| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The major con is that if everyone wants to try out the new races then you end up with a bizarre freak show petting zoo team.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The major con is that if everyone wants to try out the new races then you end up with a bizarre freak show petting zoo team.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
Listen to the sack. He is wise indeed.
If you'd call him wise, I'd call you crazy.
However, I do agree the APG is a good book, though the race builder is not really as balanced as some advertise it to be.
|
The major con is that if everyone wants to try out the new races then you end up with a bizarre freak show petting zoo team.
I have a house rule that takes care of this problem. Basically my rule is thus...
Half the party MUST be human. I do this to preserve the fact that humans are the most common race in most settings. I've never had a group complain about this house rule.
There is one exception to this rule, however. If the entire party all wants to be of the SAME RACE, I handwave the house rule. I never get complaints on this one either. In fact, recently, I ran a three part adventure in which my group of five PCs were all Dwarves. :D
I'm glad you'd let at least some players have the fun, though I mean the fun for those who don't want to play a Human.
I know if I were in your group, I'd never go for a Human, since I have the choice of being something else, which is sadly rare around here.
Unfortunately, the cage-fighting done to see WHICH half of the group has to be human can wear on a tight-knit RP group.
But for the Race Guide, I think it just contributes to some really inspired character combinations and ideas.
My wife plays a halfling cavalier, and while not Order of the Paw, we probably wouldn't have ever thought of building up her character without that insight from the book.
The Samsarran has some amazing caster utility, the ratfolk archetype for Gunslinger is EXACTLY how I would want to play the class.
So, if nothing else, get it for the simple fact that it will lead you to thinking up some character ideas that you might not have thought of before, even if you don't use the actual races.
|
|
I'm glad you'd let at least some players have the fun, though I mean the fun for those who don't want to play a Human.
I know if I were in your group, I'd never go for a Human, since I have the choice of being something else, which is sadly rare around here.
In every group I've run, I've always had at least two people want to play humans. I'm open to other options though. Such as the classic Human, Elf, Dwarf, Halfling combo. LOL!
But in all honesty, if the group REALLY, REALLY wanted to have no Humans in the group, I'd give in. If the players aren't having fun, then there is no point to the game.
Unfortunately, the cage-fighting done to see WHICH half of the group has to be human can wear on a tight-knit RP group.
Doubtful, at least in the circles where I play. I am in the side of the fence that prefers unusual races alongside two other guys, while the other four potential players prefer Core races and humans especially. The DM of the other group has let me play one of my homebrew races, but only so far in a 4e game.
In every group I've run, I've always had at least two people want to play humans. I'm open to other options though. Such as the classic Human, Elf, Dwarf, Halfling combo. LOL!
But in all honesty, if the group REALLY, REALLY wanted to have no Humans in the group, I'd give in. If the players aren't having fun, then there is no point to the game.
What's your stance on homebrew races? That is, ones with balanced stats and whatnot.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I prefer playing non-human BECAUSE I am a human in real life. Kind of funny, really.
|
|
I prefer playing non-human BECAUSE I am a human in real life. Kind of funny, really.
I'm the same way. When I actually play (which is never, since I'm the only one in the group with enough free time to be the GM) I prefer to play something non-human. If I ever get to play, I'm wanting to be a Tiefling Paladin. :D
when i do decide to play a human, i usually want one of those highly exaggerated unique humans whom has a reason to travel among freaks. a human who is a freak of sorts as well. which usually leads to me playing women with unusual qualities some might see as kinky. such as specific clothing styles, identifiable accessories, or specific personality quirks. it's also common for them to be short and small framed.
I'm the same way. When I actually play (which is never, since I'm the only one in the group with enough free time to be the GM) I prefer to play something non-human. If I ever get to play, I'm wanting to be a Tiefling Paladin. :D
I'd allow that. You got Blood of Fiends by any chance?
ARG is a great book, but it does have its flaws, like any other book.
There are basically 3 things I don't like about it:
- Spellbinder (Elf Wizard Archetype): IMO, way too good.
- Paragon Surge (Half-Elf spell): This one can be abused to basically get infinite spells known.
- Race Builder: By god, does this thing suck. It's a great idea, but it was executed so poorly.
That said, it's simply a matter of not allowing whatever you don't like in the book. I don't think any decent player will try and abuse Paragon Surge, at least not without consequences.
The Human Imperial Bloodline for Sorceror has some nice flavor. I like the ability "Take your best shot." Basically you are so awesome that when someone hits you with a spell and you save against it you can then get an attempt to demoralize the caster. Good times.
I'd assume that Half-Elves and Half-Orcs can take that bloodline too, what with being part Human and all.
I found it most useful in assisting me with world-building. It also allowed me to fill in some racial gaps.
Unfortunately, the cage-fighting done to see WHICH half of the group has to be human can wear on a tight-knit RP group.Doubtful, at least in the circles where I play. I am in the side of the fence that prefers unusual races alongside two other guys, while the other four potential players prefer Core races and humans especially. The DM of the other group has let me play one of my homebrew races, but only so far in a 4e game.
Well, I guess the cage COULD be a circle, so I think we're of likemind on this. Plus, the cage-fighting usually eliminates half the player group by violent death anyway, so I guess then 100% of the remaining group winds up human.
Problem solved!
...what? I missed the joke.
|
|
I'm the same way. When I actually play (which is never, since I'm the only one in the group with enough free time to be the GM) I prefer to play something non-human. If I ever get to play, I'm wanting to be a Tiefling Paladin. :DI'd allow that. You got Blood of Fiends by any chance?
I've ordered it. Waiting for it to come in the mail. :D
You won't regret getting it. The customization options for Tieflings are awesome.
yeah, the alternate racial traits and racial archetypes have some pretty awesome flavor and/or mechanical options.
Spellbinder (Elf Wizard Archetype): IMO, way too good.
PURE JANK!!!! I am the kind of person that likes to play with the DM as much as I can. Not so much power gaming, but, well, meh, you could call it power gaming. Either way, I walked to the table of his newest campaign with an Elf Wizard Spellbinder, he OK'd it. I have never had more fun playing a character then I have with this archtype. It truly is, broken, unfair, makes the cleric ability look like porridge while my ability looks like biscuits with gravy.
I'm glad you didn't go and call yourself a munchkin, since that would have been incorrect.
All I can say is, we've spec'd up a bunch of things we needed PC races for: gnolls, githzerai, modrons...
Each time it's taken about 15-20 minutes, tops, and the end result has been very balanced, fair, and useable. That's really impressive.
It's worth noting that my group doesn't go out of their way to abuse rules though, so I can't speak to whether or not they are jerk-proof. But then, nothing is.
I've held off buying the book for weeks and weeks, but after actually using it to fill in the gaps for several favorite races, I'm gonna pick this one up.
|
|
Like the subject says.
Sell me on the Advanced Race Guide.
I will more than likely pick it up anyway, merely because I am a completist.But please, go ahead and tell me the Pros and Cons of the book. I've read a few reviews but they're all over the place ranging from Great to Terrible.
Buy it or Paizo will send their goblins to your house, who will burn it down, kill your dog and eat your face off.
|
|
Buy it or Paizo will send their goblins to your house, who will burn it down, kill your dog and eat your face off.Like the subject says.
Sell me on the Advanced Race Guide.
I will more than likely pick it up anyway, merely because I am a completist.But please, go ahead and tell me the Pros and Cons of the book. I've read a few reviews but they're all over the place ranging from Great to Terrible.
Damn! Okay, okay. I'm sold. LOL!!!
The major con is that if everyone wants to try out the new races then you end up with a bizarre freak show petting zoo team.I have a house rule that takes care of this problem. Basically my rule is thus...
Half the party MUST be human. I do this to preserve the fact that humans are the most common race in most settings. I've never had a group complain about this house rule.
There is one exception to this rule, however. If the entire party all wants to be of the SAME RACE, I handwave the house rule. I never get complaints on this one either. In fact, recently, I ran a three part adventure in which my group of five PCs were all Dwarves. :D
What about 13 dwarves and 1 halfling, would you let that pass? :)
What about 13 dwarves and 1 halfling, would you let that pass? :)The major con is that if everyone wants to try out the new races then you end up with a bizarre freak show petting zoo team.I have a house rule that takes care of this problem. Basically my rule is thus...
Half the party MUST be human. I do this to preserve the fact that humans are the most common race in most settings. I've never had a group complain about this house rule.
There is one exception to this rule, however. If the entire party all wants to be of the SAME RACE, I handwave the house rule. I never get complaints on this one either. In fact, recently, I ran a three part adventure in which my group of five PCs were all Dwarves. :D
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I recommend this book because of one feat: Racial Heritage.
Play a fighter that can turn into a raven. Play an aberrant sorcerer with a 20-foot long tongue that can make touch attacks. Play a rogue with extreme darkvision. Play a cleric with natural spell resistance.
Strange and unusual concepts for vanilla humans suddenly become extremely possible.
I still don't like playing humans that much, so that statement fails to apply with me :P
Yeah I'm in the camp of I hate humans so I never play them category. I actually ran Keep on the Shadowfell and banned all the core 4th ed. races and classes, and what people came up with was a blast. Of course I love improvising so that campaign went off without a hitch.
As far as the ARG goes. It's my favorite book. I for one like the race builder as it opens up alot of the old 3.5 races that haven't made it over, as well as made it possible to play alot of races that haven't seen a PC status yet. I'm an option fiend anyway so this book is candy to me.
Some the artwork (not all just some) is a let down, that's about all you can complain about it.
It's real versatility comes in when you look at other products. (3.5 primarily and some of 4th ed., as well as Blizzard's races, Oblivion's races, etc.) And the book basically lays out how you can Pathfinderize them with no fuss. Also it makes the one thing I have HATED in d20 rpgs obselete. And that is the stupid HD and level adjustment, ECL crap. (I won't rant here, but so many +1 lvl adjustment races in 3.5 had no reason to have it. It just made the race extremely weak.)
|
|
What about 13 dwarves and 1 halfling, would you let that pass? :)The major con is that if everyone wants to try out the new races then you end up with a bizarre freak show petting zoo team.I have a house rule that takes care of this problem. Basically my rule is thus...
Half the party MUST be human. I do this to preserve the fact that humans are the most common race in most settings. I've never had a group complain about this house rule.
There is one exception to this rule, however. If the entire party all wants to be of the SAME RACE, I handwave the house rule. I never get complaints on this one either. In fact, recently, I ran a three part adventure in which my group of five PCs were all Dwarves. :D
Sure. Let 'em through. :D
|
|
I recommend this book because of one feat: Racial Heritage.
Play a fighter that can turn into a raven. Play an aberrant sorcerer with a 20-foot long tongue that can make touch attacks. Play a rogue with extreme darkvision. Play a cleric with natural spell resistance.
Strange and unusual concepts for vanilla humans suddenly become extremely possible.
Interesting.
I'd say it's damn near essential IF you want to use Pathfinder to play in some other settings that have lots of weird races. Of course, you could just houserule those races, but this is a little less messy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
it's a pretty good sourcebook. just be careful with the race builder's guidelines. it doesn't take things like synergy into account and undervalues some of the most powerful races such as the Orc and Dwarf while overvaluing things like the Suli, Aasimaar, and Fetchling.
The Race Builder is a mess. I don't know, maybe if you were having trouble creating balanced custom races beforehand it's going to do you some good, but even then it's as likely to lead you astray as to something sensible. Anything that declares half-elves to be a superior racial choice to humans has obvious pricing problems.
half elves and humans are about equal. depending on what you spend your extra feat on.
if you planned on picking up an exotic weapon, iron will, or skill focus anyway, the half elf becomes the better choice. but if you want more skill points for your skill starved character, then human becomes the better one.
the key with a human is to pick up the feat that other races don't get for free or to meet prerequisites earlier. if prerequisites aren't an issue, or if you plan to stack bonuses. the racial pseudo feats become better. these pseudo feats come in a variety of forms from attribute bonuses to racial abilities. from a bonus to constitution (toughness) or intelligence (open minded) to abilities like dual minded (iron will) or elven magic (spell penetration)
I thought it was OK. Has some decent things, and so on.
My players however, loved it. Now the Jade Regent campaing I'm running has a human, a strix, a kitsune, and a catfolk.
If a given race is always one of the best choices for an optimized character, no matter what class it's one of the most powerful races. If a point system doesn't reflect this, the point system is obviously wrong.
When one opens an optimization guide, one reliably finds humans tied for the top choice. (Okay, in Treantmonk's guide to wizards, tied for second behind only the elf.) No other core race comes close.
I mean, if humans were always in second place, jack of all classes and master of none, we could have some discussion here, because a truly optimized character would reliably be something other than human. But that's not what we have.
Despite this, the point system in this case counts the core races of dwarves, elves, gnomes, and half-elves superior to humans, and halflings equal. That to make humans the equal of elves/gnomes/half-elves, they need to be buffed with a 1 RP ability, like weapon familiarity with bows and the bastard sword.
Yeah.