Ancestries are getting overhauled in 1.4, says the twitch stream


Ancestries & Backgrounds

51 to 100 of 219 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wolfism wrote:
That gnome one might be enough to actually get me to play a gnome for the first time ever.

Yeah, a more Fey-route and redcap action, sounds nifty.

I am hoping for some Planetouched option (aasimar, genasi, tiefling, etc).

Goblins being the new core race is fine, they are a long-standing staple, but I prefer them in SF (with those cool space-helmets) as a major player. I think for PF2/Golarion, they could have included a more interesting race, fresh, something new for a core race, not necessarily new to the game/world. Maybe a quadruped?

Liberty's Edge

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Vic Ferrari wrote:
Goblins being the new core race is fine, they are a long-standing staple, but I prefer them in SF (with those cool space-helmets) as a major player. I think for PF2/Golarion, they could have included a more interesting race, fresh, something new for a core race, not necessarily new to the game/world. Maybe a quadruped?

I've only heard one qualification I've ever believed for what should be 'Core':

To be core, something should be relatively recognizable to most people who've never played D&D or Pathfinder.

That fits all current Ancestries and Classes, including Goblins, pretty well (okay, Cleric is a little weird name-wise, but it's pretty much just a priest and easy enough to explain). Adding new Ancestries that don't fit it is something I'm gonna go on the record as disagreeing with.

Now, as non-core options, I'm totally on board, but core being recognizable to everyone seems a good policy to stick with.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Vic Ferrari wrote:
Goblins being the new core race is fine, they are a long-standing staple, but I prefer them in SF (with those cool space-helmets) as a major player. I think for PF2/Golarion, they could have included a more interesting race, fresh, something new for a core race, not necessarily new to the game/world. Maybe a quadruped?

I've only heard one qualification I've ever believed for what should be 'Core':

To be core, something should be relatively recognizable to most people who've never played D&D or Pathfinder.

That fits all current Ancestries and Classes, including Goblins, pretty well (okay, Cleric is a little weird name-wise, but it's pretty much just a priest and easy enough to explain). Adding new Ancestries that don't fit it is something I'm gonna go on the record as disagreeing with.

Now, as non-core options, I'm totally on board, but core being recognizable to everyone seems a good policy to stick with.

I agree, I am not advocating for Aboleths to be a core race or anything, something easily recognisable, that fits. Goblin is not the only one. As I said, it's fine, I like goblins (they are a standard race in Al-Qadim: Goblin Barber!), I just thought it could have been something a tad more daring, stand out in the new edition.

Cleric has an interesting history (started as the vampire-killer, vampires were absurdly powerful).


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Vic Ferrari wrote:


I agree, I am not advocating for Aboleths to be a core race or anything, something easily recognisable, that fits.

Well I for one am horrified at the lack of respect given to our Aboleth overlords.


Elleth wrote:
Vic Ferrari wrote:


I agree, I am not advocating for Aboleths to be a core race or anything, something easily recognisable, that fits.
Well I for one am horrified at the lack of respect given to our Aboleth overlords.

I would never, have always loved those guys! I really dig that they are a big part of Golarion's history.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I would still prefer if we get lots of ancestry features at 1st level and any feat tied to ancestry should be some kind of upgrade of default features.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Igor Horvat wrote:

I would still prefer if we get lots of ancestry features at 1st level and any feat tied to ancestry should be some kind of upgrade of default features.

So kind of like your using the race builder rules from PF1 but with limited choices?


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Igor Horvat wrote:

I would still prefer if we get lots of ancestry features at 1st level and any feat tied to ancestry should be some kind of upgrade of default features.

Having run the game for complete newbies before, I'm glad the ancestries are slimmed down. The players got really frustrated with all of the miscellaneous abilities they needed to write down before they got going, the vast majority of which never came up.

Speed, HP, size, and attribute bonuses/penalties are frequently relevant. An AC bonus against specific enemies, the ability to talk to burrowing animals, and proficiency in specific weapons are all just wastes of character creation time unless the player actively wants them.

I'm totally in favor of giving one or two decisions at level 1 that let players choose something that THEY find compelling rather than loading people up with several lines of extra, irrelevant text to copy down before they can start playing the game.


Data Lore wrote:
dragonborn

Fus'Roh nah, I'm pretty sure that's copyrighted. (The D&D or Skyrim version)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Scythia wrote:
Data Lore wrote:
dragonborn
Fus'Roh nah, I'm pretty sure that's copyrighted. (The D&D or Skyrim version)

What about Lizardfolk?

Silver Crusade

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I really hope Drow a core heritage.

(I will be ignoring all naysayers on this.)


3 people marked this as a favorite.
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:

I really hope Drow a core heritage.

(I will be ignoring all naysayers on this.)

Spoken as a true democratic Drow.


He was just missing some sort of threat.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:

I really hope Drow a core heritage.

(I will be ignoring all naysayers on this.)

I would very much be up for seeing Drow, Bleachling, and maybe Duergar as options.

I do really hope they stick to the cultural stuff being optional though. I'm really not a fan of it being baked in if that ever happens.


Elleth wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:

I really hope Drow a core heritage.

(I will be ignoring all naysayers on this.)

I would very much be up for seeing Drow, Bleachling, and maybe Duergar as options.

I do really hope they stick to the cultural stuff being optional though. I'm really not a fan of it being baked in if that ever happens.

Just as long as you can choose not to take those options i'll be fine.


I hope that they will give some bonuses for an ordinary man so that the half elf and half orc are not significantly better


I think the last I heard they were worried that the half orc and half elf options were to good but info seems to change often in one of these.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Other interesting stuff. Mark confirmed that they don't want feats to he relevant balancing the Ancestries' chassis cores against each other. They are aware eventually every ancestry will get awesome feats printed, and don't want to limit the design space. With "that feat is TOO good for dwarves."

The other thing is they don't want balance points to be too based on delayed gratification, which Mark cited as a problem with the halfies. Half eves were recognized as great at third level, but not especially before then.

This wasn't specified, but on a related note I hope Ancient Blood becomes an ancestry feat and not a heritage. It hurts the most before level 3, which is also where you will probably encounter the least magic.

Also, I'm not entirely clear if the half elf and half orc heritages will grant everything they did as a feat, but if they do I think we will be getting a lot of first level ancestry stuff while still letting you expand on those options later. It might be a good middle ground between not overloading first level with too many alternative choices and getting Ancestries feeling more complete out the box.


Captain Morgan wrote:

Other interesting stuff. Mark confirmed that they don't want feats to he relevant balancing the Ancestries' chassis cores against each other. They are aware eventually every ancestry will get awesome feats printed, and don't want to limit the design space. With "that feat is TOO good for dwarves."

The other thing is they don't want balance points to be too based on delayed gratification, which Mark cited as a problem with the halfies. Half eves were recognized as great at third level, but not especially before then.

This wasn't specified, but on a related note I hope Ancient Blood becomes an ancestry feat and not a heritage. It hurts the most before level 3, which is also where you will probably encounter the least magic.

Also, I'm not entirely clear if the half elf and half orc heritages will grant everything they did as a feat, but if they do I think we will be getting a lot of first level ancestry stuff while still letting you expand on those options later. It might be a good middle ground between not overloading first level with too many alternative choices and getting Ancestries feeling more complete out the box.

Thanks for the information in general.

I do hope that the halfies don't grant their skill proficiency, but I'm fine with the other bits of them.


Is it already known when will update 1.4 be available?


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

You know, it's a bit strange they didn't go for Orc as the ancestry to include rather than Goblin. Everyone knows what an orc is, and the race list is lacking a non-heritage big strong bruiser race, while it has gnomes and halflings filling the little guy role.

I don't know... Warcraft and Lord of the Rings and even Bright have puy orcs in the public view more than goblins, it seems.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

Need more Kobolds.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Vic Ferrari wrote:
I agree, I am not advocating for Aboleths to be a core race or anything

I, for one, welcome our so old they're new again Aboleth overlords.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:

I really hope Drow a core heritage.

(I will be ignoring all naysayers on this.)

I've spent the last hours (ever since watching the stream, in truth) researching on how to summon a devil and make a pact with them for this to happen. :P

*just joking of course*

Seriously though, I will be extremely disappointed if Fell Gnomes and Goblins are in but Drows are left out because...reasons?
I'm getting the nagging feeling that elven heritages will end up being a bland variation of City Elf, Wood Elf, Arctic Elf and Desert Elf and now Monday can't come fast enough. :o


3 people marked this as a favorite.
The Once and Future Kai wrote:
Vic Ferrari wrote:
I agree, I am not advocating for Aboleths to be a core race or anything
I, for one, welcome our so old they're new again Aboleth overlords.

Hail be, all hail.


Excellent news!
Ancentries were, in my opinion, the worst executed part of the initial release - actually, it is since their first preview that I have been saying that they seemed like a waste of an excellent idea.
The fact that higer-level, stronger ancestry feats were missing, was another thing I had criticized.

Now we can have actual sub-ancestries, and with heritage+feat level one will be more customizable and feel less bare.
My hopes are high!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cylerist wrote:
I still think its odd that you need to advance in levels to become " better " in your race- oops ancestry

Agreed. There are a number of conceptual problems.

1. It seems odd to consider traits acquired by these Feats to be 'Elvish', 'Gnome', etc when most members of that Ancestry won't actually possess them.
2. Travelling away from your homeland and people to go on adventures seems like, it should broaden the mind and make one more cosmopolitan rather than move you some stereotypical uberdwarf.

Overall, it feels more like your character's mutating or something and, frankly, it's kinda gross...


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Ironeye wrote:
Igor Horvat wrote:

I would still prefer if we get lots of ancestry features at 1st level and any feat tied to ancestry should be some kind of upgrade of default features.

Having run the game for complete newbies before, I'm glad the ancestries are slimmed down. The players got really frustrated with all of the miscellaneous abilities they needed to write down before they got going, the vast majority of which never came up.

Speed, HP, size, and attribute bonuses/penalties are frequently relevant. An AC bonus against specific enemies, the ability to talk to burrowing animals, and proficiency in specific weapons are all just wastes of character creation time unless the player actively wants them.

I'm totally in favor of giving one or two decisions at level 1 that let players choose something that THEY find compelling rather than loading people up with several lines of extra, irrelevant text to copy down before they can start playing the game.

The problem with 1E was that it started with locked in, predefined race traits, and then grafted on a system of alternate traits. This made things complex for new players to follow and put a tremendous strain on system balance.

2E is in a great position to fix this by building the system from the ground up so that all you have to do is select the racial features you want from a list. Call them heritages, feats, traits, whatever, they are all the same thing. Selecting two to four things from a list is not harder than selecting one. Having more than one to choose actually lowers the stakes a bit, so new player don't have to worry about wasting their one and only choice on something they end up never using.

It eases balancing pressure as well. Let's be honest, if you only get one to choose, and they aren't all garbage, you're going to see a lot of people taking the optimal choice, a few people taking the next best thing, and everything else was largely a waste of paper. If you have four choices, everyone will take the optimal thing, and maybe the next best one, but there will still be room for the sub-optimal but flavorful things and the situational ones if you want them.


I wonder if one of the human ancestries will be Azlanti? There is already precedence for Azlanti to be a bit different stats wise than regular humans, so it would be an obvious choice as one of the four human heritages. Hopefully they are putting off Aasimar and Tiefling to later books, not because I hate them, but because they really need a lot more specific feat support than I think they will have room for.

Also really hope there is some sort of ancestry feat that grants you two heritages. It would be great if you could be a snowcaster half-elf for instance.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Crayon wrote:
Cylerist wrote:
I still think its odd that you need to advance in levels to become " better " in your race- oops ancestry

Agreed. There are a number of conceptual problems.

1. It seems odd to consider traits acquired by these Feats to be 'Elvish', 'Gnome', etc when most members of that Ancestry won't actually possess them.
2. Travelling away from your homeland and people to go on adventures seems like, it should broaden the mind and make one more cosmopolitan rather than move you some stereotypical uberdwarf.

Overall, it feels more like your character's mutating or something and, frankly, it's kinda gross...

I agree to an extent. It would be weird, for example, for a half-orc to start out not having darkvision, and gain it later when they leveled up. That’s a physiological trait, and suddenly developing it after killing enough monsters is super weird. On the other hand, I have no problem with an elf starting without proficiency in bows, but acquiring it over the course of their adventuring career, even improving it beyond other proficiencies at higher levels. Weapon training is a learned trait, so it makes sense that you might not have it at first, but acquire it over time. I think I’d really like this latest take on Ancestries, on the following conditions:

1. Ancestry Feats are entirely non-physiological. Weapon and Skill Proficiencies, bonuses against certain types of enemies, that kind of thing. Any physiological traits like vision type, special resistances, or inherent magical traits are exclusive to Heritage.
2. You get all features of your Heritage at first level. If my half-orc is going to be able to see in the dark, she needs to be able to do so from birth. If my dwarf is resistant to poison, it needs to come from her inborn dwarven hardiness, not from building an immunity over time.


The vast majority of existing non-heritage ancestry feats aren't physical features. Even the heritage feats are mostly things you can already get from leveling up in specific classes, like improved perception or access to magic, so it's not especially weird to do it from the Ancestries.


Charlaquin wrote:
Crayon wrote:
Cylerist wrote:
I still think its odd that you need to advance in levels to become " better " in your race- oops ancestry

Agreed. There are a number of conceptual problems.

1. It seems odd to consider traits acquired by these Feats to be 'Elvish', 'Gnome', etc when most members of that Ancestry won't actually possess them.
2. Travelling away from your homeland and people to go on adventures seems like, it should broaden the mind and make one more cosmopolitan rather than move you some stereotypical uberdwarf.

Overall, it feels more like your character's mutating or something and, frankly, it's kinda gross...

I agree to an extent. It would be weird, for example, for a half-orc to start out not having darkvision, and gain it later when they leveled up. That’s a physiological trait, and suddenly developing it after killing enough monsters is super weird. On the other hand, I have no problem with an elf starting without proficiency in bows, but acquiring it over the course of their adventuring career, even improving it beyond other proficiencies at higher levels.

I agree, how do you feel about spellcasting, like drow gaining advanced innate casting as an option?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
WatersLethe wrote:

You know, it's a bit strange they didn't go for Orc as the ancestry to include rather than Goblin. Everyone knows what an orc is, and the race list is lacking a non-heritage big strong bruiser race, while it has gnomes and halflings filling the little guy role.

I don't know... Warcraft and Lord of the Rings and even Bright have puy orcs in the public view more than goblins, it seems.

It feels like Paizo in particular has done a lot of public relations work on the image of goblins though so for Pathfinder in particular, Goblins make more sense than Orcs.

I mean, Golarion's Orcs aren't really different enough from "standard fantasy orcs" in order to be a mascot or a showcase. Now I'm totally on board with doing this, but they haven't really.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

One thing that I don’t see mentioned here that was part of the stream is that ethnicities (Osirion, Varisian, etc) will not be part of the Heritages. You pick whatever heritage you want, your feat, and can still be from wherever you want to be. Ethnicity and heritage do not compete with each other.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Seems like they should just remove ethnicity from the PF2 CRB. If they don't want to give it a mechanical bonus, its not worth the page count. Better save that for a setting book.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Strachan Fireblade wrote:
One thing that I don’t see mentioned here that was part of the stream is that ethnicities (Osirion, Varisian, etc) will not be part of the Heritages. You pick whatever heritage you want, your feat, and can still be from wherever you want to be. Ethnicity and heritage do not compete with each other.

So in PF1 a lot of "I am from a certain place" was encoded in traits, like "I bear the elaborate tattoos of my people". Are we no longer going to have a mechanical impact from Shoanti or Varisian tattoos, or where are we going to put that stuff?

I guess those could be ancestry feats where if you take it at level 5 in a campaign not set in Varisia, you can just justify it via "I met some people."


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Strachan Fireblade wrote:
One thing that I don’t see mentioned here that was part of the stream is that ethnicities (Osirion, Varisian, etc) will not be part of the Heritages. You pick whatever heritage you want, your feat, and can still be from wherever you want to be. Ethnicity and heritage do not compete with each other.

So in PF1 a lot of "I am from a certain place" was encoded in traits, like "I bear the elaborate tattoos of my people". Are we no longer going to have a mechanical impact from Shoanti or Varisian tattoos, or where are we going to put that stuff?

I guess those could be ancestry feats where if you take it at level 5 in a campaign not set in Varisia, you can just justify it via "I met some people."

I do not know the answer to this question. If I were to hazard a guess, I would say that out of the gate there will be no mechanics for ethnicity but I could see that added in the future.


Vic Ferrari wrote:
Charlaquin wrote:


I agree to an extent. It would be weird, for example, for a half-orc to start out not having darkvision, and gain it later when they leveled up. That’s a physiological trait, and suddenly developing it after killing enough monsters is super weird. On the other hand, I have no problem with an elf starting without proficiency in bows, but acquiring it over the course of their adventuring career, even improving it beyond other proficiencies at higher levels.
I agree, how do you feel about spellcasting, like drow gaining advanced innate casting as an option?

I can go either way on spellcasting, just depending on the fiction. If drow magic is an inherent trait, that drow just have the inborn ability to produce certain magical effects, then put it under Heritage. But if rather than an innate ability, drow magic is a tradition practiced in their society, then it makes sense to be an Ancestry Feat. I could even see, if all drow can innately cast certain spells, but the advanced drow magic is something that has to be practiced and learned, having the former be part of the Heritage and the latter be an Ancestry Feat that requires drow Heritage as a prerequisite.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Vic Ferrari wrote:
I think for PF2/Golarion, they could have included a more interesting race, fresh, something new for a core race, not necessarily new to the game/world. Maybe a quadruped?

I've never quite understood why PF and D&D seem resistant to the idea of the Centaur. They don't have to be silly, nor do they have to be overpowered. First of all, you don't even have to make them so big that other PCs can ride them, (maybe halflings, goblins, and gnomes, but not medium guys).

I see them as like Game of Thrones Dothraki with the horse-part built-in. Main features would probably still be an enhanced carrying capacity, movement rate, and something that makes using spears awesome for once.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I'll be incredibly disappointed if they move away from half-race heritages. I thought this was a very innovative method of character customization, that offered far too many benefits going forward (plane-touched races, half-xxx templates, etc).

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
WatersLethe wrote:

You know, it's a bit strange they didn't go for Orc as the ancestry to include rather than Goblin. Everyone knows what an orc is, and the race list is lacking a non-heritage big strong bruiser race, while it has gnomes and halflings filling the little guy role.

I don't know... Warcraft and Lord of the Rings and even Bright have puy orcs in the public view more than goblins, it seems.

I believe they've stated that they considered it but decided Goblins were more tied to their brand identity and iconic of Golarion and so went with them instead.

They were gonna have a 'monstrous' Ancestry either way, though.

CraziFuzzy wrote:
I'll be incredibly disappointed if they move away from half-race heritages. I thought this was a very innovative method of character customization, that offered far too many benefits going forward (plane-touched races, half-xxx templates, etc).

I don't see why they would. Having them as Feats was problematic for a host of reasons. Having them as Heritages seems to be fine with most people (including me).


FitzTheRuke wrote:
Vic Ferrari wrote:
I think for PF2/Golarion, they could have included a more interesting race, fresh, something new for a core race, not necessarily new to the game/world. Maybe a quadruped?

I've never quite understood why PF and D&D seem resistant to the idea of the Centaur. They don't have to be silly, nor do they have to be overpowered. First of all, you don't even have to make them so big that other PCs can ride them, (maybe halflings, goblins, and gnomes, but not medium guys).

I see them as like Game of Thrones Dothraki with the horse-part built-in. Main features would probably still be an enhanced carrying capacity, movement rate, and something that makes using spears awesome for once.

Some of it is probably to keep the game feeling like a standard fantasy adventure rather than a monster menagerie. There were other problems, like size being really important, and differences in the amount of limbs someone has, but those are mostly unimportant in PF2.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Elleth wrote:
Vic Ferrari wrote:


I agree, I am not advocating for Aboleths to be a core race or anything, something easily recognisable, that fits.
Well I for one am horrified at the lack of respect given to our Aboleth overlords.

I solemnly demand a PF2 CRB where all core ancestries are alghollthu. It will be a good first step


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Charlaquin wrote:
Vic Ferrari wrote:
Charlaquin wrote:


I agree to an extent. It would be weird, for example, for a half-orc to start out not having darkvision, and gain it later when they leveled up. That’s a physiological trait, and suddenly developing it after killing enough monsters is super weird. On the other hand, I have no problem with an elf starting without proficiency in bows, but acquiring it over the course of their adventuring career, even improving it beyond other proficiencies at higher levels.
I agree, how do you feel about spellcasting, like drow gaining advanced innate casting as an option?
I can go either way on spellcasting, just depending on the fiction. If drow magic is an inherent trait, that drow just have the inborn ability to produce certain magical effects, then put it under Heritage. But if rather than an innate ability, drow magic is a tradition practiced in their society, then it makes sense to be an Ancestry Feat. I could even see, if all drow can innately cast certain spells, but the advanced drow magic is something that has to be practiced and learned, having the former be part of the Heritage and the latter be an Ancestry Feat that requires drow Heritage as a prerequisite.

Again, exactly as I see it; like all drow have innate spellcasting (dancing lights, darkness, faerie fire), but can take an ancestry feat to gain more spells (detect magic, levitation, clairvoyance or what-have-you).


FitzTheRuke wrote:
I've never quite understood why PF and D&D seem resistant to the idea of the Centaur. They don't have to be silly, nor do they have to be overpowered. First of all, you don't even have to make them so big that other PCs can ride them, (maybe halflings, goblins, and gnomes, but not medium guys).

I think that the biggest issue is that most of the places the PCs are going to visit in the course of a standard adventure are sized and shaped for roughly human-sized bipeds. So having someone who can't really traverse a spiral staircase, or fit inside a tailor's shop, or climb a rope, is going to be a big limitation on "adventure design."

Honestly, in terms of "Monstrous Humanoids that will not cause problems" in Pathfinder the sweet spot is Cecaelias, since they are reasonably fast on land and they can fit anywhere a human can. Plus the lore is that they are gregarious, curious, and don't mind being gawked at, so we avoid the "rare and insular people who are bad at stairs" problem.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ErichAD wrote:
FitzTheRuke wrote:
Vic Ferrari wrote:
I think for PF2/Golarion, they could have included a more interesting race, fresh, something new for a core race, not necessarily new to the game/world. Maybe a quadruped?

I've never quite understood why PF and D&D seem resistant to the idea of the Centaur. They don't have to be silly, nor do they have to be overpowered. First of all, you don't even have to make them so big that other PCs can ride them, (maybe halflings, goblins, and gnomes, but not medium guys).

I see them as like Game of Thrones Dothraki with the horse-part built-in. Main features would probably still be an enhanced carrying capacity, movement rate, and something that makes using spears awesome for once.

Some of it is probably to keep the game feeling like a standard fantasy adventure rather than a monster menagerie. There were other problems, like size being really important, and differences in the amount of limbs someone has, but those are mostly unimportant in PF2.

Yeah, the Size thing for Centaur has been an issue in the past (Bariaur solve that), a classic, though (WotC has made a Medium one for their 5th Ed/Magic crossover). Other races I was thinking of: Lizardfolk (I have always liked them, again, available in Al-Qadim), Half-Ogre, maybe Satyr, some sort of Sprite.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
bad at stairs

Horrifically off-topic, but I still have this horrible temptation to one of these days just stat up a golem based off of a dalek.

Liberty's Edge

I kind of hope there's another ancestry survey later because this set of changes addresses pretty much everything in my previous survey ;)

I definitely like the change and I think rebalancing the core of ancestries, adding more heritages, and adding more feats on top of that is a great set of changes.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

Just to clarify a bit...

Every ancestry has 4 heritages to choose from in this implementation of the rules. Half-elf and Half-orc are two of the human ones.

how would this work going forward for the other half-races? it'd be a shame to see them all tied to humans despite how fitting they may be (such as an oread-dwarf or an aasimar elf)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
FitzTheRuke wrote:
Vic Ferrari wrote:
I think for PF2/Golarion, they could have included a more interesting race, fresh, something new for a core race, not necessarily new to the game/world. Maybe a quadruped?

I've never quite understood why PF and D&D seem resistant to the idea of the Centaur. They don't have to be silly, nor do they have to be overpowered. First of all, you don't even have to make them so big that other PCs can ride them, (maybe halflings, goblins, and gnomes, but not medium guys).

I see them as like Game of Thrones Dothraki with the horse-part built-in. Main features would probably still be an enhanced carrying capacity, movement rate, and something that makes using spears awesome for once.

Well, Centaurs used Medium weapons so the benefits and drawbacks of Size generally balanced out - if anything I'd say it left them a tad on the weak side since they often had trouble moving in enclosed areas. Their unique anatomy played havoc with Item Slots, Trip, and certain skills like Climb or Swim though.

51 to 100 of 219 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Player Rules / Ancestries & Backgrounds / Ancestries are getting overhauled in 1.4, says the twitch stream All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.