Wanting to see what others opinions were and ask out to the general forums, what favorite odd race does everyone here have that they like to play or use. Personally, I love to play odd things and I try often to be that one guy in the party that's the lizardfolk(my favorite) or the gnoll or Hobgoblin or Wyrwood, etc. I love being something unique just because it's different and I get to put a spin on the RP that you can't get with one of the core races. Anybody else?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Orang-pendak, androids, and Ghorans are all awesome new additions out of B5 that have seen a lot of play and use in my homegames alongside skinwalkers.
Orang-pendaks basically act as an offshoot species of playable bigfoots in my home game that also have a penchant for breeding Megaprimus in the few large mountain strongholds that exist. Meanwhile, most live in the great plains surrounding the area, living as migratory hunter gatherers that look to avoid a lot of the other human races.
Androids get a whole lot of use after the excellent ecology article in Iron Gods and get to fill this niche as the last inheritors (or projects) of this civilization that existed long before the rise of man and though many don't remember it their existence is a continuation of that legacy.
Ghorans are just cool since their whole design brings up a lot of interesting ideas about predation, predator prey dynamics, the mindset of plants, taste, and narcotics all in this one package. They are a plant race that originated as food stock that tastes so good creatures have an easier time holding onto them with their mouths. Their is a lot to unpack their that I'm interested in exploring both in characters and from a sociocultural narrative standpoint.
Beyond that I'm also really into hobgoblins as a player race since from what we know of them I'm really excited to see more. I mean, they are a meritocracy that doesn't demarcate their society down gender lines and assigns tasks without care for gender or sex. That's cool and leads to a lot of interesting questions like are they agender, what does gender and sex mean to them, how did their culture remove the reliance on the gender binary across the board from their culture? I got a couple more but that feels like enough to show off the possibility in unpacking those questions.
Also, totally with you in thinking the Lizardfolk are cool. Really wish we had more stat blocks for them that made them 0 HD and gave them some more diverse abilities to represent the plethora of reptiles that they can be inspired by.
Well the race book has them pretty tolerable, only RP 9 which is less than most of the core races. I generally go off the one in that book and I've had a few chances to play it and I'm playing 2 right now. Having a blast with them xD Yeah Hobgoblins seemed very cool and they've gotten even cooler the more lore and background that comes out for the in the Race Guide and Monster codex.
I thought the Hybrid Deep One's were pretty neat also from B5 especially with what happens to them when the die of old age.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I really like both changeling and samsarans. I feel like they have a great backstory as races and they also have some cool racial abilities.
Yeah the 0 HD Gnoll and Lizardfolk are high among my favorites to play.
Out of the official Uncommons, I'd say Kitsune, cause I like being a fox anthro, and having that CHA bonus.
Pure outside of Core races, I adore Catfolk. With Ratfolk and Kobolds in close running.
|
Back in previous editions it was Aquatic Elves, all the way.
Nine times out of ten, I'll play a human, 'though. When I want to play something different, it's not usually just a dwarf or elf or gnome, but something really different, like a gnoll, hobgoblin, kobold or lizardfolk.
Of the new races introduced in Pathfinder, I'm a big fan of tengu, androids, vishkanya, deep one hybrids and caligni.
I love lashunta, catfolk, ghoran, merfolk, androids, kitsune, dhampir, grippli, nagaji, and strix.
I also love aasimar, tiefling, ifrit, oread, suli, sylph, and undine but I would hardly call them uncommon.
Kitsune and Tengu are both pretty awesome... they're also both very common right around now, since they're part of the always-available 'weirdo' races currently allowed in PFS.
Nagaji are mine.
I like Lashunta, Changelings, and Skinwalkers a lot.
I've always wanted to play a Gnoll. But I do love any animal races such as Kitsune, Catfolk, and all the others. Has anyone played normally considered monsters such as Lamia and Centaurs?
Lizardfolk, shocking nobody. I've wanted to play a hobgoblin for a while now. Gnolls, I like, but with how similar they are to Lizardfolk mechanically, I just don't really end up finding a reason to play one instead. I'm pretty neutral feeling about Kitsune, but one ended up being one of my favorite characters, so that's nice. NG Mind-controllers, ho!
I am currently loving playing a low Int lizardfolk druid in Rappan Athuk. This could be partly due to the fact, however, that in my group's homebrew setting lizardfolk are essentially a race of slow but lovable bros. They're totally cold-blooded bro.
Kobolds probably, to the point where I have modified my version of Golarion to make them a more significant race, taking a lot of inspiration from the Midgard Campaign setting, and removing the E from their most common alignment.
I've made some interesting Kobolds & Aasamirs, don't have much experience with any other uncommon races. I've theory crafted with several of the genie-kin but never got to see in action. I do enjoy the crunch of Samsarins, Changelings, Dhamphirs, & Wayangs.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Any of the animal races: Kitsune, Gnolls, Catkolk, Ratfolk, Tengu.
I had a ton of fun with an Ifrit rouge, who hated spiders and had an uncontrollable urge to set slave traders on fire.
Nagaji, Ifrit, Oread, Catfolk, Tengu, Kitsune
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Human.
I get it that people like to play furries and so on, but they do nothing for me, and I get tired of seeing parties that look like the Mos Eisley cantina.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
I get tired of a room full of humans saying "hey non-humans, we don't take kindly to your kind around here":(
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I love goblins, +4 to dex, small size, also fun to roleplay, what's not to love?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I love goblins, +4 to dex, small size, also fun to roleplay, what's not to love?That they're basically Kender with pyromania instead of kleptomania.
why choose one mania when you can have all the manias? GERBWINS!
Sylphs and androids.
Sylphs' nearly psychotic levels of curiosity allows for a lot of opportunities for a campaign to find side-track quests. Maybe related to the overall story, maybe not, but always entertaining.
Androids are androids, and therefore they're just interesting to me.
I've always wanted to play a Gnoll. But I do love any animal races such as Kitsune, Catfolk, and all the others. Has anyone played normally considered monsters such as Lamia and Centaurs?
I adjusted the maftet to be a PC race and played one in a Shattered Star campaign. She was an investigator. It was a lot of fun.
Otherwise, I find the fetchlings pretty interesting. And I have a soft spot for aasimar and tieflings. The ganzi look pretty neat too...haven't seen one in play yet, but I will in my next game.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hey, Yizzik Uhari:
Here are my favorite odd-ball races:
1. I love me some Androids (Blade Runner!). I got the opportunity to play Roy Batty essentially in the Iron Gods AP. I role-played that Empathy feat so hard! ()
2. I'm also particularly fond of Dhampirs as I'm a real sucker () for vampires and horror. Not the ones who sparkle in the sunlight, though...
3. Lastly, a shout-out to the Drow. Descending into the Underdark in Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn and Drizzt Do'Urden really sealed the deal for me. I have yet to play one in a campaign, though - they're just too good :3
|
Personally, I'd list my top three as Samsaran, Android, and Astomi. Samsaran because they're just so different than things I've run into before (though I'm admittedly fairly new to the tabletop RPG scene), Androids because I love me some sci-fi, especially with fantasy woven in, and the Astomi because they're just so bizarre in so many ways.
Honorable mention is the Ganzi because I love me some planar races. Now to wait until they release one affected by the lawful planes...
Duergar, Hobgoblins and Dhampir.
What can I say, I like the bad guys.
Any of the races that originate from other planes like wayangs and suli. I like doing planar adventures so it helps when you need PC races that aren't from the prime material.
Haha glad theres been more posting since I've last checked. A lot of new posts and intersting likes. Funnily enough, one of the discussions here I was gonna make a new post for, but I might as well add it here.
Why is it that GM's in general seem to want to avoid "Mos Eisley" or stick to only core? The world is so diverse, I don't understand the hesitance. I always leave the race book open whenever I GM and it usually adds a lot of diversity, and even though, the core is still always represented fairly well even when I do. It's odd to hear being tired of seeing the cantina, cause from what I see on the forums, races other than core(with exception to the always included Tiefling and Aasimar) are always blocked off
I've always wanted to play a Gnoll. But I do love any animal races such as Kitsune, Catfolk, and all the others. Has anyone played normally considered monsters such as Lamia and Centaurs?
I've allowed centaurs in games I've run before. They are tough in battle, but RP with them is always hilarious since they can't fit anywhere humans can.
Anyone ever get to play anything they've made from the race builder? Only one I've played and had a lot of fun with was the sangheili(the Elites) from Halo. Was a lot of fun playing something that made a lot of sense as a paladin, big on honor and leadership. Been sitting on murloc's xP one day...
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
... Why is it that GM's in general seem to want to avoid "Mos Eisley" or stick to only core?..
I can't speak for others, of course, but sometimes 'cosmopolitan' isn't the right feel for a campaign's setting. More races brings more cultures which turns a simple setting into a complex setting, and sometimes a simple setting is the backdrop you need to enable everyone to focus on the story the game is trying to tell. When even describing the PCs walking down a street turns into having to describe a dozen or so races - what they look like, how they act, what the PCs know about that race, etc. - it all serves of obfuscate the actual plot the PCs are meant to be part of.
Now, you could go with exotic races but a shared culture - everyone's really human, but just looks a bit different with some different stats - but then that loses the whole 'exotic' flavour of strange races anyway.
On the other hand, if you're playing with a group that is already familiar with all the various weird and wonderful races then most of these potential issues go away. The GM still needs to keep track of more (you don't want some player suddenly pointing out that race 'X' is well known for always keeping kegs of black powder on hand, or something, if you'd not planned for the PCs to have easy access to multiple kegs of black powder, let alone simple things like remembering to account for low-light or darkvision, extra movement modes or natural attacks) but it's a lot easier if when you say 'you see a vanara shopkeeper hanging from the eaves of his shop repainting his sign' it's not followed by an hour of discussion on what exactly a 'vanara' is and does, where do they come from, what are they like, etc...
Even if you limit the weird to the PCs then you can face some issues. For example, if I set up an intrigue campaign based in the court of a human kingdom, then the PCs all being catfolk or bird-people or whatever means their relationship with that court is going to be very different than if they were all playing human nobles.
There's also simple GM information-overload: keeping up with dozens of races, new base classes, hundreds of archetypes, new spells, new Feats, new, new, new... not everyone can be a 'full-time' GM! Sometimes you can get the time to go and review the particular option a player wants for their character, but sometimes it's easier to just limit it to stuff you know already. Races can be tricky in that regard too as more information is released about them, more options added, and strange interactions with pre-existing character options start to crop up ('your character starts with how many natural attacks at level one?!'). Plus, assuming the player in question isn't just after the mechanical benefits of playing a certain race, the GM also has to swot-up on that race's beliefs, outlooks, goals, society, culture... and the GM may not want that much homework!
So yes, there's lots of good reasons to limit options - race options included - in a game... but that doesn't mean you always have to.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm a total mark for lizardfolk. If I'm playing a character who might even step into melee a little, I give a lot of consideration to playing one, generally going lame with human/tiefling/aasimar if I'm not.
There's just something about the brutal and visceral appearance of a lizardfolk that's just brutal and beautiful, the raw power of them, not to mention their bomb ass racials. I will always consider lizardfolk at the very least.
|
Changelings make the best clerics. plus the lore fuels an adventure story.
Trox honestly make broken barbarians. love that they were originally from another planet. plus those grapple checks are ridiculous.
Honestly the only 2 i'm not a fan of are the Munravi and Drow Nobles. The fact they get a bonus to damn near everything seems like they would suck to play. God mode is only cool for so long.
Is it bad that the sole reason I want to play a changeling is so the GM can have something hunting me throughout the game?
Grippli!
... Why is it that GM's in general seem to want to avoid "Mos Eisley" or stick to only core?..I can't speak for others, of course, but sometimes 'cosmopolitan' isn't the right feel for a campaign's setting. More races brings more cultures which turns a simple setting into a complex setting, and sometimes a simple setting is the backdrop you need to enable everyone to focus on the story the game is trying to tell. When even describing the PCs walking down a street turns into having to describe a dozen or so races - what they look like, how they act, what the PCs know about that race, etc. - it all serves of obfuscate the actual plot the PCs are meant to be part of.
Now, you could go with exotic races but a shared culture - everyone's really human, but just looks a bit different with some different stats - but then that loses the whole 'exotic' flavour of strange races anyway.
On the other hand, if you're playing with a group that is already familiar with all the various weird and wonderful races then most of these potential issues go away. The GM still needs to keep track of more (you don't want some player suddenly pointing out that race 'X' is well known for always keeping kegs of black powder on hand, or something, if you'd not planned for the PCs to have easy access to multiple kegs of black powder, let alone simple things like remembering to account for low-light or darkvision, extra movement modes or natural attacks) but it's a lot easier if when you say 'you see a vanara shopkeeper hanging from the eaves of his shop repainting his sign' it's not followed by an hour of discussion on what exactly a 'vanara' is and does, where do they come from, what are they like, etc...
Even if you limit the weird to the PCs then you can face some issues. For example, if I set up an intrigue campaign based in the court of a human kingdom, then the PCs all being catfolk or bird-people or whatever means their relationship with that court is going to be very different than if...
These are all very good points, and I can see the reasoning of wanting the campaign setting to match. I guess I've just grown so board of the LotR setting of only core races that my hunger for more has just burst forth. I had one DM who depending on how many players were joining a game of his would allow only a certain number of strange races, which worked out pretty well. I think most should consider doing something like that, just to keep things on their toes.
I used to like playing weird races much more before. Not anymore, don't know why, I just lost interest (it started to smell like old cheese). But if I had to pick one uncommon race: Grippli!
EDIT:
Why is it that GM's in general seem to want to avoid "Mos Eisley" or stick to only core?Several points, though: As a DM, it's not that I want to avoid it. Most settlements don't contain many non-core races (that's why the other races are classified as "uncommon", etc). So if a player picks a weird race and walk into town... What do they expect? To blend in? Let me tell you, they won't, because they're not the regular crowd in this Mos Eisley cantina.
Also, a lot of players don't actually take this weird race into consideration when roleplaying.
They're different, speical, monsters and freaks. They know this, because they picked this race to be special. And if they want to be special, they better be prepared for it. Don't think you can just wear it like a name-tag that says "Hello, I'm Marry 'a bit more special than everyone else' Sue".So what does actually happen when Marry Tiefling Sue, with red skin, claws and horns, walks into town? She gets killed (or at least she's not very welcomed). And she should have known that people aren't too fond of demons/devils, or what ever, by now. But for some reason, the player still thinks he's playing a regular human. When he actually specifically made sure that he's not a regular human.
A lot of times it seems more to be a min-max feature than actually wanting to play the race.
Very true, but isn't that why most races are picked though? Even the core are USUALLY picked to mesh well with their class. Not many pick the Orc Sorcerer or the Dwarven Rogue (I've personally done the prior and it was pretty fun).
Personally though, I welcome the DM not to treat me with kindness whenever i play the lizardfolk. I expect my character to earn it from the villagers everywhere i go. I leave it to the other players to be mistrusting at first. Heck, I like playing Gnolls and Lizardfolk and RP speaking they are both weaker than the core races.
I feel like if you're trying to blend in, you go human and halfling to blend in. If you pick a more monsterous race, you expect to be hated by the town folk (but really...what back alley merchant is gonna have the balls to go tell the orc or the gnoll he isn't welcome). I just feel even if the town is mainly one race, being something uncommon should provided everyone with good RP since combat and skills are really just second hat to the main point of the game. My own two cents though, and admittedly biased since I like being these odder races.