Isn't it strange that elves aren't that well suited to nature based classes?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

101 to 144 of 144 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Are not Pathfinder Elves built to reside in the base setting, Golarion?


Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Are not Pathfinder Elves built to reside in the base setting, Golarion?

The cancer is built? Like a robot? Are they nanomachines? OH GOD IT'S A TERMINATOR! KILL IT! KILL IT WITH LAVA!


3 people marked this as a favorite.
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Are not Pathfinder Elves built to reside in the base setting, Golarion?

The ones from a planet other than Golarion to manipulate our nature live underground in our nightmares and breed with our people?

The ones whose patron goddess seek nothing but sex and vengeance?

Those elves?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Yes.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Than yes we are talking about the same elves.

The Ulfen had it right.

Purge the disease.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Then why the nature happy hippy schtick, and the complaints why it isn't mechanically superior to all other races, for one single concept?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
TarkXT wrote:

Than yes we are talking about the same elves.

The Ulfen had it right.

Purge the disease.

"Burn the heretic. Kill the mutant. Purge the unclean."

"Fear the alien."

"Suffer Not The Alien to Live."


blackbloodtroll wrote:
Then why the nature happy hippy schtick, and the complaints why it isn't mechanically superior to all other races, for one single concept?

I would say they are mechanically superior to most others for the concept of intelligence-based casting - constitution penalty aside, they're pretty solid.

That said, I think the "complaint" in this case is more an acknowledgement of humor - a kind of lampshade hanging - looking at supposed elven superiority, as it is often depicted (and often presumed by fans, when not depicted) in so many various fantasy settings.

What's humorous to me, is that I like elves. I like Golarion/Paizo elves, and I like elves from Forgotten Realms; from Tolkien, and from Dragon Age. All of these have similar (even when distinct and unique) themes.

I mean, from wikipedia,

Quote:
Modern fantasy literature has revived the elves as a race of semi-divine beings of human stature who are friendly with nature and animals. Although the álfar of Norse mythology has influenced the concept of elves in fantasy, the elves are different from Norse and the traditional elves found in Middle Ages folklore and Victorian era literature.

That said, Paizo's are different - not as different as, say Harry Potter, or Warhammer, Discworld elves, obviously - but different nonetheless.

For example, one of their archetypes, and several of their feats are directly tied to nature themed elements and classes.

Hence, this is mostly, I think, an amusing recognition that elves, per Paizo and Golarion, are not the most mechanically sound "nature"-themed race for classes, despite their historical association and tendency toward association within fantasy fandom, regardless of whether or not a given setting (like Golarion) actually paints them that way (which it still does, if only mildly).

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Tacticslion wrote:


Hence, this is mostly, I think, an amusing recognition that elves, per Paizo and Golarion, are not the most mechanically sound "nature"-themed race for classes, despite their historical association and tendency toward association within fantasy fandom, regardless of whether or not a given setting (like Golarion) actually paints them that way (which it still does, if only mildly).

That sort of begs the question... who's actually better? Not Humans.. the only thing that Humans are "better" when it comes to forests, is at chopping them down, and replacing them with farms, villages, and cities. (At which, they are very very good at.)

One needs more than a +2 Wisdom to show themselves a race more adapted to forests than elves.

Elves are well suited to the nature classes, some of them more than others, and frequently in different ways. An elf druid may not take the same approach as an orc druid, and every Human druid may very well take a unique one due to their versatiality. Half-elf druids are in the very least... an interesting position.

Trivia fact: besides Humans, Half-Elves were the only AD+D race allowed unlimited druid advancement in First Edition.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
the only thing that Humans are "better" when it comes to forests, is at chopping them down, and replacing them with farms, villages, and cities.

Whereas elves thrive without farming, hunting on a large-scale, building, or consuming fuel.

Somehow.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Matthew Downie wrote:
LazarX wrote:
the only thing that Humans are "better" when it comes to forests, is at chopping them down, and replacing them with farms, villages, and cities.

Whereas elves thrive without farming, hunting on a large-scale, building, or consuming fuel.

Somehow.

As did most Humans until relatively recently geologically speaking. Among other things Elves use this thing called.... MAGIC. It suffues their societies more than others, albiet in more subtle approaches, and they are much more willing to work WITH nature instead of against it. Druidic magic can make a farm produce much more than it would otherwise yield. I would assume that Elves use it much more than Humans do.

And unlike Humans... they don't eat as much. Also remember that much of our farming is used in raising meat animals, which is not a very efficient use of farming, and why we require much more farm area than we would otherwise need.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
Matthew Downie wrote:
LazarX wrote:
the only thing that Humans are "better" when it comes to forests, is at chopping them down, and replacing them with farms, villages, and cities.

Whereas elves thrive without farming, hunting on a large-scale, building, or consuming fuel.

Somehow.
As did most Humans until relatively recently geologically speaking.

These humans tended to survive by slash and burn agriculture, by roaming the rainforest and killing any living animal they saw, or by chasing buffalo off cliffs.

They stayed eco-friendly mostly by having low population density. Which elves must somehow manage, despite their 400-year lifespans, while also keeping other people off their land.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Matthew Downie wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Matthew Downie wrote:
LazarX wrote:
the only thing that Humans are "better" when it comes to forests, is at chopping them down, and replacing them with farms, villages, and cities.

Whereas elves thrive without farming, hunting on a large-scale, building, or consuming fuel.

Somehow.
As did most Humans until relatively recently geologically speaking.

These humans tended to survive by slash and burn agriculture, by roaming the rainforest and killing any living animal they saw, or by chasing buffalo off cliffs.

They stayed eco-friendly mostly by having low population density. Which elves must somehow manage, despite their 400-year lifespans, while also keeping other people off their land.

Yes... absolutely. Lets keep in mind for the umpteenth time, if you're looking for "realistic" world simulation in Pathfinder, or the history of Golarion, you are absolutely barking up the wrong tree.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
That sort of begs the question... who's actually better?

Dwarves, mechanically.

LazarX wrote:
Not Humans.. the only thing that Humans are "better" when it comes to forests, is at chopping them down, and replacing them with farms, villages, and cities. (At which, they are very very good at.)

You're looking at fluff instead of mechanics. They are, in fact, superior, mechanically, at nature-stuff.

LazarX wrote:
One needs more than a +2 Wisdom to show themselves a race more adapted to forests than elves.

I should have mentioned this from the first, but "nature" =/= "forests".

LazarX wrote:
Elves are well suited to the nature classes, some of them more than others, and frequently in different ways. An elf druid may not take the same approach as an orc druid, and every Human druid may very well take a unique one due to their versatiality. Half-elf druids are in the very least... an interesting position.

You are very correct that there are tendencies toward racially divergent groupings, however, since you're citing fluff (instead of mechanics), I'd like to point out that human druids tend to (and, in certain settings, must) gather in like-minded groups; groups that actually tend to cross racial lines with elves, half-elves, and other druids.

This is true in Golarion (see: Green Faith, among others), as well as in more traditional settings like Forgotten Realms (druid circles, organized by nature gods) or Greyhawk (the Old Faith, in which you could not progress as a druid without defeating higher level druids, originally), or other non-traditional settings like Eberron (see their various sects).

While there are always loners, those loners are just as likely (in terms of percentages) to be non-humans as to be humans, and to take individual approaches as much as not. This is especially true of races that traditionally tend toward chaotic alignments, such as elves and orcs: individualism is the name of the game in such societies, and a loner is more individualistic than most.

Again, however, this is modified by setting.

Incidentally, orcs make terrible druids, mechanically. I still think Eberron is pretty awesome.

LazarX wrote:
Trivia fact: besides Humans, Half-Elves were the only AD+D race allowed unlimited druid advancement in First Edition.

Hah! I'd forgotten! Thanks! :D

Matthew Downie wrote:

Whereas elves thrive without farming, hunting on a large-scale, building, or consuming fuel.

Somehow.

LazarX wrote:
As did most Humans until relatively recently geologically speaking.

Actually, we didn't... at least not compared to the elves! We "survived" - which is very different from the "thriving" that Downie is discussing.

And that's without monsters and alien species attempting to kill us off at every turn, outbreed us, or breed with us until our children have all become strange hybrids!

True, the elves have magic... but so do the monsters, aliens, and other creepy things. And the aliens trying to outbreed them and breed them out (hah! See it's a pun becau-... nevermind) not only have an innately higher birth and maturation rate, but also a the ability to be competitive in any given field - while an elf might be more physically or mentally gifted in two areas, those aliens are than likely their match in at least one, outnumber them more than two-to-one, can accomplish more feats and be just as skilled at the same level, and are great grandparents by the time an elf has finished becoming an adult.

LazarX wrote:
Among other things Elves use this thing called.... MAGIC. It suffues their societies more than others, albiet in more subtle approaches, and they are much more willing to work WITH nature instead of against it. Druidic magic can make a farm produce much more than it would otherwise yield. I would assume that Elves use it much more than Humans do.

Neat assumptions, and I like the implications of the setting, but there is nothing that's functionally borne out rules-wise about this (especially since human druids are noted as being more populous, as humans are in all things Golarion-based*).

Also, while I totally agree with this - like, a lot - I'm really surprised you're pulling out the, "they've got magic to handle that!" card, considering how you've made it known you tend to look down on GMs that allow such shenanigans to go on in their games. I mean, there's nothing wrong with changing your mind (that's cool!), it's just a bit of a surprise.

* Which is not necessarily the same thing as "all things Paizo-based", although it's worth noting that we know of elves living on two planets, whereas we know of humans as living on at least three planets, with the implication that there are far more, due to Earth, Golarion, Androffa, and whatever empire Androffa used to be part of.

LazarX wrote:
And unlike Humans... they don't eat as much.

[citation needed]

In fact, considering elven trail rations weigh the exact same as human trail rations, and elves are taller than humans on-average anyway... it seems like they must eat the same amount.

LazarX wrote:
Also remember that much of our farming is used in raising meat animals, which is not a very efficient use of farming, and why we require much more farm area than we would otherwise need.

And elves... don't? I'm pretty sure, in fact, they do. I mean, there are elven trail rations, but that costs four times the normal rations.

That's... a lot. Most elves can't automatically afford to eat that well consistently.

(Citation: the core rule book, the PRD, and SRD; please see "wealth by level" charts, the craft/perform/profession skills, and payment for hired services; compare costs v. income. Either the elves are mostly really high-level, or they can't afford that much on top of sustaining a basic "life" beyond work and eating. Neither of these are borne out in the lore, so... most elves don't eat those.)

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Paizo creates rules to make tensions and stresses for player characters. It's a time honored fact that D+D economics weren't designed to make sense. they pretty much all draw from original Gygax assumptions which were designed with the idea that players would acquire wheelbarrows full of gold and spend them just as quickly.

All prices you see in Pathfinder are inheritors of the original Gygaxian Gold Rush model of economics, which simply does not map to stable economies. Order of The Stick made an excellent page of lampshading this where they show how towns change their prices when they realise a party of adventurers is coming up.

Not even Pathfinder novels model the economy of the Pathfinder game. Again, I don't see this as a bad thing, the game is built as Gygax intended it.. so that players can gather and spend big numbers.

Also remember that during First Edition the bulk of your experience points came from treasure you obtained and SOLD.

That thing you see called "Elven Trail Rations"... that's the overpriced stuff they sell to tourists, adventurers, and Forlorn Elves who don't know better.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

it may be worth noting, too, that the way elves interact with nature is different than how a dwarf (or other race) would and it may not be a bad thing for the classes to model that...

elves aren't the most optimal druids? well, maybe that's related to their being less concerned with the divine in general. their connection to nature makes them more disposed to manipulating the arcane energies flowing through it. They make great witches, which can be pretty tied to nature. They make great wizards too, and with an elemental school (especially wood) they have a clear connection to nature. Take that wood wizard and pick up the Magaambyan Arcanist prestige class (which I really wish was flavored better for elves) and you basically are an arcane druid.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
That thing you see called "Elven Trail Rations"... that's the overpriced stuff they sell to tourists, adventurers, and Forlorn Elves who don't know better.

I... don't see evidence of that anywhere, though I'd be open to it, if you have a reference. That's kind of fascinating: elf-made elven-focused huckstering.

Anyway, my point wasn't that elves are terrible... more like "there is a certain trope that is so troperific that it is humorous when, mechanically speaking, they do not fit to their presupposed tendencies" which is different from other species.

Dwarves are (originally) underground folk who are good at mining, surviving, and so on. Thus their traits reflect that.

Humans are adaptable, capable of being anything they want, as an individual. Their traits reflect that.

Elves are magic folk who are deeply in tune with nature. Their traits reflect half of that, leaving them "less" capable (but not incapable) than other races in the other half.

There is nothing wrong with this. This isn't bad design. It's merely interesting - and humorous - especially when compared/contrasted with the (stereo-)typical elven arrogance or superiority complex.

In other words, most folk here are going,

the basic idea of this thread wrote:
"Why is 6 afraid of 7? Because 7-8-9!"

... and you seem to be engaging the topic with,

the basic idea of the response wrote:
"Traditionally, six is an evil number, associated with bad things, so it's nothing to laugh at; also what you say makes no sense because we use the Arabic numeral system which isn't something that reflects the English language use of the words at all. Oh, and there was this one guy that did important stuff with numbers we now all imitate, and he never indicated that six felt any fear whatsoever."

... which, though it can be a worthwhile discussion, seems to both miss the point, as well as take an unnecessarily (if not purposefully) combative tone.

If you want to engage the premise as a serious examination of the the topic, there are plenty of posts (including my own) that can be taken which, together, form a pretty solid argument for the less nature-y-ness* of elves, compared to other species; at least on Golarion via fluff and/or mechanics.

Via the fluff, their connection with nature, while hypothetically profound, is not as profound as it was in previous editions; their economy does not support what they're tendencies in previous editions; and their religious, cultural, and moral views are slightly different.

Beyond that, eating meat or altering the land for convenience or consuming/destroying/etc is not unnatural or inharmonious with nature at all - arguments to the contrary are, themselves, unnatural, or, at best, focused on very specific and limited readings of "natural" and, in so doing, fail to understand themselves or the world around them (reflecting the lack of a +2 to wisdom that elves hold**). Simply looking at both plant*** and animal species^ will quickly disabuse anyone of that notion - whether on Earth, Golarion, or Castrovel (which is where Sovyrian is) or any other planet with life. Instead, it is simply inharmonious with certain life... much like elves and drow are inharmonious.

Via mechanics, dwarves just make better "nature"-themed characters. That wisdom bonus is hard to deny, their hardiness lends itself well to most natural careers (aiding them in resisting diseases more often than elves - which they will be exposed to), and darkvision is strictly superior to lowlight vision (which, if read mechanically, does nothing other than let elves treat dim light as if it were twice the radius, though still taking all the penalties for dim light as normal).

Elves are cool. My favorite race is likely half-elf, even (although kalashtar, aasimar, samsaran, elan, duergar, changeling [both D&D and PF versions], noble drow, deep imaskari, kitsune, illumian, lashunta, mongrelfolk, svirfneblin, strix, and maybe a few others may, at any time, replace it in the "number one right now" slot).

The point being: elves are not inherently more "natural" than other races (though their fluff-culture encourages being "in tune" with it), and their stats are not better-suited toward natural proclivities than other races.

That's pretty much all this is saying, albeit in a tongue-and-cheek manner that's poking fun at an old trope that some love, some find annoying, and some don't really care about because the mechanics tell a different story.

... the best "nature" race, mechanically, of course, would be an aasimar or samsaran with the reincarnated druid archetype - not because they're more more "natural" per se, as a race, but because they get +2 to two different mental scores (of which wisdom is one), and reincarnation^^ leaves your mental scores intact. Hence becoming the best druids, as well as gaining entirely natural "immortality" (roughly speaking) by level five! :D

(Also, if it's not clear, that last paragraph is a joke. It's pure silliness.)

Asterisks and Carrots:
* I'm not calling them unnatural, because they are natural... just alien. Also, for the record, Dwarves and Orcs are, from what I can tell, the only definitively true natural natives of Golarion, as a planet, and I'm not exactly sure about the orcs (which might be a strange mutant something).
** I really wish to convey just how much of a joke this statement is. A lot. This is not an insult.
*** Not even plant creatures. I just mean plants.
^ Or fungi, or bacteria, or viruses, or <every kind of thing that has life>
^^ While I know that you and a few others debate this, due to your intense dislike of players gaining statistical advantage, if you engage in the debate here, you are both missing the point of the statement - humor - and derailing the thread.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Would you say the elven lifespan gives them the ability to appear in harmony with nature (to other races). Yet in their reality, it is more bending nature to their intellect.

If you had 100 years to grow your home (rather than 1 to build it)

Human wow they are in harmony w nature.
Elf I spent 100 years guiding the tree in the right direction.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
TarkXT wrote:
So JJ what's the best antibiotic to use on Elven induced canker sores in my community?

Meteor Swarm: Apply directly to head.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
TarkXT wrote:
I too like playing a blight upon the world.

Play an Elven Bard who worships Urgathoa and goes on an epic campaign of seduction to spread the Plague of Elf.


In most novels as well as D&D type settings, elves aren't really nature beings, rather magical beings (womewhat related to fey) - their primary schtick. Even with wood elves living in tree house communities, there is no inherent need for nature related powers to be successful there. There are probably elven rangers around if they need special woodland skills that the majority don't have. If an elf needs something they cast a spell, wizardry has always been the thing with elves, not nature specifically.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:

{. . .}

Trivia fact: besides Humans, Half-Elves were the only AD+D race allowed unlimited druid advancement in First Edition.

This is a reminder that things could be worse (and once were). Remember 1st Edition (and it persisted into 2nd Edition), where anyone who wasn't Human was level-capped in all other classes than Thief (later became Rogue, for the newer people here), with the following exceptions:

Half-Elf: Also Unlimited as Druid (as LazarX posted above) -- but keep in mind that Druid had its own level cap.
Half-Orc: Unlimited as Assassin but NOT as Thief/Rogue -- but keep in mind that Assassin had its own level cap; and unlike almost everybody else.
Female Drow: Also Unlimited as Cleric.


gamer-printer wrote:
In most novels as well as D&D type settings, elves aren't really nature beings, rather magical beings (womewhat related to fey) - their primary schtick. Even with wood elves living in tree house communities, there is no inherent need for nature related powers to be successful there. There are probably elven rangers around if they need special woodland skills that the majority don't have. If an elf needs something they cast a spell, wizardry has always been the thing with elves, not nature specifically.

This is especially bizarre, considering that earlier I quoted wikipedia's entry on them:

Quote:
Modern fantasy literature has revived the elves as a race of semi-divine beings of human stature who are friendly with nature and animals. Although the álfar of Norse mythology has influenced the concept of elves in fantasy, the elves are different from Norse and the traditional elves found in Middle Ages folklore and Victorian era literature.

But, just in case, TV Tropes has lots to say about elves (there are several companion links in that one - as always).

But let me just skim the wiki article:

- a closer empathy with nature [Tolkien]
- power to control nature to some extent [Tolkien]
- hates humankind because of the destruction they bring onto nature [Spiderwick]
- in tune with nature [Perfect World RPG]
- a greater affinity with nature [...] focuses on nature aligned spells [M:tG]

The very fact that, in various D&D settings, they live in "forest kingdoms" that are "in tune with nature" tends to make it look like, culturally, they are meant to be "nature-themed". Elven rangers, elven druids, elven high-wizards with flare for the natural, etc... elves are often depicted within naturalistic settings and supposedly harmonious with it.

(There is nothing wrong with this.)

In Pathfinder, they are definitively more well-suited to intelligence-based arcane casting than anything else (though dexterity-based classes that somehow don't care about constitution* are good too, I suppose*). But their fluff still shows them as "tuning in" to their natural surroundings, even as they are alien to it.

Again, I, personally, am not against "natural elves", but I also like to be clear and honest about it: they're not optimal, and they're not truly "natural" to the world they've come to inhabit.

And that's fine - they can still adapt and become "naturalized" to it. It's really more of a lampshade hanging.

The tropes say that elves are arrogant, elves are nature-themed, and elves are factually superior. In fact, if you look at the numbers and traits, and compare those to the tropes, in this regard, elves are just arrogant.

* Which, basically, means that elves are perfect for becoming undead...

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

leo1925 wrote:
M1k31 wrote:
Helena Handbasket wrote:
And—not to go too far off topic—I really need to watch Stargate: Atlantis (finished SG-1, but never went further).
do it.... you can marathon it because it ended ad kind of chose a decent spot to end... the only question is whether SGU is worth watching afterwards.
It's not worth seeing SGU, or rather it's worth seeing only the second half of season 2 of SGU.

Sorry about the late reply (and brief off-topicalness...off-topicality?). I'm actually re-watching the later seasons of SG-1 right now. When I finish, I plan on watching SG-Atlantis. Haven't even considered SG-U yet...is it really that bad?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Dwarves, as well as making better druids, usually make better archers - at least, Zen Archers, which may be the best class for doing Legolas-like things (shooting orcs in the eye at point-blank range while wearing minimal armor, gravity-defying acrobatics, etc.)

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
* Which, basically, means that elves are perfect for becoming undead...

I used to think that the likelihood of an elf seeking lichhood (lichdom?) was extremely unlikely, due to elven longevity. But now, due to my personal relationship with aging, I change my outlook. No matter the lifespan, I think intelligent beings desire more...more!...MORE!! Um, er, I'm not suggesting that I, personally, am considering lich-hood-dom...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Funnily enough, a player of mine is working on a setting where elves are industrious and dwarves are about nature.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

3 people marked this as a favorite.

HERESY!!!
Inquisitors are on their way to burn down your friend's world :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

In the version of D&D I cut my teeth on, elves couldn't even be druids, and elven clerics were NPC only and limited to modest levels. So, it's not really weird to me. For some 30+ years now, elves have been arcane casters who are attuned to nature.

Now, Tolkien style elves would have pretty high Wisdom, which is exactly how they are handled in Fantasy Craft.

But Golarion elves come from D&D elves, which ultimately owe much to the literary, Norse-style elves of Poul Anderson with a pinch of Moorcock's elder races.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
This is especially bizarre, considering that...

I guess I should have specified Norse folklore books, rather than any books. I tend to base all folklore beings to pre-20th century literary sources, and never modern fantasy (so even Tolkien is outside of consideration), nor RPG representations (for me neither are official).


gamer-printer wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:
This is especially bizarre, considering that...
I guess I should have specified Norse folklore books, rather than any books. I tend to base all folklore beings to pre-20th century literary sources, and never modern fantasy (so even Tolkien is outside of consideration), nor RPG representations (for me neither are official).

Ah, that makes sense. I can see it.

For me, it's just that the stereotype is so prevalent as to be noticeably absent even when a deal isn't made of it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Helena Handbasket wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:
* Which, basically, means that elves are perfect for becoming undead...
I used to think that the likelihood of an elf seeking lichhood (lichdom?) was extremely unlikely, due to elven longevity. But now, due to my personal relationship with aging, I change my outlook. No matter the lifespan, I think intelligent beings desire more...more!...MORE!! Um, er, I'm not suggesting that I, personally, am considering lich-hood-dom...

Of course, this brings up the issue of the other end of the Elven life cycle: What was the Elf doing growing up?


AFAICR, Dragonlance had real dark elves at some point in their history, at least going by the gamebook of Raistlin's test of Wizardhood.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
DominusMegadeus wrote:

+Wisdom is the optimal ability score adjustment for Wisdom based casting classes (Druid, Hunter, Ranger, Cleric of nature god).

Elves do not get +Wisdom.

Therefore, Elves do not have optimal ability score adjustments for nature-themed characters.

1. If the Druid is a melee wildshaper, mega wisdom is not called for.

If the druid is a melee wildshaper he needs strength and to not have a con penalty. You're not making a very good case for elves here.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
The Pale King wrote:
Part of the elven schtick is being in tune with nature, yet as far as stats and abilities go the nature based classes aren't exactly their strong suit. The best is probably an archer Ranger since the low con and no wisdom bonus don't matter too terribly, but classes like Druid, Hunter, and Shaman just don't really jive with being elves. I've definitely played such characters anyway, but it feels like the race should lend some more support to such builds.

Elves in Pathfinder are more like the Noldor from the Silmarillion, genius crafters of metalworking and magic. Hence the +2 to Intelligence rather than Wisdom. Which means Paizo didn't really do much new with elves other than make Valinor another planet.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
gamer-printer wrote:

I guess I should have specified Norse folklore books, rather than any books. I tend to base all folklore beings to pre-20th century literary sources, and never modern fantasy (so even Tolkien is outside of consideration), nor RPG representations (for me neither are official).

Out of curiosity, do you take into account how folklore has changed/been changed over the centuries? For example, the pre-Christian stories of the sidhe, etc. put them at human size, but later versions shrank them down to "the little people" (which probably would have been much more suitable in the eyes of the early church in Ireland, etc.).


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

In my home-brew variant on Pathfinder, I offer variants for most of the non-human core races.

For example, elves are either D+2, Co-2, I+2, or they can be D+2, I+2, W-2. Granted, that doesn't solve the "nature connection" issue. I might end up offering a third variant to do that. At any rate, my elves are not native to either Golarion or Castrovel, but from from another star system. (They tend to drop off a colonial population on a planet and then leave them there for several thousand years before checking in on them again.)


TarkXT wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Are not Pathfinder Elves built to reside in the base setting, Golarion?

The ones from a planet other than Golarion to manipulate our nature live underground in our nightmares and breed with our people?

The ones whose patron goddess seek nothing but sex and vengeance?

Those elves?

Omigod, those elves sound awesome; I'll be really polite and inoffensive, avoiding the latter, and am totally willing to contribute my "efforts" to the former!

Sovereign Court

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Oh man, it makes no sense to have these humans living in the cold, northern lands. They're just not suited to the environment.

Dwarves, with their constitution bonus, should live in the cold parts of the world.

---

Oh man, it makes no sense to have these humans living in the hot, desert lands. They're just not suited to the environment.

Dwarves, with their constitution bonus, should live in the hot parts of the world.

---

Oh man, it makes no sense to have these humans living in the humid, jungle lands. They're just not suited to the environment.

Dwarves, with their constitution bonus, should live in the humid parts of the world.

---

etc.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Elves of Golarion was disappointing.

Elves in Second Darkness were disappointing.

However, elves in the Pathfinder Tales line have been pretty cool and interesting. I like them.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
GeraintElberion wrote:

Oh man, it makes no sense to have these humans living in the cold, northern lands. They're just not suited to the environment.

Dwarves, with their constitution bonus, should live in the cold parts of the world.

---

Oh man, it makes no sense to have these humans living in the hot, desert lands. They're just not suited to the environment.

Dwarves, with their constitution bonus, should live in the hot parts of the world.

---

Oh man, it makes no sense to have these humans living in the humid, jungle lands. They're just not suited to the environment.

Dwarves, with their constitution bonus, should live in the humid parts of the world.

---

etc.

I too welcome our new Dwarven Overlords.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

"new"


GeraintElberion wrote:
Oh man, it makes no sense to have these humans living in {. . .}

Dual Talent: Humans can trade in the Bonus Feat and Bonus Skill Rank for a second +2 that can also go anywhere (including Constitution) as long as it doesn't land on top of the first +2 (which, for that matter, could also go on Constitution even without Dual Talent).

Heart of the Fields/Heart of the Mountains/Heart of the Sea/Heart of the Slums/Heart of the Snows/Heart of the Streets/Heart of the Sun/Heart of the Wilderness: Humans can go anywhere as long as they can breathe at all and can find even a little bit of food and water, even without Dual Talent.
Mixed Heritage: For the cost of their Bonus Feat, Humans can adapt to two places at once.

Wcreplays.com (primarily WarCraft III) forums had a technical term for this: "Humba".


Helena Handbasket wrote:

HERESY!!!

Inquisitors are on their way to burn down your friend's world :)

Gip, Gentlegoblin Adventurer Extraordinaire, will lead the way! *grabs torches and oil and runs off*

101 to 144 of 144 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Isn't it strange that elves aren't that well suited to nature based classes? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.