| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hi Guys,
one of my Players wants to play a Half-Ogre. Is there any way to do this in Pathfinder?
I am not sure what adjustments, if any need to be made to use them as a PC race.
Or, you could just use the Advanced Race Guide to build a half-ogre of your own.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Find the template here.Wow, those mutations are not pretty.
Neither are Ogres. They are crazed, murderous, inbred, rape-loving giants.
All Ogrekin(Half-Ogres) are children of rape.
Ogres love rape.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You could try this one from Adamant Entertainment:
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@DungeonmasterCal
i realy like that one better than the paizo one. for some one that would like to have an half-ogre with no deformities, this is great.
it depends on what you've allowed your other players, but standard races (the ones in the core rulebook) range from 8 to 13 points (if i remember correctly) with 10 or 11 being most common. and creating one shouldn't be too tough...
attributes=paragon (+4 str; -2 int, wis, and cha) [1]
size=large (+2 str, -2 dex) [7]
traits= reach (10') [1]; low-light vision [1]
attribute=greater paragon (+4 str; -2 dex and int) [2]
traits= advanced strength (+2 str) [4]; natural armor +1 [2]; darkvision [2]
The Whole Half Ogre... Best darn door opener there is...
Ah Dragon magazine #73 how I miss thee, may 1983...
What a long strange trip it has been.
|
|
Find more about Ogres and Ogrekin here and here.
Favorite quote is:
"On the rare occasions when ogres take their carnal lust out on creatures they aren't related to, they often choose to force themselves upon terrified human victims, the result is the horrifying ogrekin. When ogre's blood mixes with human's, it infects that family like a virus and any bloodline sullied by ogre blood will never be the same again.".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
the ogrekin are CR+1, just let him play an Ogrekin at the cost of reducing his total class levels by 1 (Akin to level adjustment). so in an 8th level party, the ogrekin would have 7 levels in a class of their choosing.
Monsters as PCs
Using one of the monsters presented in this book as a character can be very rewarding, but weighing such a character against others is challenging. Monsters are not designed with the rules for players in mind, and as such can be very unbalancing if not handled carefully.There are a number of monsters in this book that do not possess racial Hit Dice. Such creatures are the best options for player characters, but a few of them are so powerful that they count as having 1 class level, even without a racial Hit Die. Such characters should only be allowed in a group that is 2nd-level or higher.
For monsters with racial Hit Dice, the best way to allow monster PCs is to pick a CR and allow all of the players to make characters using monsters of that CR. Treat the monster's CR as its total class levels and allow the characters to multiclass into the core classes. Do not advance such monsters by adding Hit Dice. Monster PCs should only advance through classes.
If you are including a single monster character in a group of standard characters, make sure the group is of a level that is at least as high as the monster's CR. Treat the monster's CR as class levels when determining the monster PC's overall levels. For example, in a group of 6th-level characters, a minotaur (CR 4) would possess 2 levels of a core class, such as barbarian.
Note that in a mixed group, the value of racial Hit Dice and abilities diminish as a character gains levels. It is recommended that for every 3 levels gained by the group, the monster character should gain an extra level, received halfway between the 2nd and 3rd levels. Repeat this process a number of times equal to half the monster's CR, rounded down. Using the minotaur example, when the group is at a point between 6th and 7th level, the minotaur gains a level, and then again at 7th, making him a minotaur barbarian 4. This process repeats at 10th level, making him a minotaur barbarian 8 when the group reaches 10th level. From that point onward, he gains levels normally.
GMs should carefully consider any monster PCs in their groups. Some creatures are simply not suitable for play as PCs, due to their powers or role in the game. As monster characters progress, GMs should closely monitor whether such characters are disruptive or abusive to the rules and modify them as needed to improve play.
i bolded the big rule that should generally be ignored with Monstrous PCs, because it just encourages template abuse to get an even numbered CR.
The Whole Half Ogre... Best darn door opener there is...
Ah Dragon magazine #73 how I miss thee, may 1983...
What a long strange trip it has been.
Good lord, I remember that article.
Which means that I've been playing these games off and on for thirty years.
The Whole Half Ogre... Best darn door opener there is...
Ah Dragon magazine #73 how I miss thee, may 1983...
What a long strange trip it has been.
Good lord, I remember that article.
Which means that I've been playing these games off and on for thirty years.
I do love seeing forum posts with questions that have been bandied about for 30 years... the great alignment war will never end. I don't ever remember 2e being subjected to so many possibilities of a RAW/RAI separation... but then I don't remember there being internet forums back when 2e came out.
Now it feels like every paragraph in the published works has some word use that leaves things up to interpretation... Our current GM loves playing in this vast gray area because it leaves him open to call all the shots however he sees fit, but if you've got a different interpretation of rai than he does then there end up being far too many game sessions that get interrupted by 'philosophical debates about the definition of the word 'attended' and stuff.
I feel like in 2e when you weren't sure how something worked, you cracked open the book and you got an answer and nearly every time everyone was on the same page what it meant.... With pathfinder I feel like you wonder how something works and you crack the book open then you have a 40 minute discussion of semantics and turn of phrase...
I wonder if its just that I was too young to notice semantic disparities or if the pathfinder books really are written to be purposefully vague to encourage 'discussion'... I like the social aspect of discussion but I don't think it helps the game out to have so many gray areas over so many small details...
But that article just reminds me that maybe all that is just because I'm old.
I remember lots of disagreements about rules even back to AD&D. I think the only difference between the "old days" of the early 80's and now is the internet allows for arguments to be larger (more people), repeated (new people to argue with every day), and never ending. When the sum total of people you could discuss games with was in the low teens you either ended up with a ruling they could live with or burned out on discussing particular things.
I think gamers are the same now as they have always been. The internet just allows us to reach out to each other in a wider way.