|
I think this is a really important question, that seems to have a lot of answers, and for me, comes up a lot as I read many posts on the subject in other threads.
Subjectively, I agree that running WBG1 12 times and committing suicide / killing one another as soon as the module starts is abuse and borderline cheating.
I'm not sure where the line is, and I'm sure many of you have opinions on it, so my goal here is to attempt to find a middle ground between us all. What I think would be most valuable is a post from John or Mike with a clear definition.
As an aside, please try to be civil about this. I know many of you are passionate about this issue, as am I, but I think we are better than bickering.
|
Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder ...
I doubt this can be answered with a simple number / rule.
Mike and John already said what they believe is too much but they tried to trust us. Defining a fixed number will go to the lowest denominator and will cause even more grief.
I understand why people want a fixed number. But I doubt this will work.
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Asking for specific clarification has merits. It enables us to have a hard and fast place we can point to as evidence that X or Y isn't allowed.
Conversely, by empowering us as individuals to ask the question "what constitutes abuse" and to define that ourselves is also a great gift. I believe Mike and John are seeing (or trusting, even) that we're mature enough to know where that line is and not to cross it.
To continue my original example, if you have to ask if X or Y is abuse, it probably is.
I don't know which method I'd prefer for something like this, however in the long run, neither will really matter. Although I will say that the second allows the campaign staff to see how mature we, as individuals, really are.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The grandfather clause is meant to be self policing. You don't need a hard number for self policing as the answer is always: "If you think it is abusive then it is." Asking for a hard number is only useful if you want other people to do the policing, which goes against the spirit of the ruling. Some people may think that some people can't be trusted to self-police. John & Mike obviously don't think this way.
|
The grandfather clause is meant to be self policing. You don't need a hard number for self policing as the answer is always: "If you think it is abusive then it is." Asking for a hard number is only useful if you want other people to do the policing, which goes against the spirit of the ruling. Some people may think that some people can't be trusted to self-police. John & Mike obviously don't think this way.
Or to put it another way, "If you have to ask..."
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm inclined to agree with Thod. If you can look at yourself in the mirror, with a clear conscience, then you did not abuse the aasimar/tiefling grandfathering process. If the little voice in your head says, "Maybe you're taking this a little too far", then you probably are.
If you are looking for a number so that you can wag your finger at other people, then I think you have to ask yourself, "Is it really THAT important to me that some guy in Des Moines has 27 tiefling PFS characters?"
As for me, I already have a tiefling character, so I don't feel the need to make another one. I don't have any aasimar characters in PFS, so I'm going to try to get one in before the deadline. It would not offend me if someone had two or three (or even twelve) cool concepts that they wanted to grandfather in.
P.S. I have nothing against Des Moines, it's just a random place far away from where I live.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let me flip the question around for you: "How many Aasimar and Tiefling characters does a player want to have, and why that many?"
Let's look at some math that is overly simplified and rounded off. Please don't nitpick it later - I'm simplifying it because I'm lazy and don't want to actually look through the paths.
As of August, 2014, there have been:
5 seasons of 26 scenarios = 130 available experience
~25 modules for character levels <12 = 75 available experience
6 sanctioned adventure paths @ 12 XP each for character levels <12 = 72 experience
Total available XP for scenario-legal characters: 277
Total number of characters, as of now, that you can get to level 12: 8.4
Given that most people probably won't want to have ALL of their characters as Aasimar or Tiefling, more than 6 is, in my opinion, ridiculous.
What's excessive? In my opinion, which in this case should not be taken as an official answer, having more than 2 characters of a given race - of any given race - is excessive. Personally, I'd have limited it to 1 aasimar and 1 tiefling character per player.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
Hey Jeff, I like the math. I didn't realize how many 12s a person could have if they played it all out perfectly. Just remember that some people slow track PCs, and not everyone want's their PCs to reach level 12.
I had a player that at one point made characters with early retirement in mind.* For example, his Oracle 1/ Sorcerer 1 that will be level 2 forever. Or his bloodrager with Whirlwind that's stopping at level 7. He wants to play them at lower levels because the builds are more fun at that point of their career.
So we shouldn't assume that everyone's goal is the maximum amount of level 12+ characters possible.
EDIT: Wanted to preemptively apologize if I come off snarky there, Jeff. I agree with your opening question and follow up of "what's excessive?"
That's a question we should each ask ourselves when looking at this ruling. I just think we're all going to have a different answer, and that's OK.
|
|
Some people in threads like this have made the assertion that they see the restrictions as saying that if you already have an aasimar or Tiefling character, you shouldn't make one now to get it in before the deadline, and that doing so (even one) would be abusive.
Clearly there's a wide range of interpretations about what is or is not abusive.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
For reference:
From there, we drew up a fair window to allow players to lock in another native outsider or three and resolved to require only 1 XP on those characters--the aim being that most participants would have the opportunity to create and play at least one new character in that time.
Now, let's zoom in a little, adding some bolding:
From there, we drew up a fair window to allow players to lock in another native outsider or three and resolved to require only 1 XP on those characters--the aim being that most participants would have the opportunity to create and play at least one new character in that time.
I think it's safe to say that it's fully within the intent for players to intentionally "bank" more than one soon-to-be-restricted PC. Somewhere there's a blurry upper limit, but I think it's very reasonable to say that "bank more than one on purpose" is definitely within the spirit of the grandfathering rules.
|
|
What's excessive? In my opinion, which in this case should not be taken as an official answer, having more than 2 characters of a given race - of any given race - is excessive. Personally, I'd have limited it to 1 aasimar and 1 tiefling character per player.
1 is definitely WAY too low, especially for those of us who like making characters and prefer low to mid level play. I have 3 "real" Aasimar (all well past legal rebuild) characters. I have 2 or more of several other races too (Tengu, Human, Kitsune).
And the math for total number of characters has to include GM credits and tier 1 replayables. I think I can get something like 15 characters to the levels I want.
My personal rule is that it is "played" if I have a character concept and have actually played that concept at least once. May still get rebuilt (at least 1 is likely to change when the ACG comes out).
I'll likely also bank one character just in case I get some fantastic idea later that can ONLY be done by an Aasimar or Tiefling. I doubt I'll ever run it but I want the insurance :-)
|
|
The grandfather clause is meant to be self policing. You don't need a hard number for self policing as the answer is always: "If you think it is abusive then it is." Asking for a hard number is only useful if you want other people to do the policing, which goes against the spirit of the ruling. Some people may think that some people can't be trusted to self-police. John & Mike obviously don't think this way.
Is the corollary true?
If you don't think it is abusive then it isn't.
Venture-Captain, Washington—Spokane
|
Personally, I have made one additional character of each race. One is already locked in and the other will probably be locked as of Friday. That is all I plan to create based on the empowerment we have been graciously given. It is my opinion that the 30 days notice and 1 xp requirement to be grandfathered is more than generous. Just think, the requirements could have been Level 2 with absolutely no notice whatsoever. Do I plan to take many of my characters to retirement? I am currently not able to answer that question but I do know that I have a couple that are on their way there.
Marathons of low tier scenarios and/or modules to lock in a stockpile of Aasimars and Tieflings is a little excessive, in my opinion. Limiting a player to one of each seems a little to strict as those who may have a few characters of those races in active play would be forced to shelve the excess (unless I am interpreting the restriction incorrectly).
That is just me 2 cp worth.
|
|
Personally, I have made one additional character of each race. One is already locked in and the other will probably be locked as of Friday. That is all I plan to create based on the empowerment we have been graciously given. It is my opinion that the 30 days notice and 1 xp requirement to be grandfathered is more than generous. Just think, the requirements could have been Level 2 with absolutely no notice whatsoever. Do I plan to take many of my characters to retirement? I am currently not able to answer that question but I do know that I have a couple that are on their way there.
Marathons of low tier scenarios and/or modules to lock in a stockpile of Aasimars and Tieflings is a little excessive, in my opinion. Limiting a player to one of each seems a little to strict as those who may have a few characters of those races in active play would be forced to shelve the excess (unless I am interpreting the restriction incorrectly).
That is just me 2 cp worth.
My proposal was that they could keep all the ones they had prior to the announcement, just not make any more.
That means if you already had 5 aasimars then you could play them. You just couldn't use a 1 xp new character to grandfather any.
|
|
Personally, I have made one additional character of each race. One is already locked in and the other will probably be locked as of Friday. That is all I plan to create based on the empowerment we have been graciously given. It is my opinion that the 30 days notice and 1 xp requirement to be grandfathered is more than generous. Just think, the requirements could have been Level 2 with absolutely no notice whatsoever. Do I plan to take many of my characters to retirement? I am currently not able to answer that question but I do know that I have a couple that are on their way there.
Marathons of low tier scenarios and/or modules to lock in a stockpile of Aasimars and Tieflings is a little excessive, in my opinion. Limiting a player to one of each seems a little to strict as those who may have a few characters of those races in active play would be forced to shelve the excess (unless I am interpreting the restriction incorrectly).
That is just me 2 cp worth.
I more or less agree with Preston. I have one active tiefling character and no active aasimar characters. I have a GM baby that is an aasimar, and I might try to get another character as a tiefling. I have no intention of having more planetouched characters than that, and I might not even play those two above first level. It depends on what personalities I can come up with for them.
That said, I don't see a problem with other players running Master of the Fallen Fortress a dozen times to wheel out a bunch of planetouched bodies to be filled as characters later. After all, they can only play one at a time anyway.
As an aside, I do agree that the planetouched are mechanically strong. But I don't understand the idea that they are the "best" race to play. My single tiefling is among my strongest characters, and he is boring as heck to play.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think people are getting a little crazy with this.
The idea is not to shutdown all planetouched, but to reduce the number of them.
Now if someone wants to play a whole ton o fPFS to have some planetouched back ups, well GREAT!
Then there is a ton of PFS happening.
How does that hurt you, and why should it be limited?
|
|
For reference:
From there, we drew up a fair window to allow players to lock in another native outsider or three and resolved to require only 1 XP on those characters--the aim being that most participants would have the opportunity to create and play at least one new character in that time.Now, let's zoom in a little, adding some bolding:
From there, we drew up a fair window to allow players to lock in another native outsider or three and resolved to require only 1 XP on those characters--the aim being that most participants would have the opportunity to create and play at least one new character in that time.I think it's safe to say that it's fully within the intent for players to intentionally "bank" more than one soon-to-be-restricted PC. Somewhere there's a blurry upper limit, but I think it's very reasonable to say that "bank more than one on purpose" is definitely within the spirit of the grandfathering rules.
This is really helpful, Jiggy. Thanks for that.
|
|
How does that hurt you, and why should it be limited?
Because we were told in advance, very specifically with the hope that players wouldn't rush to make a horde of new characters with that race. If abuse of that news starts to happen, then campaign staff might be less likely to tell us of that news in advance in future.
We're just looking to do the right thing here, even if that means an addendum of "...but if it really means the world to you to make more than x aasimar characters before the deadline, fair enough, just be aware that we'd prefer you did your best to avoid making more than you normally would had we not made this announcement."
|
|
Hey Jeff, I like the math. I didn't realize how many 12s a person could have if they played it all out perfectly. Just remember that some people slow track PCs, and not everyone want's their PCs to reach level 12.
That's fair. Slow track means fewer characters, though, and I'm not certain whether only playing to level 7 or so would increase the total appreciably, as you then lose access to some modules, some adventure path XP, and the 7-11 scenarios.
Paul's point about GM credit is well-taken, though, and increases the number of characters to 16.
As to my last point, as I said, that's my opinion - and anyone who knows me IRL (as Paul does) will also know that the criteria I impose upon myself for character creation is a lot more stringent than I expect from other people. While I believe that more than 2 characters of a given race is excessive, I fully recognize that not everyone is going to agree with that. It's only my personal opinion, anyway. :)
And FWIW, I didn't see any snark in your post, Walter, but thanks for clarifying all the same.
|
|
I wanted to clarify that in making this thread and asking this question, I'm not really looking for a specific number, and I'm certainly not looking to get a specific number so that I can get as many planetouched as possible without angering the leadership. There were a couple of posts earlier on that seemed like that's what they were implying.
Personally, I've got 3-4 awesome Aasimar concepts in mind (2-3 of which I have the low level credits for), and 2 fun Tiefling concepts. Some of them, in my mind, require one of the closing races, others, are only enhanced by them. I'm fairly certain I won't get all six, and six is probably one too many.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How does that hurt you, and why should it be limited?Because we were told in advance, very specifically with the hope that players wouldn't rush to make a horde of new characters with that race. If abuse of that news starts to happen, then campaign staff might be less likely to tell us of that news in advance in future.
We're just looking to do the right thing here, even if that means an addendum of "...but if it really means the world to you to make more than x aasimar characters before the deadline, fair enough, just be aware that we'd prefer you did your best to avoid making more than you normally would had we not made this announcement."
I disagree with this completely.
The staff are removing the race in a means to prevent as much anger as possible, it attempt to make people enjoy the game more.
Everything they do is an attempt to make the game more enjoyable. They do not want to upset people and make them stoping funding their paychecks.
The actions will take will alwyas be geared towards that.
|
|
I'm amazed that people are missing what I thought of as the most important part of that post, Jiggy...
We also recognized that these conditions would enable however many people to exploit the system and create a dozen new native outsider characters for a rainy day. In a way, that's a feature and not a bug. Although I scratch my head a bit at stockpiling aasimars, I'm also aware that the campaign serves a wide range of play styles and interests, so if someone is wild about aasimars and wants to play a bunch of scenarios in a month, that's his or her business.One of the guys who runs the campaign has publicly acknowledged that they ARE aware some people would stockpile a bunch of aasimars and tieflings, and that he, at the very least, considered that the player's business, not his.
To reiterate, John Compton has outright stated he doesn't have a problem with people stockpiling grandfathered races.
Thanks, RedMage, this is also very helpful, though I doubt I'm going to make a dozen of anything! ;)
|
|
I think the line, in this case, is best drawn by the player making the characters themselves. If they are at the point where they feel they are actively abusing the Grandfathering rule and they are still going through with their character creation, then it up to them to stop themselves. I can't tell how many characters of this sort anyone needs.
I personally would rather not deal with getting any characters in before the deadline. My need is not great and I hope by not making my own outsider that I do a tiny bit to keep the race a bit more special in my own corner of the woods.
However this last weekend I rand a game that saw the introduction of two more assimar into PFS. One from a new player and another from a long time player. The second is already planning to make a tiefling in the next available game as well. I think that it is excessive, but these are characters he has been talking about making for years, so I'm not going go begrudge him moving to make them before they are unavailable to him.
It runs the same for everyone else. I really really don't get why anyone would want to make three tiefling/assimars within a year, much less twelve within a month, but I I'm going to try not to question it and not let it interfere with me enjoying the game myself.
|
|
Perhaps the line is with the having concepts? If you have concepts for a half a dozen aasimar or tiefling characters that need those races to work, then by all means start them. But if you're starting A/T characters "just in case I want to use them someday," that smacks a little of pressing the line.
But again, that's just on opinion.
|
For reference:
From there, we drew up a fair window to allow players to lock in another native outsider or three and resolved to require only 1 XP on those characters--the aim being that most participants would have the opportunity to create and play at least one new character in that time.Now, let's zoom in a little, adding some bolding:
From there, we drew up a fair window to allow players to lock in another native outsider or three and resolved to require only 1 XP on those characters--the aim being that most participants would have the opportunity to create and play at least one new character in that time.I think it's safe to say that it's fully within the intent for players to intentionally "bank" more than one soon-to-be-restricted PC. Somewhere there's a blurry upper limit, but I think it's very reasonable to say that "bank more than one on purpose" is definitely within the spirit of the grandfathering rules.
I would say the limit is somewhere between 3 (your post highlighted the number 3) and 10 (the number John and Mike use in the Blog as a number identifying what would be excessive.
And if you want to use RAW as an argument, I'd say that 3 is the upper limit, because 3 is the number used.
He says, and I quote, "another native outsider or three."
In context, I agree that the language is being ambiguous and just giving an example.
But if we need a hard number, I'd say its already in the blog.
|
|
I'm amazed that people are missing what I thought of as the most important part of that post, Jiggy...
We also recognized that these conditions would enable however many people to exploit the system and create a dozen new native outsider characters for a rainy day. In a way, that's a feature and not a bug. Although I scratch my head a bit at stockpiling aasimars, I'm also aware that the campaign serves a wide range of play styles and interests, so if someone is wild about aasimars and wants to play a bunch of scenarios in a month, that's his or her business.One of the guys who runs the campaign has publicly acknowledged that they ARE aware some people would stockpile a bunch of aasimars and tieflings, and that he, at the very least, considered that the player's business, not his.
To reiterate, John Compton has outright stated he doesn't have a problem with people stockpiling grandfathered races.
You can't use single lines of text to make your case, while ignoring other lines of text.
In the same blog, it was also stated that 10 was probably excessive and asked everyone to use good judgement and to please respect the intent of this change.
You can't ignore that just so you can make your point.
|
|
I personally think the limit should be with the individual and what they feel comfortable/happy with, after all they can't play more than one at a time anyway. I share John's view that stockpiling hordes of them makes me scratch my head simply because of the play/scenario limits, but I am not going to judge how someone else has fun in the game so long as it doesn't disrupt or hinder anyone else' fun.
That said, I think folks who have "a ton of cool concepts for planetouched that HAVE to be made before the deadline!", should look at the concepts and see if they work some other way, and then reduce the number of Aasimar or Tiefling they feel the need to make. I went over my ideas and checked the ones that had to be planar... either due to archetypes or FCB usage or feats... and then took a hard look at the rest to see what could be re-imagined and went from there. Though that was more a method of saving me from trying to cram sessions and burnout rather than any feeling of making too many. Just seemed counter to fun to me.
|
|
Hey Jeff, I like the math. I didn't realize how many 12s a person could have if they played it all out perfectly. Just remember that some people slow track PCs, and not everyone want's their PCs to reach level 12.That's fair. Slow track means fewer characters, though, and I'm not certain whether only playing to level 7 or so would increase the total appreciably, as you then lose access to some modules, some adventure path XP, and the 7-11 scenarios.
Paul's point about GM credit is well-taken, though, and increases the number of characters to 16.
As to my last point, as I said, that's my opinion - and anyone who knows me IRL (as Paul does) will also know that the criteria I impose upon myself for character creation is a lot more stringent than I expect from other people. While I believe that more than 2 characters of a given race is excessive, I fully recognize that not everyone is going to agree with that. It's only my personal opinion, anyway. :)
And FWIW, I didn't see any snark in your post, Walter, but thanks for clarifying all the same.
Just as a question for you, and understanding that I have run a lot of the Tier 1 replayables, for one reason or another, how many non-boon races are there?
Dwarf
Elf
Gnome
Half-Elf
Half-Orc
Halfling
Human
Open:
Tengu
Open, going to boon:
Aasimar
Tiefling
Boon, going to open:
Kitsune
Nagaji
Wayang
Boon only:
Dhampir (Dhampyr?)
Goblin*
Grippli
Ifrit
Oread
Suli*
Sylph
Undine
I think some other races may have been available via boon?
So, while I have a few of the boons, and boon races, what should I do when I exceed the total number of PCs supported by having 2 of each race?
Most of them are Human. Does that qualify as too many humans?
Developer
|
| 19 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've tossed around a few numbers over the past week mostly to give a sense of what is appropriate in my estimation as a participant in the campaign. Making more aasimars than that may make me as a person less comfortable, but in few cases would it make me as a developer lay out official guidelines of how many is too many. It's important for me to be able to separate (or at least distinguish between) my feelings as a gamer and my feelings as a developer, such that my way of having fun is not the only way of having fun (i.e. "badwrongfun").
In that way, Mike and I haven't laid out precise numbers of how many native outsiders one can create over this month, and we recognized going in that there would be some statistical outliers who might make 5+ additional characters. As many have said or alluded to upthread, "how much is too much" is largely a matter of individual judgment. So long as folks are following all of the other campaign rules and are having fun while playing the game, I think it's in the campaign's and community's best interests that we let this play out and avoid passing judgment on others' play styles.
|
|
And if you want to use RAW as an argument, I'd say that 3 is the upper limit, because 3 is the number used.
He says, and I quote, "another native outsider or three."
In context, I agree that the language is being ambiguous and just giving an example.
But if we need a hard number, I'd say its already in the blog.
Aww shucks, I'm out of luck because all I wanted was 2 more. :)
|
|
The grandfather clause is meant to be self policing. You don't need a hard number for self policing as the answer is always: "If you think it is abusive then it is." Asking for a hard number is only useful if you want other people to do the policing, which goes against the spirit of the ruling. Some people may think that some people can't be trusted to self-police. John & Mike obviously don't think this way.Is the corollary true?
If you don't think it is abusive then it isn't.
If we are talking self policing, then the answer is 'Yes.'
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Aww shucks, I'm out of luck because all I wanted was 2 more. :)And if you want to use RAW as an argument, I'd say that 3 is the upper limit, because 3 is the number used.
He says, and I quote, "another native outsider or three."
In context, I agree that the language is being ambiguous and just giving an example.
But if we need a hard number, I'd say its already in the blog.
The Native Outsiders of Golarion
A Reading from the Blog of Paizo, New Options, Verses 16 to 20:
Then did he raise on high the Native Outsider of Golarion, saying, "Bless this, O GM, that with it thou mayst playeth legally in future campaigns, in thy mercy." And the people did rejoice and did feast upon the lambs and trolls and tree-sloths and GM tears and orangutans and stale Doritos... Now did John Compton say, "First thou playeth the Native Outsider. Then thou must count to three. Three shall be the number of the counting and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither shalt thou count two, excepting that thou then proceedeth to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the number of the counting, be reached, then lobbest thou the Native Outsider in the direction of thine foe, who, being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it."
TOZ: Right. One... two... five.
Andrew: Three, TOZ.
TOZ: Three.
|
|
So, while I have a few of the boons, and boon races, what should I do when I exceed the total number of PCs supported by having 2 of each race?
*shrug* You make another one. Including only the races that are open starting at season 6, that's 22 characters. If you have 22 different characters, then you've got good reason to have more than 2 of at least 1 of them, and probably more. I consider that to be a corner case - I don't get to play outside of my local community, but I can comfortably say that I can count the number of players I've met with more than a half-dozen characters on one hand, myself included.
That said, I'll reiterate that the "2 characters per race" is a personal opinion, as I'd rather have a variety of different characters, and I try to encourage other players to step out of their comfort zone and not to have a half-dozen slightly different dwarven fighters.
|
|
I don't get to play outside of my local community, but I can comfortably say that I can count the number of players I've met with more than a half-dozen characters on one hand, myself included.
I think that you're wrong about that, Jeff. Most of the longtimers have more than 6 characters. Just look at the -? numbers that you report.
I just glanced at the 401 sessions from June 21 and later and counted 10 -7 or later characters.
Which, I admit, was less than I expected. Less than 20% of the total.
Note to others: Jeff and I are in essentially the same local community.
|
|
I have no qualms admitting that the upcoming changes has forced my hand in terms of making characters that I didn't necessarily want to make straight away before losing the opportunity, possibly forever. Prior to the announcement, I had a level 7 cleric and a level 2 warpriest, both aasimar. Thematically, the race fits well with both classes, which is what I build for 90% of the time (the other 10% we don't talk about ^_^). I also had a total of 8 characters created for PFS play.
That number has ballooned to 12, but with some caveats. I'm taking my primary character (a paladin) to retirement and will need to replace him soon. Since I enjoy the paladin class, I always like having one available. Aasimar would be a natural choice since I went human the first go. This character will likely see a fair bit of play once my senior paladin retires.
Going back to my level 7 cleric, she's almost at the point of her prime and have already placed her in slow track because of it. Retirement is not a goal for this character. Right now, she's in a holding pattern because I'm saving her for runs through Bonekeep. I realize I could be waiting a long while. Since two more runs will move her out of tier for Bonekeep 1 & 2, she's completely stuck waiting and leaving me without a character. As a result, I ended up making another cleric, another aasimar, with the intent of being a dedicated caster/support character. This character will be on the backburner for awhile since I already have a half-elf bard coming up in the ranks.
I, for one, have never been a big fan of tieflings, but I had to make one with Tian Xia likely becoming a focus in the future. I took an old 3.0 character (one of my first characters) and rehashed it for PFS. Long story short, he was human samurai that wore demon-like armor and served fiercely under his empress, garnering the reputation of being an 'oni'. Through the course of the plot, he discovered his own liege was in on destroying the world and was forced to turn against her, becoming cursed in the process. He ultimately became the very thing people feared him for. I wanted to pay homage to that character and thought a tiefling samurai would be fun to play. It's too early to tell if this character will see much table play, however, it does make me grin from nostalgia. I shall enjoy playing this character again from time to time.
My fourth, and final, I've built for the deadline doesn't really have a backstory or a specific purpose other than for making a witch since I've never played one yet. She's also a tiefling. If anything, I like the thought of being a 'dark hero' with this character. Probably will only see play if the role is needed at the table as I've never been big on arcane casters.
Myself, as a player, have no qualms about taking the "Mikey" role at the table with a couple exceptions about opportunities to play my paladin or magus. Of all the characters I've created recently, I don't find any of them abusive in terms of practical reasons why they were created. As time goes on and the number of native outsiders decrease, I suppose it would be nice of having that bling factor of having grandfathered tieflings and aasimars. One should probably carry around a copy of the blog post announcing the change though as I can see some table variance in understanding whether or not X character is legal.
One positive thing about the change I liked, kitsune. Let the mischief commence!
|
|
So, while I have a few of the boons, and boon races, what should I do when I exceed the total number of PCs supported by having 2 of each race?*shrug* You make another one. Including only the races that are open starting at season 6, that's 22 characters. If you have 22 different characters, then you've got good reason to have more than 2 of at least 1 of them, and probably more. I consider that to be a corner case - I don't get to play outside of my local community, but I can comfortably say that I can count the number of players I've met with more than a half-dozen characters on one hand, myself included.
That said, I'll reiterate that the "2 characters per race" is a personal opinion, as I'd rather have a variety of different characters, and I try to encourage other players to step out of their comfort zone and not to have a half-dozen slightly different dwarven fighters.
Heh. My last character who received credit is my -27.
Races:
Human (14?)
Dhampir (1)
Kitsune (1)
Ifrit (1)
Oread (1)
Sylph (1)
Undine (1)
Aasimar (4?)
Tiefling (3?)
Until the announcement, I had 1 aasimar, no tieflings; but I looked through my 1-3 XP PCs, found three of them that might work as aasimar or tiefling, have played First Steps with a tiefling cleric, GMed Confirmation, and have a Confirmation game coming up this Sunday.
Currently at 95 tables of credit, although some of that is from various modules, and a bunch of the Tier 1/Tier 1-2 games. We have had a bunch of churn in local gamers, so lots of startup games.
Although I do have PCs leveled up through to my highest, who is 14th level.
And it is possible to have a half-dozen "dwarf fighters" using different races and classes to get the same result.
I may have other archer style PCs, but I am also tryiung to use PFS to experiment with builds and/or classes I am less comfortable with, like arcane casters. Two different sorcerers, one at 4th level (human), and one at 6th level (my kitsune). One wizard, using the boon to make him a Thassilonian Specialist, at 3rd or 4th level now; an 8th level Magus, and a couple of disarm/trip reach builds; one my 14th level PC, fighter (polearm master) using a fauchard, and the other at 10th level, fighter (lore warden) 8, Magus (Kensai) 2, using a whip.
I took delivery on Blood of Angels and Blood of Fiends a few days before this change was announced. I feel like the notice on this was WAY too short for those of us with limited time to invest in PFS.
I threw away $20 plus shipping since I won't be playing home games.
Feeling a little abused...
|
|
I took delivery on Blood of Angels and Blood of Fiends a few days before this change was announced. I feel like the notice on this was WAY too short for those of us with limited time to invest in PFS.
I threw away $20 plus shipping since I won't be playing home games.
Feeling a little abused...
I think about half or a full season's notice would have been a good way to do it. If nothing else, I reckon there'd be alot less grumbling going on about it.
But it's their campaign. They are essentially the ultimate GM of PFS, and players play by the GM rules or find another GM. *shrug*
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I felt it was getting to the point that the way to build a character was to start with a Blood of Angels/Fiends aasimar/tiefling, and then choose what you want. Any other choice was unwelcome. That, by itself, is reason for it to change.
Just the fact that so many people are scrambling to grandfather in as many aasimars/tieflings as possible indicates that it really was a problem. Sure, some people saying, "Oh, I wanted to try something with an A/T, I'd better make and run it now!" is fine. But when it becomes, "Quick, how many A/T can I get in the door before it closes?" it suggests that the availability of the race itself is the problem.
Seriously, if the tengu were stopped, would there be this same rush for tengu? No. No, there wouldn't.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I felt it was getting to the point that the way to build a character was to start with a Blood of Angels/Fiends aasimar/tiefling, and then choose what you want. Any other choice was unwelcome. That, by itself, is reason for it to change.
Just the fact that so many people are scrambling to grandfather in as many aasimars/tieflings as possible indicates that it really was a problem. Sure, some people saying, "Oh, I wanted to try something with an A/T, I'd better make and run it now!" is fine. But when it becomes, "Quick, how many A/T can I get in the door before it closes?" it suggests that the availability of the race itself is the problem.
Seriously, if the tengu were stopped, would there be this same rush for tengu? No. No, there wouldn't.
The same? No. A rush? Yes. Its like ignoring a toy until someone tries to take it away, then its the coolest thing ever!
Mind you, aasimar and tieflings are pretty cool to start with, so its a perfect storm of psychology and practicality