J-Gal |
I am still puzzled why the OP omits half-orcs from his list of classic races. They've been a part of D&D since the beginning(they were removed in 2nd edition, but then brought back).
That's more of a personal preference. I feel that half-orcs should be relatively uncommon and certainly looked upon with horror and scorn. I said it explicitly to get a rise out of you guys but I do mean it. I don't like them.
Holger Coulson |
That's more of a personal preference. I feel that half-orcs should be relatively uncommon and certainly looked upon with horror and scorn. I said it explicitly to get a rise out of you guys but I do mean it. I don't like them.
I won't hold it against ya. Don't like some of my mates myself.
Auskrem |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
J-Gal wrote:That's more of a personal preference. I feel that half-orcs should be relatively uncommon and certainly looked upon with horror and scorn. I said it explicitly to get a rise out of you guys but I do mean it. I don't like them.I won't hold it against ya. Don't like some of my mates myself.
Hell with that, I'm proud of who I am. Why wouldn't I be? Blood of badass heroes on both sides of the family.
Even if mom spent my childhood throwing logs at me to get me ready for the world. @#$%, wonder how she's doing?
Kolokotroni |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Vinja89 wrote:Thank you, this is exactly what I'm talking about. Hell, it seems like my players would be happier with me telling them "There is no magic in this setting." than "There are only humans in this setting".One thing i always found funny is, you say there is no place for gunslingers and firearms in your campaign, nobody panics. You say there is no room for catfolk in your campaign everybody looses their minds and you get called out for stymieing player creativity, and a good DM would make room! Just a humorous observation i have made.
Personally i say the more the merrier! whatever makes the player happy, within reason of course.
The severity of the reaction is because there is no middle ground. Except for some very specific things, like gunslingers, almost every concept can be expressed as a function of the core classes. Whether its effective, or whether it does a good job of it or not is a separate question. But in general a class restriction doesnt put a hard stop on a concept. If I want to play a ninja, but you dont want to play the ninja class, i can play a sneaky bard who goes into the assasin prestige class, or a rogue, or any other number of courses. It might not be perfect. But its doable.
Theres no work around for race. If I want to play an anthropomorphic fox because I have this idea for a character with a bunch of nervous ticks around playing with his big fluffy tail, nothing in the core rules is going to help me with that. If I want to play a small creepy dark skinned sneaky guy from the shadow planes and you ban wayamg, I cant dress a halfling up in a costume and call it done. It doesnt work. A racial ban is a hard stop on a concept that involves that race.
That isnt to say you dont have the right to ban a race, or many races, thats up to you and your group. But there is a rational reason why the reaction is likely more severe in terms of races then it is in terms of classes/feats/whatever.
Mikaze |
My solution: Racism. NPCs are not enlightened socialists like people want them to be. If a player plays an atypical race for the area they can expect to face persecution wherever they go. Children pointing while parents usher them away, price markups in shops, higher Bluff and Diplomacy DCs (though lower intimidate DCs) and even if the rest of the party makes fast friends, the 'alien' is at best tolerated until they personally save someone's life.
I have an orc player in Sandpoint and a couple of goblins sailing the Arcadian ocean who can attest to this, though I manage to keep the games fun enough so they don't ragequit. It can be a delicate balancing act alienating the character but not the player.
'Course, in places like Katapesh, Kaer Maga and Durpar (I primarily DM in the Forgotten Realms and Golarion), these attitudes are relaxed and my players can feel more free to be a drow or ghoran or whatever esoteric race that they want to experiment/powergame with.
Along the lines of the balancing act, there's also the matter of making sure reactions aren't universal(as Wraithstrike said, individuals vary) or static. One of the most frustrating things any player can be faced with is a world that doesn't change at all regardless of their actions. Playing an outcast race and never seeing any light at the end of the tunnel no matter what they do is more likely to lead to "darkness induced audience apathy" than meaningful drama. Especially when part of the appeal to playing an outcast race is to have the opportunity to overcome those prejudices.
Not saying you're falling into that trap, but it's something I've seen a lot of in the past, even tauted as a virtue by some.
Coarthios |
Our group sees a lot of elves with caster types and humans because of the bonus feats and skills.
Now a buddy in our gaming group always plays really odd races with tweaked classes and specializations. I think he enjoys playing characters that the other player characters are unfamiliar with and there is a bit of power gaming to it as well.
Another friend in the same group tends to play all humans for reasons already mentioned. I usually think of personality types first and then work backwards into what their race, class and other details would be based on the behavior I'd enjoy emulating. I find when I build a character around what they can do, they become flavorless and boring to me. I enjoy the role playing more than the roll playing. I realize, especially in Pathfinder, that this is not normal.
Least played races in our group are: Halflings, Orcs and Dwarves in that order, with Halflings the clear number one because some Orcish or Dwarf shows up now and again. Our group hates hobbits. Current group consists of Elven Wizard, Human Paladin, Fairy Dragon Psionic, Half Elf Warrior, Human Cleric, Half Dragon Sorcerer and Half Elf Ranger.
Previous campaign was 4 humans, 1 dwarf, 1 elf.
We don't meet and play very often so we aren't bored of the class-race combinations that some of you probably are so with many there is a need for fresh options, I think.
knightnday |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another reason the classic races may be taking a back seat for many players is the level of support found in the books. Thirty years ago there was the odd module or Dragon article that might support a non-standard race every few years, but other than that it was mostly homebrew or nothing.
Now, the main companies support these races and 3PP give even more options. So people that have always wanted to play these get their chance.
J-Gal |
J-Gal wrote:Vinja89 wrote:Thank you, this is exactly what I'm talking about. Hell, it seems like my players would be happier with me telling them "There is no magic in this setting." than "There are only humans in this setting".One thing i always found funny is, you say there is no place for gunslingers and firearms in your campaign, nobody panics. You say there is no room for catfolk in your campaign everybody looses their minds and you get called out for stymieing player creativity, and a good DM would make room! Just a humorous observation i have made.
Personally i say the more the merrier! whatever makes the player happy, within reason of course.
The severity of the reaction is because there is no middle ground. Except for some very specific things, like gunslingers, almost every concept can be expressed as a function of the core classes. Whether its effective, or whether it does a good job of it or not is a separate question. But in general a class restriction doesnt put a hard stop on a concept. If I want to play a ninja, but you dont want to play the ninja class, i can play a sneaky bard who goes into the assasin prestige class, or a rogue, or any other number of courses. It might not be perfect. But its doable.
Theres no work around for race. If I want to play an anthropomorphic fox because I have this idea for a character with a bunch of nervous ticks around playing with his big fluffy tail, nothing in the core rules is going to help me with that. If I want to play a small creepy dark skinned sneaky guy from the shadow planes and you ban wayamg, I cant dress a halfling up in a costume and call it done. It doesnt work. A racial ban is a hard stop on a concept that involves that race.
That isnt to say you dont have the right to ban a race, or many races, thats up to you and your group. But there is a rational reason why the reaction is likely more severe in terms of races then it is in terms of classes/feats/whatever.
If a player could explain to me what a wayang is doing at level 1 in the middle of Taldor hanging out with humans and elves and dwarves, I MIGHT allow it. However, if a player's character has just died and the PCs are on the Plane of Shadow and he says "Can I play a wayang?" I am much more liable to say yes.
Tholomyes |
Saying "I normally play in a Forgotten Realms-esque setting" and "I don't like abnormal races" is like saying "I hate super powers and comics so I only play Mutants and Masterminds".
Hey, don't knock it. I personally like M&M for high Fantasy over even pathfinder. Modified slightly so power level is slightly flexible, to deal with situational damage (sneak attack, Spells with significant side effects for the caster, ect), but otherwise largely core. The only problem is very few groups don't give me a weird look for saying "let's play a fantasy game in a supers system"
Zhayne |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Theres no work around for race. If I want to play an anthropomorphic fox because I have this idea for a character with a bunch of nervous ticks around playing with his big fluffy tail, nothing in the core rules is going to help me with that.
To be fair, this depends on your group's view on reflavoring. Racial appearance is flavor text, just like how other folks are 'supposed' to react to you. GM willing, nothing says you can't take Race A and describe it as looking however you like. I've played a character who was a fox hunter and got cursed by a fey, classic fairy-tale style, to look like one. No mechanical modifications, just flavor text.
Zhayne |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
snip
And that's cool. Not everybody plays in a world where that's a rarity, though, and PF should provide those of us who prefer less classic/traditional worlds the options we want. Not all of us like to play in Middle-Earth/Forgotten Realms/Golarion. I've been playing in game worlds like that for 30-ish years, and I'm bored of them.
Creative freedom, infinite possibilities, and the power of imagination. That's a big part of why I game. I don't care what Tolkien, or Howard, or anybody else wrote ... this is about our stories, not theirs.
thejeff |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One thing i always found funny is, you say there is no place for gunslingers and firearms in your campaign, nobody panics. You say there is no room for catfolk in your campaign everybody looses their minds and you get called out for stymieing player creativity, and a good DM would make room! Just a humorous observation i have made.
Personally i say the more the merrier! whatever makes the player happy, within reason of course.
I've seen people go crazy about no guns, there are plenty of "Firearms don't fit" threads.
Tholomyes |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One of the things that you could do, if you're worried about people choosing exotic races, and you think they're doing this solely for mechanical reasons is to give options for alternate ability score racial modifiers, and racial traits. One of the big reason I've seen people take races like Aasimar and Tiefling and such, beyond flavor reasons, was because there are more than half a dozen options for their ability scores stuff, which means they can have their stats line up for their classes better.
So for example, I tend to offer 'Wood Elves', to contrast the CRB's 'high elves' who lose their Con penalty and Int bonus for a Cha penalty and a Wis bonus, and trade out Elven Magic for Woodcraft.
Doing this will grant your players access to more mechanical options, while staying within the standard races
thejeff |
Vinja89 wrote:Thank you, this is exactly what I'm talking about. Hell, it seems like my players would be happier with me telling them "There is no magic in this setting." than "There are only humans in this setting".One thing i always found funny is, you say there is no place for gunslingers and firearms in your campaign, nobody panics. You say there is no room for catfolk in your campaign everybody looses their minds and you get called out for stymieing player creativity, and a good DM would make room! Just a humorous observation i have made.
Personally i say the more the merrier! whatever makes the player happy, within reason of course.
Yes! Join the Howard purists!
Oust the Tolkien lovers with their weird races!Matt Thomason |
J-Gal wrote:
snipAnd that's cool. Not everybody plays in a world where that's a rarity, though, and PF should provide those of us who prefer less classic/traditional worlds the options we want. Not all of us like to play in Middle-Earth/Forgotten Realms/Golarion. I've been playing in game worlds like that for 30-ish years, and I'm bored of them.
Creative freedom, infinite possibilities, and the power of imagination. That's a big part of why I game. I don't care what Tolkien, or Howard, or anybody else wrote ... this is about our stories, not theirs.
After playing a lot of Fallen London, I think I want to play a Rubbery Man...
Adjule |
I would seriously play a kitsune paladin or barbarian or fighter, if I could ever find a game that would allow the race. Most games only allow the core + planetouched (usually just aasimar+tiefling, rarely undine+ifrit+oread+sylph, and fetchlings even less), so it is tough to play one. So I typically go with the half-orc or dwarf.
I would gladly play a melee beatstick, as Zhayne so lovingly called them, and go for the kitsune race even with their -2 to Strength, and complete focus on illusions and enchantment "trickery", despite not going well with the melee beatstick theme.
Hell, I really want to play a kitsune barbarian from the Land of the Linnorm Kings who is pasty white, blonde hair/blue eyes typical scandinavian viking, who goes hybrid form only when he rages, and who's fox form has the physical characteristics of an arctic fox. That would be an honestly fun-ass character to play. I would more than likely even take some of the Kitsune-only racial feats, such as being able to transform quicker. Kitsune Pounce? Only if it really fit the concept.
But trying to find a game that would let me even play a kitsune and not just allow the core + planetouched races, would be rather difficult to do. Because I seriously want to play that character now.
Liam Warner |
I would seriously play a kitsune paladin or barbarian or fighter, if I could ever find a game that would allow the race. Most games only allow the core + planetouched (usually just aasimar+tiefling, rarely undine+ifrit+oread+sylph, and fetchlings even less), so it is tough to play one. So I typically go with the half-orc or dwarf.
I would gladly play a melee beatstick, as Zhayne so lovingly called them, and go for the kitsune race even with their -2 to Strength, and complete focus on illusions and enchantment "trickery", despite not going well with the melee beatstick theme.
Hell, I really want to play a kitsune barbarian from the Land of the Linnorm Kings who is pasty white, blonde hair/blue eyes typical scandinavian viking, who goes hybrid form only when he rages, and who's fox form has the physical characteristics of an arctic fox. That would be an honestly fun-ass character to play. I would more than likely even take some of the Kitsune-only racial feats, such as being able to transform quicker. Kitsune Pounce? Only if it really fit the concept.
But trying to find a game that would let me even play a kitsune and not just allow the core + planetouched races, would be rather difficult to do. Because I seriously want to play that character now.
I'm the same really like the Kitsune (or oriental adventures Hengeyoki-Fox, rather a fan of oriental adventures in general actually) but I never get to play them so if I was in a game that allowed them I'd take them regardless of the penalties.
"Sooo you'll let me take Kitsune if I play a straight Rogue with no 3rd party suppliments? Done."
thejeff |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Zhayne wrote:After playing a lot of Fallen London, I think I want to play a Rubbery Man...J-Gal wrote:
snipAnd that's cool. Not everybody plays in a world where that's a rarity, though, and PF should provide those of us who prefer less classic/traditional worlds the options we want. Not all of us like to play in Middle-Earth/Forgotten Realms/Golarion. I've been playing in game worlds like that for 30-ish years, and I'm bored of them.
Creative freedom, infinite possibilities, and the power of imagination. That's a big part of why I game. I don't care what Tolkien, or Howard, or anybody else wrote ... this is about our stories, not theirs.
Fallen London had some awesome concepts and great flavor.
At higher levels it became too much of a grind fest for me, sadly. I should look back in on it sometime.
Adjule |
I'd let you. Like I say, I'm more likely to ban the core races than the rest of the stuff. :)
Oh, and you should buy thr Races Revised for the Kitsune. They have a barbarian archetype where your 'rage' turns you into a wolf-sized feral (4-footed) fox.
While that would be nice, finding someone who would allow 3rd party would be even harder than someone who would allow the kitsune. As for the archetype, it sounds interesting, being a wolf-sized "feral" fox would be different. And +respect for admitting to being a furry on the internet on a site that isn't a dedicated furry site. Thankfully the people here seem to actually try to follow the forum rule of "Don't be a jerk", as many other places, a comment like that would have been flooded with vitriol. I have experienced that myself.
Unfortunately, the 2 games I play in are run over roll20.net (it's the only way I can play as there are no local groups), and I refuse pbp due to experiences from way back in 2003 when I attempted that form. It is tough getting into an online game, especially with a "far-out-there" character like a kitsune barbarian.
Adjule |
Damian Magecraft wrote:How is this different from a dwarf with a hammer or an elf with a bow?My only issue with the "special little snowflakes" is that all to often they are not really all that special.
If I had a nickle for every drow ranger or staff wielding monkey man... oy vey.
Or a dwarf with an axe, a half-orc barbarian, or a halfling rogue?
KestrelZ |
I've seen lots of PF game groups. Some have more race restrictions than others. Some can play any "core equivalent" race possible and the whole group plays humans. Some are restricted only to the core races and everyone plays every race except for humans, a few oddballs say "one race only" (usually human, but there was an all-dwarf campaign once) or "anything goes" (We get to play dragons!)
In the end, it's personal preference. There are other rpg products that have settings for either extreme
(lots of human-only fantasy rpgs all the way to a few furry "no human" fantasy rpgs).
thejeff |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mikaze wrote:Many gamers really do pick their races primarily or exclusively for theme.If "many" gamers really did that, we'd see a lot more kitsune barbarians, right? Aasimar rogues? Strix sorcerers?
But for some strange reason, we don't...
There's "pick races for powergaming reasons" and then there's "deliberately pick race/class combinations to cripple yourself".
Maybe they pick a race they like, then pick a class that works well with it? But may still be weaker than a human or other core option.
OTOH, I do have a halfling barbarian, so what do I know.
Damian Magecraft |
Damian Magecraft wrote:How is this different from a dwarf with a hammer or an elf with a bow?My only issue with the "special little snowflakes" is that all to often they are not really all that special.
If I had a nickle for every drow ranger or staff wielding monkey man... oy vey.
At what point did I claim they were better?
Zhayne |
Zhayne wrote:At what point did I claim they were better?Damian Magecraft wrote:How is this different from a dwarf with a hammer or an elf with a bow?My only issue with the "special little snowflakes" is that all to often they are not really all that special.
If I had a nickle for every drow ranger or staff wielding monkey man... oy vey.
I didn't say better, I said different.
It's the same thing. 'This is the iconic/thematic weapon of that race'. If you don't b&%*% about dwarves with hammers or axes or elves with bows, don't b!%+& about drow with scimitars or vanara with staves.thejeff |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Damian Magecraft wrote:Zhayne wrote:At what point did I claim they were better?Damian Magecraft wrote:How is this different from a dwarf with a hammer or an elf with a bow?My only issue with the "special little snowflakes" is that all to often they are not really all that special.
If I had a nickle for every drow ranger or staff wielding monkey man... oy vey.I didn't say better, I said different.
It's the same thing. 'This is the iconic/thematic weapon of that race'. If you don't b#$&@ about dwarves with hammers or axes or elves with bows, don't b$!$* about drow with scimitars or vanara with staves.
The difference is that the rebel drow with scimitars wasn't supposed to be a standard example of his race. It only became so because D'rzzt was so popular.
That's not everyone playing the iconic/thematic version of that race, that's everyone copying a specific character who was supposed to be an exception.
The thematic Drow should really be a Machiavellian female cleric.
K177Y C47 |
who is saying that they come from other planes?
Some of the comments from J-Gal and some others seem to treat like Plane-touched are weird and confusing outsiders from other realities are are "extremely diffcult" to explain why they are there (when in reality they are just like every other human... just slightly different in lineage).
LazarX |
Zhayne wrote:Damian Magecraft wrote:Zhayne wrote:At what point did I claim they were better?Damian Magecraft wrote:How is this different from a dwarf with a hammer or an elf with a bow?My only issue with the "special little snowflakes" is that all to often they are not really all that special.
If I had a nickle for every drow ranger or staff wielding monkey man... oy vey.I didn't say better, I said different.
It's the same thing. 'This is the iconic/thematic weapon of that race'. If you don't b#$&@ about dwarves with hammers or axes or elves with bows, don't b$!$* about drow with scimitars or vanara with staves.The difference is that the rebel drow with scimitars wasn't supposed to be a standard example of his race. It only became so because D'rzzt was so popular.
That's not everyone playing the iconic/thematic version of that race, that's everyone copying a specific character who was supposed to be an exception.
The thematic Drow should really be a Machiavellian female cleric.
And should not be an iconic as Drow are supposed to be encounters, not a standard choice for player characters.
Headfirst |
The point I'm trying to make with all this is:
Don't show up to a game with a crazy alternate race with absolutely perfect stats for your chosen class to maximize DPS, with all of your attributes either 18+ or 7 or less... then try to convince everyone that you only built your character that way for role-play purposes.
Once again: Power gaming is fine. Let's not forget that the granddaddy of all RPGs was a tabletop war game.
The point of this thread is to wonder what happened to the "classic races." Well, Paizo decided to put out a bunch of alternate races with stats optimized for very specific classes, which is like catnip to power gamers. When you combine that with gamers (and DMs) who choose to ignore all the flavor text, where the only drawbacks of some of these races is explained, yeah, you're going to end up with a game that looks more like an anime furry convention than a "classic" RPG.
Mikaze |
4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The point I'm trying to make with all this is:
Don't show up to a game with a crazy alternate race with absolutely perfect stats for your chosen class to maximize DPS, with all of your attributes either 18+ or 7 or less... then try to convince everyone that you only built your character that way for role-play purposes.
Once again: Power gaming is fine. Let's not forget that the granddaddy of all RPGs was a tabletop war game.
The point of this thread is to wonder what happened to the "classic races." Well, Paizo decided to put out a bunch of alternate races with stats optimized for very specific classes, which is like catnip to power gamers. When you combine that with gamers (and DMs) who choose to ignore all the flavor text, where the only drawbacks of some of these races is explained, yeah, you're going to end up with a game that looks more like an anime furry convention than a "classic" RPG.
THE RIDE NEVER ENDS
kyrt-ryder |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Zhayne wrote:And, for the record, I pick exotic races because I'm a furry and only want to play furries, because they look cool.Sure, man. And you read Playboy for the articles. :)
Let's look up Kitsune, shall we? Oh, look at that, bonuses to Dexterity and Charisma and a penalty to one of the game's most popular dump stats, Strength.
Lets look up Halflings, shall we? Oh, look at that, bonuses to Dexterity and Charisma and a penalty to one of the game's most popular dump stats, Strength.
Zhayne |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Races should not be (and are not) 'balanced' on flavor text. The entire point of flavor text is that it is mutable and non-binding. That has ZERO bearing on anything mechanical. In any given game world, what is common and what is a freak can be extremely different.
This is why flavor text is not, in any way, a mechanic, much less a balancing mechanic. If I say humans are a rare, freakish, feared-by-all race in this world, then they are. Are they going to get bennies for it? No, because flavor text is not rules text and has no bearing on game balance.
The only flavor that matters is the flavor the player gives his character, and the GM and his players give their game world.
Zhayne |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Headfirst wrote:Lets look up Halflings, shall we? Oh, look at that, bonuses to Dexterity and Charisma and a penalty to one of the game's most popular dump stats, Strength.Zhayne wrote:And, for the record, I pick exotic races because I'm a furry and only want to play furries, because they look cool.Sure, man. And you read Playboy for the articles. :)
Let's look up Kitsune, shall we? Oh, look at that, bonuses to Dexterity and Charisma and a penalty to one of the game's most popular dump stats, Strength.
And better racial bonuses than kitsune, and metric f**tons more feat support.
Ooh, I'm SUCH a power gamer.
thejeff |
thejeff wrote:That's not everyone playing the iconic/thematic version of that race, that's everyone copying a specific character who was supposed to be an exception.
Like Gimli and Legolas and Frito.
So ... same thing.
Well, Frodo was supposed to be an exception, in that he was a scholar and an elf-friend and a bit adventurous, but that's hardly the common gaming halfling stereotype.
Gimli and Legolas were fairly typical examples of their race, though more heroic than most. The most exceptional thing about them other than that was their friendship. They weren't outcasts who'd rebelled against the traditions of their people or anything like that.
The overwhelming majority of mountain dwelling axe-wielding dwarves or forest living bow wielding elves in gaming are NPCs. The overwhelming majority of two-scimitar wielding surface dwelling outcast drow rangers are PCs. (Or at least were long enough for it to become a stereotype.)
alchemicGenius |
The point I'm trying to make with all this is:
Don't show up to a game with a crazy alternate race with absolutely perfect stats for your chosen class to maximize DPS, with all of your attributes either 18+ or 7 or less... then try to convince everyone that you only built your character that way for role-play purposes.
Once again: Power gaming is fine. Let's not forget that the granddaddy of all RPGs was a tabletop war game.
The point of this thread is to wonder what happened to the "classic races." Well, Paizo decided to put out a bunch of alternate races with stats optimized for very specific classes, which is like catnip to power gamers. When you combine that with gamers (and DMs) who choose to ignore all the flavor text, where the only drawbacks of some of these races is explained, yeah, you're going to end up with a game that looks more like an anime furry convention than a "classic" RPG.
That first part is really starting to sound like the Stormwind Fallacy. Just because someone has an optimized character does not mean they aren't doing it for role playing purpose. Someone finding the absolute best way to take advantage of their natural ability is not that difficult to conceive. What I don't get is why people start getting up in arms about people using non core races for bonuses, but no one complains when people use core races because they are the most optimal choices. Everyone's fine with a wizard being elf, but dear lord when someone decides to use a tiefling to make a battle cleric!
knightnday |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The point I'm trying to make with all this is:
Don't show up to a game with a crazy alternate race with absolutely perfect stats for your chosen class to maximize DPS, with all of your attributes either 18+ or 7 or less... then try to convince everyone that you only built your character that way for role-play purposes.
Once again: Power gaming is fine. Let's not forget that the granddaddy of all RPGs was a tabletop war game.
The point of this thread is to wonder what happened to the "classic races." Well, Paizo decided to put out a bunch of alternate races with stats optimized for very specific classes, which is like catnip to power gamers. When you combine that with gamers (and DMs) who choose to ignore all the flavor text, where the only drawbacks of some of these races is explained, yeah, you're going to end up with a game that looks more like an anime furry convention than a "classic" RPG.
Meh, bogus argument. As has been proven over and over and over and over and over .. did I mention over .. again, Humans are what you look for in power gaming, as well as many of the base races.
The classic races still exist and they are rare in some games and quite prominent in others. Given that they are in the core book and receive a great deal of attention there and in other game systems, they don't seem in danger of dying out.
Not every person who wants to play a non-"classic" race is a powergamer or whatever other slur we'd like to come up with, much like everyone who plays a wizard isn't a power gamer.
LazarX |
Zhayne wrote:This is why flavor text is not, in any way, a mechanic, much less a balancing mechanic.Tell that to your PFS DM the next time you try to have your drow infernal sorcerer try to use diplomacy to befriend a superstitious dwarf barbarian. :)
He'd better show me the boon that allows him to play a drow character first. :)