What are the odds Tieflings will be core in PF2E? They seem to me like they're pretty popular overall, and they were core in 5e.
My first and most developed character (that I never got a chance to play to level 6 because of circumstances) is a Tiefling Draconic Sorcerer.
We have the Sorcerer, we have the Draconic Bloodline. Now I just need Tieflings in core for me to be able to remake arguably my favorite D&D character.
What do you guys think are the chances? Anyone else hoping for similar?
Very very very low odds. They're not in the playtest.
The core races are set in stone as the ones that were core in PF1 + goblins. It's possible that you will be able to represent the planetouched races with human ancestry feats in core, but if not I imagine a book of expanded ancestries will be a very early addition to PF2's library.
Very very very low odds. They're not in the playtest.
We don't know so far if they're not in the playtest yet, do we? We've seen plenty of races, but not all of them- Humans haven't been shown off, but they're a given. No offense intended, I'm just trying to keep track of the PF2E info.
The core races are set in stone as the ones that were core in PF1 + goblins. It's possible that you will be able to represent the planetouched races with human ancestry feats in core, but if not I imagine a book of expanded ancestries will be a very early addition to PF2's library.
Has it been outright confirmed we're only getting Core + Goblins in terms of races? We've seen plenty of previews, but I haven't seen any statements saying what you're telling me.
If Tieflings aren't core I'm gonna be more than a little disappointed. Mostly because I really want to be able to play my favorite PC right out of the gate, without having to worry about whether or not someone agrees with or allows extra materials or the like.
Yes, it has been confirmed that, in the playtest, we are getting the core races and classes from Pathfinder First edition plus goblins and the alchemist. If there was anything more new, don't you think they would be leading with that, the same way as with those two?
No, the chances of tieflings being a core race in Pathfinder Second Edition are flat out 0%.
I'm quite certain, though that they will become an option later in the life of the game, maybe even as early as the new Bestiary which might contain information to use races for player characters in a way similar to Starfinder's Alien Archive.
Has it been outright confirmed we're only getting Core + Goblins in terms of races? We've seen plenty of previews, but I haven't seen any statements saying what you're telling me.
They are confirmed as the playtest races. It's not set in stone that goblins will be core in the final version, but it's unlikely that they're going to add a bunch of ancestries to the core book.
We don't know so far if they're not in the playtest yet, do we? We've seen plenty of races, but not all of them- Humans haven't been shown off, but they're a given. No offense intended, I'm just trying to keep track of the PF2E info.
We do know that. They've stated what classes and ancestries are in the playtest. I'm afraid I don't have a specific source, but it's been mentioned a few times.
If Tieflings aren't core I'm gonna be more than a little disappointed. Mostly because I really want to be able to play my favorite PC right out of the gate, without having to worry about whether or not someone agrees with or allows extra materials or the like.
Understandable. I (and I'm sure most players) have a race I'd have loved to see ported over as a core ancestry, but it's just not very likely. I think it's pretty reasonable to expect anything that's been a PFS-available race to show up as an ancestry before too long. So yeah, we'll both still need GM approval.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
imo it would be cool if tieflings, aasimars and similar would be presented with general ancestry feats everyone can take
I always found it lacking that native outsiders of other then human heritage would basically be all the same as their human counterparts
The ability boosts and flaws could be used, plus other basics like size and darkvision.
But the ancestry feats would be a guess.
However, from a comment the devs made, I think the planetouched will be modifications of base ancestries and may get to mix the two so that a dwarf tiefling can differ from an elf tiefling or human tiefling.
I liked all the varieties Fiend derived tieflings and I would like to see them make a come back and give some distinctiveness.
Yeah, I'm wondering if all the part-human races (half-elf, half-orc, tiefling, aasimar, dhampir, the elemental races etc) will not be full separate ancestries, but instead be represented though heritage feats. The fact that they've held onto releasing Human, half-elf and half-orc previews for so long makes me think there is a surprise like that waiting. It also means that other than half-elf and half-orc, these could be open to all PC races to represent the members of other races with some odd ancestry. Their stat bonuses might just be the same as their base ancestry. This might cause some loss of abilities and distinctiveness of these races though.
Up to now I didn't realize that those post still were missing...
Thats actually kind of interesting - And luckily we don't have to wait that long for the info, just 4 articles left, one dropping today
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Interesting, so you could choose Human, but then take heritage feats to become a Half-Gnome or what-have-you?
Maybe not half-gnome (at least in the base setting, but that might be an option for some homebrew worlds and such). And I think the half-elf and half-orc might be done a little differently than the other part-human races which is mostly what I'm thinking about. I'm thinking it might be more like there being a heritage feats called something like Fiendish Ancestor which gives some base changes to make a tiefling character. You could take this with any base ancestry to get a tiefling elf, dwarf, gnome etc. Those mixes already exist in setting with PF1, it's just they use the standard tiefling stats. It'd be similar for other races, Celestial Ancestor for aasimars, Vampiric Ancestor for dhampir etc. Orcish Ancestor and Elven Ancestor might be there too and limited to humans by default, or they might be handled a bit differently. I'm not sure if these feats would change the attribute bonuses or just add some extra ancestry traits and unlock later feats. I don't have a really fully formed idea, just the basic shape of things.
Of course this could be completely wrong, we'll have to wait and see.
You know, “Ancestry” rather than “Race”, and making it about feats might also be a way to sort of “Multi-Ancestry” in a way that we didn’t have before. A Dwarf Tiefling can be distinct by having Dwarf AND Tiefling feats. But obviously that’s strong... There might be an extra cost somewhere in there.
Unrelated to that whole idea, I will be approximating a Tiefling Ancestry for the developers to hate reading about when I submit my data.
|
Given that both Tieflings and Aasimar had sections for their races referring to their physicality being based on a base race, it would make sense that those two "Races" would be a culmination of universal Race feats instead of something more specific. You could do that with a lot of races, as Gabby indicated, but also with things like Skinwalkers.
You know, “Ancestry” rather than “Race”, and making it about feats might also be a way to sort of “Multi-Ancestry” in a way that we didn’t have before. A Dwarf Tiefling can be distinct by having Dwarf AND Tiefling feats. But obviously that’s strong... There might be an extra cost somewhere in there.
Unrelated to that whole idea, I will be approximating a Tiefling Ancestry for the developers to hate reading about when I submit my data.
I could see the cost being that your heritage feat is "Abyss-Touched" or something like that. Doesn't grant you anything (or maybe only a minor bonus, compared to the other feats). So you effectively get only 4 (or maybe closer to 4.5) ancestry feats, and you don't get access to other heritage feats, but you get more flexibility when choosing the other 4 feats.
It's kind of like Archetypes in that way. You choose a dedication, which is, if not always a minor bonus, at least less of a cohesive bonus than a class feat, which is the cost for taking an archetype, but you get access to greater flexibility with your later class feats.
Tieflings won't be in Core Rule Book.
They will be in Bestiary, which is co-released with CRB and is probably functionally necessary to play the game.
I would say it is likely Bestiary will have stat modifiers, abilities, and Ancestry Feats to allow PC usage.
Which after all was also the case re: P1E Bestiary including PC stats for Goblins, Tieflings, and more.
So as far as playing them, that is basically what you want, perhaps with less deep Ancestry Feat variety.
They aren't presented as "Core Race" in terms of CRB,
but that is meta-fluff that doesn't impact you using them if Bestiary has stats and feats necessary to play them as PC.
(the same goes for Goblins if Paizo decides not to give them "Core Race" treatment in CRB)
Definitely like the idea of multi-ancestry characters. I would happily look forwards to seeing them.
I like the idea of Planetouched not being limited to humans, so you can be an elf or dwarf with celestial or fiendish heritage.
8HP
25 speed, normally affected by heavy armour
Low-light vision
Access to elf and dwarf ancestry feats.
?
I like the idea of Planetouched not being limited to humans, so you can be an elf or dwarf with celestial or fiendish heritage.
Planetouched have never been limited to humans.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
True, it seems in 2nd Ed they were, Planewalkers Handbook (the random chart for features is great), but 3rd Ed started offering some nonhuman options, like devil-touched dwarves, and some fiendish halflings, IIRC, so it would be nice to open it up to all the races via feats. Are there some other nonhuman Planetouched options in PF1?I like the idea of Planetouched not being limited to humans, so you can be an elf or dwarf with celestial or fiendish heritage.Planetouched have never been limited to humans.
Tieflings, Aasimar, Undine, Ifrit, Oread, Sylph, and Suli were all just plane-touched versions of the core races. While typically human, you could choose any race to be the foundation race. It didn't typically affect much, but there were some options for it (like a trait specifically for Dwarven Oreads), and it was the only way to get small races with bonuses to Strength (or without a penalty to Strength). One of my favorite characters ever was a gnome-based Aasimar.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
True, it seems in 2nd Ed they were, Planewalkers Handbook (the random chart for features is great), but 3rd Ed started offering some nonhuman options, like devil-touched dwarves, and some fiendish halflings, IIRC, so it would be nice to open it up to all the races via feats. Are there some other nonhuman Planetouched options in PF1?I like the idea of Planetouched not being limited to humans, so you can be an elf or dwarf with celestial or fiendish heritage.Planetouched have never been limited to humans.
There are examples of non-human base planetouched in Planescape in 2e D&D, though that means little for Pathfinder. 3e D&D started getting the awkward/nonsensical notion of planetouched being assumed human base but with specific exceptions, then 4e and 5e went even further down that unfortunate road. Pathfinder has stayed true to the original wildly varied tieflings etc from Planescape. I like that :)
|
|
Very cool, thanks, I forgot in PF1 they expanded it, and I like the idea of a celestial planetouched gnome, what class what he/she?
He was an Oracle of Khepri. It was for a Mummy's Mask game. A lotta fun, but ended up not meshing with the group as much as I would have liked. Also, he was haunted by the ghosts of all the party members he couldn't save, so that was a thing. >_>
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, no dice on getting planetouched races in core, unless they are published as an ancestry feat.
If it helps, I'm upset that yet another CRB will be supporting "our" favorite rape-fantasy in the form of Half-Orcs... Made more annoying because goblins get a free pass*, yet Paizo still cannot be bothered to make orcs playable race with more dimension than just 'a low-level rapist-monster'.
*Despite being literally described as a species too voracious and impatiant to ever become civilized. Seriously, they are also (AFAICT) the only intelligent species in Golaron that is willfully illiterate.
The idea of half elfs and half orcs a specific heritage feat of the human ancestry hadn't occurred to me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Only issue I have is that I want Drow to be a heritage of Elves, and making Half-Elves a heritage too would lock out the concept of Half-Drow (at least, not without making a specific Half-Drow heritage, but that would spoil the fun). But..it could be done.
Correction, I have two issues: I'd want Orcs to become a core Ancestry too. But actually I kind of want that whether or not Half-Human is a heritage feat, so perhaps I'm biased.
I hadn't either, and I don't expect it. Mostly because half-orcs and half-elves are in-lore both 'bastards' and 'a new race that breeds true' so even if orcs were wiped out, in theory there would srill be more half-orcs. I've always assumed other combinations just don't breed true.
Although I do somewhat expect Dhampir, Aasimar, Tiefling, and other planetouched Ancestries to crop up as Ancestry Feats or Variant Ancestries or something.
I think Drow are just 'Elves' now in the same way that a Varasian is just 'Human'. That is why the core ancestry benefits are more open ended now.
Well I also want Varisan to be a heritage for Humans.
But, hmm. Drow might be better off as an Elf racial feat. That way you could pick it up later on in your career if appropriate, or retrain out of that if appropriate too. That would mimic the Golarian concept of Drow as something elves can fall into (I think, I don't actually know much about Drow in Golarian, but that seems to be the gist).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So one of your annoyances with Goblins evolving to me more dimensional is they haven't done it for another race? If one thing is bad the rest should be too? And I guess we've seen the new Orc bestiary entry description as well!
No. I don't mind Goblns in core. I think it makes a lot of sense actually, especially since Paizo loves to publish "We be Goblin" adventures and making Goblins a core ancestry will support that.
I unrelatedly think Orcs should also be a core ancestry. Edit: to be honest, I've felt that way since long before Pathfinder was even a thing, and Orcs being relatively civilized is part of why Eberron was my favorite 3.- setting.
I saw Orcs as sort of a replacement for Half-Orcs in the book, with Half-Orcs becoming either an Orc or Human heritage (or both), but size is certainly true.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So one of your annoyances with Goblins evolving to me more dimensional is they haven't done it for another race?
Yes! It is an irrational, emotional dislike. I feel like orcs are a far more redeemable species than goblins. Especially so for the goblins described in PF1 cannon. If Goblins just had to be redeemed (which as a marketing gimmick, yes they did), Paizo should have redeemed orcs along-side them. So that we could finally banish this racist 'it is okay to kill them on sight because they have green skin and pointy teeth' mentality that I've put up with for two and a half decades!
As an addendum:
What about Hobgoblins?
Historically they have been the most civilized goblinoid. In some editions they were essentially just half-goblins (that breed true like all of the other half-its). Why did society as a whole just up and decide to accept goblins, but not their more civil cousins. I'll grant you they're also zenophopic, but so are the elves and dwarves to degrees.
I'll admit, bugbears are vile, sadistic, and even other goblinoids hate and fear them. They're not likely to ever want acceptance from humanity, and any goblins and hobgoblins in their influence will still need to be killed 'unfortunately'.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So one of your annoyances with Goblins evolving to me more dimensional is they haven't done it for another race?Yes! It is an irrational, emotional dislike. I feel like orcs are a far more redeemable species than goblins. Especially so for the goblins described in PF1 cannon. If Goblins just had to be redeemed (which as a marketing gimmick, yes they did), Paizo should have redeemed orcs along-side them. So that we could finally banish this racist 'it is okay to kill them on sight because they have green skin and pointy teeth' mentality that I've put up with for two and a half decades!
Reedemable is a tough metric. On the one hand, orcs seem smarter and more stable, which should make them have an easier time learning to participate in society. On the other, the depths of orc depravity run far lower than goblins do, and people accordingly are much more scared of orcs.
I do wish that paizo would include some examples of good orcs, because that would help combat that particular racist mindset you mentioned. (Which is a fallacy, since every orc or goblin you kill in paizo adventures has plentiful justification beyond their race. But that hasn't stopped the myth from taking hold.)
|
I do wish that paizo would include some examples of good orcs, because that would help combat that particular racist mindset you mentioned. (Which is a fallacy, since every orc or goblin you kill in paizo adventures has plentiful justification beyond their race. But that hasn't stopped the myth from taking hold.)
I definitely want more of them, but there are actually a few examples of Good Orcs. Most notably there's a CG Warpriest of Sarenrae in the Belkzen book, and Irabeth Tirabade's father, mentioned in her backstory in WotR, is apparently awesome.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do not like "evil races". I want a range of alignments across every kind of people, regardless of where they were born or what their parents look like.
Heroic goblins is a good start, but I'd like to see more good orcs too
If the core/non-core distinction is meaningful, IMO, it has to be about "how many of these there are, and how widely they are distributed." Which is an argument against tieflings sure, but is also an argument against elves and half-everything (and is an argument in favor of goblins).
I do wish that paizo would include some examples of good orcs, because that would help combat that particular racist mindset you mentioned. (Which is a fallacy, since every orc or goblin you kill in paizo adventures has plentiful justification beyond their race. But that hasn't stopped the myth from taking hold.)I definitely want more of them, but there are actually a few examples of Good Orcs. Most notably there's a CG Warpriest of Sarenrae in the Belkzen book, and Irabeth Tirabade's father, mentioned in her backstory in WotR, is apparently awesome.
Yeah, I should have said "more" there. Unfortunately those examples are too few and far between for most folks to know or care about them.
I think there should be clarity on what "Core Race" means in the discussion.
It largely is meant as within PC races of "Core Rule Book".
But Bestiary is a de facto essential part of playing the game, and we can expect (like P1E) for it to include
"playable PC stats" for races like Tieflings, Hobgoblins, or even Goblins if they don't end up in CRB.
So in another sense, all those could be seen as "core races" of the game, if included in essential component of base game.
The distinction is really not what is "playable" but what is presented as part of 'assumed party dynamic'.
"CRB Core Races" also implies basic commonality as PC adventurers, although this needn't correlate to world commonality,
the latter point in fact being an issue for me re: "Rarity" mechanic (e.g. if Knowledge DCs re: Elves are same Tier as Humans).
This is why when they put Goblins in Playtest CRB, they include a good amount of rationalization about how to make it work.
They don't do that for e.g. Dwarves, because Dwarf flavor isn't so non-functional in the way Goblins are.
If a race just has "playable PC stats" in Bestiary, they don't need to give those rationalizations even if as problematic as Goblins,
because they aren't being presented as within scope of PC norm, so it's violating or giving false impression of the norm.
Part of this hinges on meta-game factors not entirely intrinsic to races/world itself, but simply game norms.
I really wish people would not fixate on "Evil Alignment" angle. That is irrelevant, Evil characters can be 110% party functional even with non-Evil group.
Real issue with Goblins was disfunctionality, which people have even compared to Kender for generally non-Evil example.
And honestly, even if they pull off some "setting shift", it still seems implausible to expect decent number of high level Goblin NPCs.
Unlike, for example, Ratfolk who also tick boxes of "small monstrous" "Alchemy affiliated" but have socially functional flavor and plausible range of high level NPCs.
I also think it is imperative for CRB Core Races to better "point to" areas outside existing Avistan "comfort zone" although Ratfolk have plausible foot hold there in ports etc.
It's fine for Avistan to be Paizo's "classic core region", but the rest of setting is crying out for more engagement,
and having a Core Race with stronger ties elsewhere in world can only facilitate players' engagement with these "new" areas.
CRB Goblin is not really about that, which is another reason why I think it isn't the best choice for the game.
(Obviously I expect to be "playable PC race" in Bestiary, and I don't inherently oppose any "setting evolution" regarding them, but I approach CRB topic distinctly)
I do not like "evil races". I want a range of alignments across every kind of people, regardless of where they were born or what their parents look like.
Heroic goblins is a good start, but I'd like to see more good orcs too
If the core/non-core distinction is meaningful, IMO, it has to be about "how many of these there are, and how widely they are distributed." Which is an argument against tieflings sure, but is also an argument against elves and half-everything (and is an argument in favor of goblins).
What about a miniature Balor (so small or medium)? Would you accept a good race of that (they are an offshoot)?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What about a miniature Balor (so small or medium)? Would you accept a good race of that (they are an offshoot)?
I mean, literal demons in Pathfinder are canonically redeemable, though it's difficult.
What I mean by "evil races" are peoples who are inherently and irredeemably evil because of who or what they are. As long as we can treat individuals like individuals and let them make choices, it's fine.
I personally think that good aligned orcs, goblins, succubi, liches, etc. do serve to underline via contrast the depths to which their ilk have sunk.