They are good clerics, but they won't come to the table and vastly outperform every other race so I don't see them as having any real advantage.You guys do understand that Blood of Angels and Blood of Fiends are both PFS legal right? Kind of removes the whole "these races are bad because their attribute bonuses are static" argument.
"Blood of Angels"
1)Agathion Blooded: +2 CON +2 CHA, Summon Nature's Ally II
2)Angel Blooded: +2 STR +2 Cha , Alter Self(Paladins and War-Priests apply here)
3)Archon Blooded: +2 CON +2 WIS, Continual Flame(buy torches, sell ever-burning torches LOL!)
4)Azata Blooded: +2 DEX +2 CHA, Glitterdust(Bow Bards/Inquisitors apply here)
5)Garuda Blooded: +2 Dex +2 WIS, See Invisibility(Rangers and Bow Clerics apply here)
6)Peri Blooded: +2 INT +2CHA, Pyrotechnics(Arcane Casters apply here)
Also since this is a Cleric thread and I see people arguing for Dwarves. I just wanted to throw my hat in to say that dwarves kind of suck(for point buy games). At least in so far that if you want your build to involve channel energy in anyway. As a Dwarf needs to spend "7" points to get "13 CHA" 7 god dang points!
Personally I think the lack of a negative ability score makes Aasimar the most powerful legal race as they are better than humans for a fair number of classes, but I don't think it's really a big deal. It makes a lot of sense really for example for an Angel Blooded Aasimar to be statistically the strongest paladin race.
At the end of the day the 15 race points aren't being spent all that well so it's not a huge power difference. Though your gm is perfectly within his rights to tone them down slightly. I would urge said gms to have a gentle hand. As an example giving Aasimars one variable negative score makes them the same power level as tieflings, though you could also strip out the spell like ability.
they don't really have one. unlike the human, dwarf, and half human races.
the dwarf is better off defensively
the human can complete feat chains earlier
and the half elf/half orc have some pretty good substitutions that bring them up to the human level. such as the half orcs ability to gain darkvision 90 and skilled. or the half elf's ability to get dual minded, gain proficiency in any exotic weapon they want whilst defying the requirements or qualify for eldritch heritage sooner.
You're also quoting from a 3.5 source and a Faerun one at that, rather than a PF/Golarion one. So rather irrelevant =)
Lol, indeed. I feel really silly now but no harm, no foul, right?. T-T
I think BBT has already said this (maybe not in this thread but certainly in others) if you take Scion of Humanity on your aasimar and then racial heritage you can take almost any of the set race only archetypes. So with the alternative stat bonuses and abilities and the ability to use other race's archetypes the Aasimar is pretty strong. Certainly equal to the standard races. It also starts to approach the versatility of a human, I'd put them ahead of half-races in that respect but... I still think a feat, assignable +2, and bonus skill points is better.
But then again, I find humans bland. For the same reason (flavour) I'd pick a tengu over a dwarf, though I think a dwarf is mechanically superior to a tengu.
|
The idea that 1 Bonus feat is better than a flat +2 bonus to your best or second best attribute is ludicrous. If there was a feat that granted you an untyped +2 bonus to one attribute and could only be taken at level one it would get taken every time by every class.
Versatile Human would be worth it every single day of the week if it didn't also remove skilled which is the only thing that makes it a sort of hard sell.
Aasimars are better than humans and half humans for many classes if you don't understand this A: You don't understand how to optimize. B: You don't understand how point buy works or you don't play point buy. They are flat out amazing for Classes that are already MAD ie. Clerics and Monks.
I really wish people would "READ" my post before they respond to it as I said Aasimars are perfectly fine. All I said to the contrary was that I supported the decision of a gm to make minor adjustments as that is their right as a GM, not that I thought it was necessary.
|
The idea that 1 Bonus feat is better than a flat +2 bonus to your best or second best attribute is ludicrous. If there was a feat that granted you an untyped +2 bonus to one attribute and could only be taken at level one it would get taken every time by every class.
Versatile Human would be worth it every single day of the week if it didn't also remove skilled which is the only thing that makes it a sort of hard sell.
Aasimars are better than humans and half humans for many classes if you don't understand this A: You don't understand how to optimize. B: You don't understand how point buy works or you don't play point buy. They are flat out amazing for Classes that are already MAD ie. Clerics and Monks.
I really wish people would "READ" my post before they respond to it as I said Aasimars are perfectly fine. All I said to the contrary was that I supported the decision of a gm to make minor adjustments as that is their right as a GM, not that I thought it was necessary.
Being able to more effectively fight with two weapons, or have more healing capabilities, or any of a number of other abilities, is arguably equal to a +1/+1 hit and damage, or +1 save DC, or what have you.
And no one (or at least, I am not) arguing a GM's right to make changes he sees necessary, it's more that we're arguing the necessity of the change.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The idea that 1 Bonus feat is better than a flat +2 bonus to your best or second best attribute is ludicrous. If there was a feat that granted you an untyped +2 bonus to one attribute and could only be taken at level one it would get taken every time by every class.
Versatile Human would be worth it every single day of the week if it didn't also remove skilled which is the only thing that makes it a sort of hard sell.
Aasimars are better than humans and half humans for many classes if you don't understand this A: You don't understand how to optimize. B: You don't understand how point buy works or you don't play point buy. They are flat out amazing for Classes that are already MAD ie. Clerics and Monks.
I really wish people would "READ" my post before they respond to it as I said Aasimars are perfectly fine. All I said to the contrary was that I supported the decision of a gm to make minor adjustments as that is their right as a GM, not that I thought it was necessary.
Being able to more effectively fight with two weapons, or have more healing capabilities, or any of a number of other abilities, is arguably equal to a +1/+1 hit and damage, or +1 save DC, or what have you.
And no one (or at least, I am not) arguing a GM's right to make changes he sees necessary, it's more that we're arguing the necessity of the change.
"Someday we'll find it, the rainbow connection. The lovers, the dreamers and me."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The idea that 1 Bonus feat is better than a flat +2 bonus to your best or second best attribute is ludicrous. If there was a feat that granted you an untyped +2 bonus to one attribute and could only be taken at level one it would get taken every time by every class.
I call b0ll0cks on this one as it is highly situational. If you used that feat to grab Weapon Focus, then perhaps giving up that +2 to Strength wasn't really worth it after all.
If, however, it helps you get Crane Wing and Crane Riposte that much earlier (I believe a human monk of many styles can do this by level two thanks to said feat) then that is easily worth a measly +2 to an ability score.
It all depends on the character, on the situation, and what you're going for.
The idea that 1 Bonus feat is better than a flat +2 bonus to your best or second best attribute is ludicrous. If there was a feat that granted you an untyped +2 bonus to one attribute and could only be taken at level one it would get taken every time by every class.
Versatile Human would be worth it every single day of the week if it didn't also remove skilled which is the only thing that makes it a sort of hard sell.
Aasimars are better than humans and half humans for many classes if you don't understand this A: You don't understand how to optimize. B: You don't understand how point buy works or you don't play point buy. They are flat out amazing for Classes that are already MAD ie. Clerics and Monks.
I really wish people would "READ" my post before they respond to it as I said Aasimars are perfectly fine. All I said to the contrary was that I supported the decision of a gm to make minor adjustments as that is their right as a GM, not that I thought it was necessary.
Two clerics, one human, the other aasimar.
The human puts the +2 into Wisdom and gets an extra feat.
The aasimar gets +2 Wis and +2 Cha.
Would you take a feat that gave +1 DC to your channel saves (which are always going to be pretty easy to beat no matter what you do) and gives you 1 extra channel?
Clerics should have spellcraft and knowledge religion, so the bonus to Cha based skills is pretty minimal when you have 2 skill points per level and they're both spoken for (or at least one of them is).
Clerics don't need a high charisma. It's gravy, but it's not required. They don't like charisma penalties, so don't lower it to 9, but you don't need to go over 12 really either. If your channels aren't enough to heal up the party, you carry a wand of CLW... but 4 channels can go a long way.
As a dwarf, you put 2 points into Charisma, to not have a penalty. If you want the bonus channel and aren't going to melee much, you spend another 3 points on it and get yourself a 12 Cha. You don't need a 13, because you're probably not spending the ability bump ever to increase it. Those bumps should be going into Wisdom, because spells are your bread and butter. Channels are gravy that make spells taste that much better, but too much gravy and you get this weird tasting soup that spills off your plate for no good reason. I think I took that metaphor too far.
|
|
The idea that 1 Bonus feat is better than a flat +2 bonus to your best or second best attribute is ludicrous. If there was a feat that granted you an untyped +2 bonus to one attribute and could only be taken at level one it would get taken every time by every class.I call b&!@@@!s on this one as it is highly situational. If you used that feat to grab Weapon Focus, then perhaps giving up that +2 to Strength wasn't really worth it after all.
If, however, it helps you get Crane Wing and Crane Riposte that much earlier (I believe a human monk of many styles can do this by level two thanks to said feat) then that is easily worth a measly +2 to an ability score.
It all depends on the character, on the situation, and what you're going for.
Allow me to explain what I mean in a point buy scenario.
Two Characters Both Bards both Going Archery both twenty point buy.
One is Human and applies his Stat bonus Dexterity
One is Azata Blooded and gains a natural Bonus to Dexterity and Cha
The Human arrays his stats as follows STR: 14 DEX: 16(+2) Racial CON: 12 INT: 12 WIS: 7 CHA: 15
The Aasimar arrays his stats in the same manor however instead of setting CHA: to 15 it is left at 13 with the racial modifier applied it becomes the 15 that the build called for. However suddenly we have 4 more points to play around with that could be used to strengthen any point in the build effectively speaking our 20 Point Buy is now a 24 Point Buy.
This is why having a second positive modifier is so strong for any build that relies on having a secondary ability score at a reasonably high level from the get go. As the versatility of how you can spend your attributes is increased significantly.
I will agree that this does not make Aasimar the best race at everything, but it does mean that when used for classes that they mix particularly well with you will generally speaking have more well rounded attributes than your alternate race equivalents.
Regardless I refuse to listen to anyone who tries to suggest that Aasimars have some sort of "significant" disadvantage. Darkvision, resistances, minor skill bonuses and a variably useful spell like ability are icing on the cake to having well round stats.
That said to be clear I don't think it's an overpowered option I just think it is a very good one.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think anyone has said the Aasimar has a significant disadvantage. The argument has revolved around whether or not it has a significant advantage.
|
|
The idea that 1 Bonus feat is better than a flat +2 bonus to your best or second best attribute is ludicrous. If there was a feat that granted you an untyped +2 bonus to one attribute and could only be taken at level one it would get taken every time by every class.I call b&!@@@!s on this one as it is highly situational. If you used that feat to grab Weapon Focus, then perhaps giving up that +2 to Strength wasn't really worth it after all.
If, however, it helps you get Crane Wing and Crane Riposte that much earlier (I believe a human monk of many styles can do this by level two thanks to said feat) then that is easily worth a measly +2 to an ability score.
It all depends on the character, on the situation, and what you're going for.
Allow me to explain what I mean in a point buy scenario.
Two Characters Both Bards both Going Archery both twenty point buy.
One is Human and applies his Stat bonus Dexterity
One is Garuda Kin and gains a natural Bonus to Dexterity and Cha
The Human arrays his stats as follows STR: 14 DEX: 16(+2) Racial CON: 12 INT: 12 WIS: 7 CHA: 15
The Aasimar arrays his stats in the same manor however instead of setting CHA: to 15 it is left at 13 with the racial modifier applied it becomes the 15 that the build called for. However suddenly we have 4 more points to play around with that could be used to strengthen any point in the build effectively speaking our 20 Point Buy is now a 24 Point Buy.
This is why having a second positive modifier is so strong for any build that relies on having a secondary ability score at a reasonably high level from the get go. As the versatility of how you can spend your attributes is increased significantly.
I will agree that this does not make Aasimar the best race at everything, but it does mean that when used for classes that they mix particularly well with you will generally speaking have more well rounded attributes than your alternate race equivalents....
But what feats are those archers taking? The Human could have Point Blank Shot and either Rapid Shot or Precise Shot, meaning he either has an extra attack per round or has negated the -4 penalty for firing into melee, both large advantages over the Aasimar. He will continue this advantage throughout the lives of the characters since he will always be one step ahead in archery over the Aasimar.
Allow me to explain what I mean in a point buy scenario.Two Characters Both Bards both Going Archery both twenty point buy.
One is Human and applies his Stat bonus Dexterity
One is Garuda Kin and gains a natural Bonus to Dexterity and Cha
The Human arrays his stats as follows STR: 14 DEX: 16(+2) Racial CON: 12 INT: 12 WIS: 7 CHA: 15
Two minor things:
1) Garuda is +2 Dex +2 Wis, Azata-blooded is +2 Dex +2 Cha*. Azata-blooded Aasimar make amazing bards with the bard FC option. I was going to run an arcane duellist bow bard in a one off but that never happened.2) Charisma is a dump stat for an archer, I think you meant to pump wisdom.
*Edited
...The idea that 1 Bonus feat is better than a flat +2 bonus to your best or second best attribute is ludicrous. If there was a feat that granted you an untyped +2 bonus to one attribute and could only be taken at level one it would get taken every time by every class.I call b&!@@@!s on this one as it is highly situational. If you used that feat to grab Weapon Focus, then perhaps giving up that +2 to Strength wasn't really worth it after all.
If, however, it helps you get Crane Wing and Crane Riposte that much earlier (I believe a human monk of many styles can do this by level two thanks to said feat) then that is easily worth a measly +2 to an ability score.
It all depends on the character, on the situation, and what you're going for.
Allow me to explain what I mean in a point buy scenario.
Two Characters Both Bards both Going Archery both twenty point buy.
One is Human and applies his Stat bonus Dexterity
One is Garuda Kin and gains a natural Bonus to Dexterity and Cha
The Human arrays his stats as follows STR: 14 DEX: 16(+2) Racial CON: 12 INT: 12 WIS: 7 CHA: 15
The Aasimar arrays his stats in the same manor however instead of setting CHA: to 15 it is left at 13 with the racial modifier applied it becomes the 15 that the build called for. However suddenly we have 4 more points to play around with that could be used to strengthen any point in the build effectively speaking our 20 Point Buy is now a 24 Point Buy.
This is why having a second positive modifier is so strong for any build that relies on having a secondary ability score at a reasonably high level from the get go. As the versatility of how you can spend your attributes is increased significantly.
I will agree that this does not make Aasimar the best race at everything, but it does mean that when used for classes that they mix particularly well with you will generally speaking have more well rounded attributes than your alternate
Where his point does stand however is in lightly feated builds. Two handed paladins would probably want more charisma than anything else. Clerics may not have the resources to take a lot of advantage of two feats but more wisdom and charisma is always welcome. Scimitar maguses don't really start until level three but can go garuda blooded to attain definite advantages without an elven Con weakness.
There's merit to the idea even if it is not been properly applied.
|
|
But what feats are those archers taking? The Human could have Point Blank Shot and either Rapid Shot or Precise Shot, meaning he either has an extra attack per round or has negated the -4 penalty for firing into melee, both large advantages over the Aasimar. He will continue this advantage throughout the lives of the characters since he will always be one step ahead in archery over the Aasimar.
Sigh... yes I picked an non fighter archer build for my example, which are feat starved, which means that yes... humans are almost always the best choice, but the point still stands about buying attributes and how to get the most for your money.
If I used a Melee striker bard as opposed to a archer, who are less reliant on their first three feast to get their base attack routine would my example have made sense to you?
Regardless even with your points the Aasimar will eventually catch up on all the "optimized feats" where as human bard will never catch up on my attribute bonuses even with inherent bonuses added in. Having Darkvision glitterdust early and always, energy resistances and a +2 skill bonus to diplomacy preform are cumulatively more beneficial than skilled.
|
|
Allow me to explain what I mean in a point buy scenario.Two Characters Both Bards both Going Archery both twenty point buy.
One is Human and applies his Stat bonus Dexterity
One is Garuda Kin and gains a natural Bonus to Dexterity and Cha
The Human arrays his stats as follows STR: 14 DEX: 16(+2) Racial CON: 12 INT: 12 WIS: 7 CHA: 15
Two minor things:
1) Garuda is +2 Dex +2 Wis, Azata-blooded is +2 Dex +2 Cha*. Azata-blooded Aasimar make amazing bards with the bard FC option. I was going to run an arcane duellist bow bard in a one off but that never happened.
2) Charisma is a dump stat for an archer, I think you meant to pump wisdom.*Edited
My mistake meant to put Azata, edited it.
Once more, people highly underestimate the benefits of the simple things, like extra feats and skill points. A human has an entire extra feat to spend over the Aasimar (allowing him to do cool things, like fight efficiently with his sword and shield bash by a step ahead on the necessary feats in the chain, potentially having more attacks/damage/healing/accuracy/what-have you at any given level) as well as being naturally superior in non-combat situations because of his enhanced ability to put points into class skills. A human will at least have half again as many, to as much as twice as many skill points over the aasimar. A human paladin could have a point in all but one of the paladins class skills by level 2, with only a 10 INT. That is huge.
That's a great argument for the power level of humans over all other core races (which I think is completely true), but not a particularly convincing one against the Aasimar being plan better in many of its racial variants than the normal +2/+2/-2 non-human core races.
|
|
Where his point does stand however is in lightly feated builds. Two handed paladins would probably want more charisma than anything else. Clerics may not have the resources to take a lot of advantage of two feats but more wisdom and charisma is always welcome. Scimitar maguses don't really start until level three but can go garuda blooded to attain definite advantages without an elven Con weakness.
There's merit to the idea even if it is not been properly applied.
Or standard Aasimars for Holy Vidicators or Lawbringers/Garudakin for Monks.
Thank you very much for understanding what I was trying to explain.
And this is just sheer tactical idiocy on your part. Keeping the enemy tied up for a round restoring the darkness is significantly better than useless.
Wow, because thats what a smart enemy would do right? LULZ.
The enemy shouldn't be tied up for a round with this at all, or not in any way you will be taking advantage of, because it's pretty clear you don't understand the encounter in question, the layout of the terrain, the circumstances surrouding the encounter or just about any other tactical consideration.
Wow, please share with me the wealth of your inexperience some more, I can always use such material to brighten my day.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wow, please share with me the wealth of your inexperience some more, I can always use such material to brighten my day.
I thought that's what you had Daylight for.
Thank you for that, I was hoping the comment would come up :)
/boom tish, I'm here all week, try the veal!
|
|
But what feats are those archers taking? The Human could have Point Blank Shot and either Rapid Shot or Precise Shot, meaning he either has an extra attack per round or has negated the -4 penalty for firing into melee, both large advantages over the Aasimar. He will continue this advantage throughout the lives of the characters since he will always be one step ahead in archery over the Aasimar.Sigh... yes I picked an non fighter archer build for my example, which are feat starved, which means that yes... humans are almost always the best choice, but the point still stands about buying attributes and how to get the most for your money.
If I used a Melee striker bard as opposed to a archer, who are less reliant on their first three feast to get their base attack routine would my example have made sense to you?
Regardless even with your points the Aasimar will eventually catch up on all the "optimized feats" where as human bard will never catch up on my attribute bonuses even with inherent bonuses added in. Having Darkvision glitterdust early and always, energy resistances and a +2 skill bonus to diplomacy preform are cumulatively more beneficial than skilled.
I see your point but respectfully disagree. I think you are falling into the camp of people who are vastly underestimating the value of that extra skill point per level. For skill weak classes like the cleric, as I pointed out earlier, a human has the facility of having a rank in all but a single class skill by second level. This equates to the human having the edge by +4 effective skill points over the Aasimar by level 2, even with their racial skill bonuses. Skill heavy classes like the rogue benefit from having more facility at earlier levels, and the bard gains some of the largest benefits of all since those extra ranks will allow him to maximize the benefit he gets out of his Loremaster and Jack-of-All-Trades class features.
We have an Aasimar sorcerer in our current Legacy of Fire campaign.
My Duergar hates his Daylight shenanigans.
All they do is dazzle, and anger my PC.
IIRC, your Duergar has about as much feelings as a lump of stone and should rather be calculating pi, rather than try to do such complex emotive stuff like "hating things".
|
I'll just trump it all by reaching 8th level with the Sun domain. ;)
and the creature just uses deeper darkness again.
Doesn't work that way. The ability I'm referencing not only produces the effect of daylight but it also auto-dispels any darkness effect within its radius, while also unable to be dispelled itself due to being supernatural.
It's a legit trump card. Baddies want the dark back, they'll have to kill me.
|
|
I see your point but respectfully disagree. I think you are falling into the camp of people who are vastly underestimating the value of that extra skill point per level. For skill weak classes like the cleric, as I pointed out earlier, a human has the facility of having a rank in all but a single class skill by second level. Skill heavy classes like the rogue benefit from having more facility at earlier levels, and the bard gains some of the largest benefits of all since those extra ranks will allow him to maximize the benefit he gets out of his Loremaster and Jack-of-All-Trades class features.
Ok, but what is your point exactly that humans are the best race? Most players wouldn't disagree. Also pathfinder is pretty darn combat focused, your table might play differently, but generally speaking combat options are stronger than non combat options. I really just can't agree with you the suggestion that +20 skill points over the life time of a character are better than permanent dark-vision, a minor bonus to two useful skills, some minor energy resistances, and what is generally a somewhat useful spell like ability.
Additionally if you understood what I meant about increased attribute pool an Aasimar can get that +1 skills per level as a cleric anyways since having a deeper attribute pool allows it to have 12 or 14 Int where another race could only have 10 or 12.
|
|
I see your point but respectfully disagree. I think you are falling into the camp of people who are vastly underestimating the value of that extra skill point per level. For skill weak classes like the cleric, as I pointed out earlier, a human has the facility of having a rank in all but a single class skill by second level. Skill heavy classes like the rogue benefit from having more facility at earlier levels, and the bard gains some of the largest benefits of all since those extra ranks will allow him to maximize the benefit he gets out of his Loremaster and Jack-of-All-Trades class features.Ok, but what is your point exactly that humans are the best race? Most players wouldn't disagree. Also pathfinder is pretty darn combat focused, your table might play differently, but generally speaking combat options are stronger than non combat options. I really just can't agree with you the suggestion that +20 skill points over the life time of a character are better than permanent dark-vision, a minor bonus to two useful skills, some minor energy resistances, and what is generally a somewhat useful spell like ability.
Additionally if you understood what I meant about increased attribute pool a Aasimar can get that +1 skills per level as a cleric anyways since my deeper attribute pool allows it to have 12 or 14 Int where another race could only have 10 or 12.
Spending your extra points in Int just means you are expending any advantage you had before to negate the human's advantage. I don't believe the human is better than the aasimar, I just don't believe the opposite is true either. This post started because the OP's GM thought the Aasimar was overpowered. I don't think that's true.
If anything, it's those damn kobolds who need to be nerfed......
|
|
Spending your extra points in Int just means you are expending any advantage you had before to negate the human's advantage. I don't believe the human is better than the aasimar, I just don't believe the opposite is true either. This post started because the OP's GM thought the Aasimar was overpowered. I don't think that's true.
If anything, it's those damn kobolds who need to be nerfed......
So wait we're in agreement then... Well ok works for me =]!
Spending your extra points in Int just means you are expending any advantage you had before to negate the human's advantage. I don't believe the human is better than the aasimar, I just don't believe the opposite is true either. This post started because the OP's GM thought the Aasimar was overpowered. I don't think that's true.
Nicely put, I can agree with this as well.
|
|
So wait we're in agreement then... Well ok works for me =]!Spending your extra points in Int just means you are expending any advantage you had before to negate the human's advantage. I don't believe the human is better than the aasimar, I just don't believe the opposite is true either. This post started because the OP's GM thought the Aasimar was overpowered. I don't think that's true.
If anything, it's those damn kobolds who need to be nerfed......
Yay, harmony! I'm glad we agree about those pesky kobolds......
|
|
IIRC, your Duergar has about as much feelings as a lump of stone and should rather be calculating pi, rather than try to do such complex emotive stuff like "hating things".We have an Aasimar sorcerer in our current Legacy of Fire campaign.
My Duergar hates his Daylight shenanigans.
All they do is dazzle, and anger my PC.
Well, hating them in the way an octopus hates being poked with a stick.
Besides, faking emotion is something she is quite good at.
So wait we're in agreement then... Well ok works for me =]!Spending your extra points in Int just means you are expending any advantage you had before to negate the human's advantage. I don't believe the human is better than the aasimar, I just don't believe the opposite is true either. This post started because the OP's GM thought the Aasimar was overpowered. I don't think that's true.
If anything, it's those damn kobolds who need to be nerfed......
Aasimar's are a decent race. They're just not the min-maxer paradise people try to make out to be.
|
|
As a DM, in my opinion, there is nothing in the game that is overpowered.
You've got an Aasimar who's using Daylight? Fine, hit him with magical darkness of a higher level.
Aasimar have strong resistances to Acid, Cold and Lightning? Fine, hit them with fire, give them a nemesis who focuses on fire spells, give them a demon enemy who has a hate-boner for them.
They get two languages? Fine, throw other languages at them, make them deal with Aklo.
They take Deathless Spirit? Throw the usual gamut of Orcs, Goblins and Trolls at them, lead by a Transmuter, or pump up the level on your Necromancer and throw more Skeletons at them, and have the Necromancer decide he's the biggest threat there, since he's the one who can resist his pets.
There is no such thing as OP in an RPG. There is only what the DM doesn't know how to handle. Just banning something on the basis of it being "OP" is the mark of a lazy DM, who would rather just grind out encounters, rather than think about his players and how they work.
As a DM, in combat, it's your job to challenge the players, not necessarily kill them, but challenge them. The easiest way to do that? MANIPULATE THEM.
It's worked pretty well for me for as long as I'e been DMing.