Paizo may not have Goliaths but they do have Nephilim.
And I would love to see them as an Ancestry.
I love this idea so much. Nephilim feel like such a unique spin on the trope, and blend well with many of the Lost Omens setting’s predominant themes (ie: gods vs mortals, prejudice, survival in an unforgiving world, etc). They fit the niche with a built-in, compelling story.
I know Nephilim from Judeo-Christian mythology, but what are they on Golarion? How are they different from Aasimar?
I would like to see Half-Giant as a Universal heritage, so we can have half giant Elves, and half giant Lizardfolk, and etc.
This has an obvious problem. The half halfing. Aka- the "Hot Skitty" to this "Wailord". Even if you handwaive the other races, this seems like... an issue. It makes you ask "how?", and the only answer is "very, very carefully".
Anyway, I find the idea of making this a universal heritage distasteful. The giant heritage seems like it would have a larger effect than most common ancestries.
Additionally, this reduces giants down to a single heritage ability- barely a blurb that can be summed as as some kind of "big guy" ability. If half giant was its own race, then it would have an entire rainbow of heritages depending on which giant race it descended from. This would let you not only be the "big guy", but you can be "a raging volcano", "a slamming avalanche", "a looming hurricane" (ie- fire, frost, and storm/cloud giants). You can be big, and gain a theme that often coincides with an elemental force- you could paint yourself as a force of nature itself.
Half-Anything isn't a great idea for any kind of ancestry marked by its morphological difference from other things. A large humanoid who is just 100% whatever they are is just going to be a better option.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would like to see Half-Giant as a Universal heritage, so we can have half giant Elves, and half giant Lizardfolk, and etc.This has an obvious problem. The half halfing. Aka- the "Hot Skitty" to this "Wailord". Even if you handwaive the other races, this seems like... an issue. It makes you ask "how?", and the only answer is "very, very carefully".
Anyway, I find the idea of making this a universal heritage distasteful. The giant heritage seems like it would have a larger effect than most common ancestries.
Additionally, this reduces giants down to a single heritage ability- barely a blurb that can be summed as as some kind of "big guy" ability. If half giant was its own race, then it would have an entire rainbow of heritages depending on which giant race it descended from. This would let you not only be the "big guy", but you can be "a raging volcano", "a slamming avalanche", "a looming hurricane" (ie- fire, frost, and storm/cloud giants). You can be big, and gain a theme that often coincides with an elemental force- you could paint yourself as a force of nature itself.
While I agree Half-giant probably shouldn't be a Versatile Heritage (I really like the Nephilim idea), lineages in the APG are a way to bring that flavor in. They let you do things like the specific Tiefling lineages, so they should work fine for different giants.
I would like it if we had a race that was associated with almost every creature type. We have or are getting a good chunk already, with aasimar, tiefling, elemental, construct, and other ancestries being tied to a creature type. Would be cool to get a giant race in one way or another, in my opinion.
Creative Director
|
| 15 people marked this as a favorite. |
The tricky thing about making a PC ancestry too large in size is that you increasingly cause problems with adventure design that assume a PC takes up 1 square instead of 4. It also starts to increasingly strain verisimilitude when you have weapons and wearable magic items interacting with bodies that could be twice as large or more as expected. The game certainly has SOME wiggle room in there, with Small and Medium gear being interchangeable without issue, but expanding that so that a halfling suit of armor or magic shoe would work for a halfling or a giant might be too much for some folks to take. We'll see though; we're continuing to experiment and explore various PC ancestries—there's a bunch coming soon in the Advanced Player's Guide and more coming in Lost Omens Ancestry Guide (which I believe starts to toy with Tiny sized PC ancestries, I think, so if we can do that then maybe we could eventually explore Large PC ancestries.)
They will NOT be goliaths though. Those are 100% owned by Wizards of the Coast; it's D&D intellectual property and not open content. Furthermore, we don't have any tradition of goliaths having any role in our setting, so introducing them randomly out of the blue is even more damaging to world verisimilitude than the size.
We DO have plenty of options for Large PC ancestries though. Ogrekin, ogres, minotaurs, and trox all quickly come to mind... although with the lore and flavor we have for ogres and ogrekin setting them up as TRULY monstrous, I don't think it's a good idea to open those two up to PC ancestries at all.
Honestly, the best option I can think of for a potential Large PC ancestry would be the nephilim. They're established in the game in a way that would make including them pretty elegant, and with 2nd edition's separation of PC/monster building rules, we don't need to worry as much about the fact that monster nephilim are higher level creatures with a LOT of racial Hit Dice.
Another, even MORE elegant solution would be to eventually introduce ancestry options for things like aasimar and tieflings that would allow them to be larger in size, since there's already plenty of examples of Large celestials and fiends. That's essentially the same thing a nephilim is, thematically and lore-wise, so that might be the best of all options.
I would like to see Half-Giant as a Universal heritage, so we can have half giant Elves, and half giant Lizardfolk, and etc.This has an obvious problem. The half halfing. Aka- the "Hot Skitty" to this "Wailord". Even if you handwaive the other races, this seems like... an issue. It makes you ask "how?", and the only answer is "very, very carefully".
Anyway, I find the idea of making this a universal heritage distasteful. The giant heritage seems like it would have a larger effect than most common ancestries.
Additionally, this reduces giants down to a single heritage ability- barely a blurb that can be summed as as some kind of "big guy" ability. If half giant was its own race, then it would have an entire rainbow of heritages depending on which giant race it descended from. This would let you not only be the "big guy", but you can be "a raging volcano", "a slamming avalanche", "a looming hurricane" (ie- fire, frost, and storm/cloud giants). You can be big, and gain a theme that often coincides with an elemental force- you could paint yourself as a force of nature itself.
Sounds less like you want half-giants and more like you just want giants. What are you expecting the other half of half-giants to be? Not every versatile heritage makes perfect sense. I mean, how can a leshy be related to a hag? It's ultimately down to the players and the GM to come up with characters that make sense in the world.
What you're describing sounds like the lineages trait that will be added to some of the versatile heritage feats. It's how you can show that your tiefling is specifically related to a demon instead of any other fiend. A half-giant heritage could have multiple lineages giving you attributes of different giant tribes.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Playable Nephilim would be neat, but I’d also really want playable Half-Giants just for the variety it would bring. A half-Frost Giant would be completely different than a half-Fire Giant would be completely different than a half-Rune Giant, etc
(We could have half-Titans for the Planar Scions)
Also I played a half-Frost Giant in a Frostfell campaign (Thankies JJ!) and he was a lot of fun.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I too would like to see an ancestry that pushes the upper limit on Medium, and one that is related to True giants (as opposed to just large or larger humanoids that the trait is associated with). Given that True giants are supposedly descendants from Titans (in their own lore at least), and Nephilim are descended from Primordial gods, I could see this being a decent enough hook.
I'm for an option that is on the upper size for Medium, but not for something that is Large (and likewise something on the lower size for Small, but not for something that is Tiny).
I feel like the fantasy is more "I'm a really big dude/lady/etc." and less "I use different rules from other PCs".
Anyway, I find the idea of making this a universal heritage distasteful. The giant heritage seems like it would have a larger effect than most common ancestries.
Additionally, this reduces giants down to a single heritage ability- barely a blurb that can be summed as as some kind of "big guy" ability. If half giant was its own race, then it would have an entire rainbow of heritages depending on which giant race it descended from. This would let you not only be the "big guy", but you can be "a raging volcano", "a slamming avalanche", "a looming hurricane" (ie- fire, frost, and storm/cloud giants). You can be big, and gain a theme that often coincides with an elemental force- you could paint yourself as a force of nature itself.
Sounds less like you want half-giants and more like you just want giants. What are you expecting the other half of half-giants to be? Not every versatile heritage makes perfect sense. I mean, how can a leshy be related to a hag? It's ultimately down to the players and the GM to come up with characters that make sense in the world.
What you're describing sounds like the lineages trait that will be added to some of the versatile heritage feats. It's how you can show that your tiefling is specifically related to a demon instead of any other fiend. A half-giant heritage could have multiple lineages giving you attributes of different giant tribes.
One of the key features that make a half giant race problematic is how it interacts with size and reach (both due to common gamedesign assumptions, and how that is an entire central class feature of a barbarian instinct). It is a core assumption of pretty much any half giant race.
Once you make the character large sized, then you have hit the bare minimum feature to get a creature labeled as "giant". After that point, it just becomes semantics of whether or not it is a "somewhat short giant". What exactly would be the difference between a large sized half giant race and a hill giant that has been converted into a playable ancestry.
If you don't make the half giant into a large sized creature, then it falls into a similar narrative space as the half orc- a big strong guy with a heritage that is a bit awkward to explain.
My focus on the various subtypes of giant is to give an alternative- because many of the giant races are adapted for natural environments, it is easier to flavor them with that aspect, either physical or cultural.
Of course, if you go too far with the elemental aspect, then they step on the toes of the elementally touched races. Hmmm.... maybe runescarred giant blooded people might be easier to use since they can fall pretty reasonably under "a wizard did it".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, the idea of a large-size aasimar and tiefling option is really cool. It's more appealing to my personal tastes than D&D's goliaths.
I also think having the race be large would be too problematic, but would still like a race to be giant themed. They could be as large as medium size allows, but do things like wield a larger weapon, cast enlarge, increased carrying capacity, etc. Just because you have giants blood doesn't mean you'd have to be large, and still provides a lot of potential, imo.
I don't think it'd be too crazy to have one token "Large-size" ancestry, at least as a novelty. I mean, yeah, it will make the gameplay different and not fit into adventure design assumptions. I don't think this is necessarily bad! It'll at least spark player and GM creativity and be "different". Better than another ancestry just being "Humans but X" and playing the exact same.
It would probably need to be banned from PFS though, which is understandable. Could be a good candidate for the "Rare" keyword to keep it from appearing much.
I don't think it'd be too crazy to have one token "Large-size" ancestry, at least as a novelty. I mean, yeah, it will make the gameplay different and not fit into adventure design assumptions. I don't think this is necessarily bad! It'll at least spark player and GM creativity and be "different". Better than another ancestry just being "Humans but X" and playing the exact same.
It would probably need to be banned from PFS though, which is understandable. Could be a good candidate for the "Rare" keyword to keep it from appearing much.
Right! It might need adjudication at a table by table basis (it's almost as if there's a built in mechanic to enable this...), but what would the harm be with Paizo trying it out? They clearly are about to try out tiny ancestries. As long as it's just one of a number of ancestries released at one time and not like a "Lost Omens Giant People" book, I see absolutely no harm in giving it a try.
Though I think the biggest downsize in a large ancestry is that none of the current maps and materials in the APs and stuff are built to accommodate that. I can think of one battle in Fall of Plaguestone that medium creatures struggle to get to, so a large PC would have to just stand outside and wait...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think it'd be too crazy to have one token "Large-size" ancestry, at least as a novelty. I mean, yeah, it will make the gameplay different and not fit into adventure design assumptions. I don't think this is necessarily bad! It'll at least spark player and GM creativity and be "different". Better than another ancestry just being "Humans but X" and playing the exact same.
It would probably need to be banned from PFS though, which is understandable. Could be a good candidate for the "Rare" keyword to keep it from appearing much.
Right! It might need adjudication at a table by table basis (it's almost as if there's a built in mechanic to enable this...), but what would the harm be with Paizo trying it out? They clearly are about to try out tiny ancestries. As long as it's just one of a number of ancestries released at one time and not like a "Lost Omens Giant People" book, I see absolutely no harm in giving it a try.
Though I think the biggest downsize in a large ancestry is that none of the current maps and materials in the APs and stuff are built to accommodate that. I can think of one battle in Fall of Plaguestone that medium creatures struggle to get to, so a large PC would have to just stand outside and wait...
One thing I've done in a game was take the Spriggan and make it into a PC race. You're a halfling-sized fey that, for X amount of turns, can grew into a Large size. Worked around the loot problem pretty easily. I even had a feat tree where you could increase the number of turns, or even make it permanent at high levels.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think it'd be too crazy to have one token "Large-size" ancestry, at least as a novelty. I mean, yeah, it will make the gameplay different and not fit into adventure design assumptions. I don't think this is necessarily bad! It'll at least spark player and GM creativity and be "different". Better than another ancestry just being "Humans but X" and playing the exact same.
It would probably need to be banned from PFS though, which is understandable. Could be a good candidate for the "Rare" keyword to keep it from appearing much.
Right! It might need adjudication at a table by table basis (it's almost as if there's a built in mechanic to enable this...), but what would the harm be with Paizo trying it out? They clearly are about to try out tiny ancestries. As long as it's just one of a number of ancestries released at one time and not like a "Lost Omens Giant People" book, I see absolutely no harm in giving it a try.
Though I think the biggest downsize in a large ancestry is that none of the current maps and materials in the APs and stuff are built to accommodate that. I can think of one battle in Fall of Plaguestone that medium creatures struggle to get to, so a large PC would have to just stand outside and wait...
Smash your way in or try to pull enemies out! A non-PFS Group will always figure a way around things. If the entire thing is a narrow dungeon then it'll take more work, perhaps re-designing, shaping the stone or finding an alternate way in... But it's not impossible.
Jank is in the spirit of roleplaying games! PF2 might be one of the most conservative games so far, but it can still try silly things.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
From what James Jacobs listed I would totally be up for the Minotaur, Trox, and Nephilim. I'd even support "Half-Giant"/Jotun as a select heritage for certain ancestries.
I'm just gonna say that it would be a shame if we never get to be Hagrid.
Half-Giant Fighter with the Beastmaster archetype and Wizard Dedication (but no other wizard archetype feats)?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If its about casting enlarge. Than Duergars, Ifrits, and similar races work really well.
At least in PF1 Duergars had the ability to use Enlarge person 1/day, or with a Monk Archetype 1 minute/key point. But they are basically racist surface hating dwarfs (they consider themselves the only true dwarfs).
If we are doing a size changing race, then the obvious choice is Spriggan.
Go from Tiny Tim to Titan Tom in an instant.
I liked how Large races were made much more common in Starfinder. Being large often has enough drawbacks to balance having reach.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I liked how Large races were made much more common in Starfinder. Being large often has enough drawbacks to balance having reach.In SF though everyone has guns, so Reach and higher STR isn’t as useful as it would be in PF.
That's very true. I still think there should be a way to make being Large a viable option.
|
|
That's very true. I still think there should be a way to make being Large a viable option.I liked how Large races were made much more common in Starfinder. Being large often has enough drawbacks to balance having reach.In SF though everyone has guns, so Reach and higher STR isn’t as useful as it would be in PF.
*nods*
|
Note that some posters wish for a Medium ancestry that is considered Large for some purposes. The Giant instinct for Barbarians might provide a good basis. But in itself it is problematic: if your character is Medium but considered Large for this instinct, they can wield Huge weapons. Which starts sounding awkward.
I indeed much prefer a Large ancestry and see what big things Paizo can do with that. Like some limited reduce person ability to get into cramped quarters.
Maybe a Large reptilian or insectoid (or ooze-like) ancestry that can constrict itself for a time.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Note that some posters wish for a Medium ancestry that is considered Large for some purposes. The Giant instinct for Barbarians might provide a good basis. But in itself it is problematic: if your character is Medium but considered Large for this instinct, they can wield Huge weapons. Which starts sounding awkward.
Can't small races wield large weapons with this? Seems like a similar comparison: 2 sizes larger.
Although it's best that Paizo probably doesn't try to do a playable giant race called goliaths, the name is from legend and used to describe a "giant" man. A 3PP could probably create a goliath ancestry or monster as long as they took a different approach than WOTC.
|
|
Note that some posters wish for a Medium ancestry that is considered Large for some purposes. The Giant instinct for Barbarians might provide a good basis. But in itself it is problematic: if your character is Medium but considered Large for this instinct, they can wield Huge weapons. Which starts sounding awkward.Can't small races wield large weapons with this? Seems like a similar comparison: 2 sizes larger.
Good point. I must say that I find the blending of Small and Medium rather distasteful and do not wish to see it contaminate other Sizes but you are right.
I wish PF2 only had one Size for Small and Medium so that Size steps always had the same impact.
Greetings all.
First and foremost, thank you to everyone at Paizo for the amazing Dragon and Dungeon magazines you published for many years and then for picking up the pieces of many of our broken hearts when Wizards killed 3.5 and led me to you.
I will keep my inquiry simple: why don't we officially have goliaths in Golarion or in our PF and PF2 books? They are such a phenomenal race, why not continue to make several people's dreams come true and let us play goliaths on this side of the planes too?
Thank you and all the best.
-Iron
Hi Paizo (i.e., Mr. James Jacobs, Mr. Jason Bulmahn, Mr. Logan Bonner, Mr. Mark Swifter, Mr. Luis Loza, Ms. Lyz Liddell, Mr. F. Wesley Schneider, et al).
Hi.
Again, I want to thank you for most of what you have done with my favorite incarnation of "D&D Evolved" and I would like, once again, to ask about the inclusion of two of MY FAVORITE "D&D 3.5" material:
Goliaths and the prestige class, Radiant Servant of Pelor/Sarenrae.
Would one, all, some of you *please* consider and discuss if one (or ideally for me and possibly others) to include both of these officially in PF 02 and possibly PF 01 also?
Please.
Thank you for your time.
-Ironhammer
Greetings all.
First and foremost, thank you to everyone at Paizo for the amazing Dragon and Dungeon magazines you published for many years and then for picking up the pieces of many of our broken hearts when Wizards killed 3.5 and led me to you.
I will keep my inquiry simple: why don't we officially have goliaths in Golarion or in our PF and PF2 books? They are such a phenomenal race, why not continue to make several people's dreams come true and let us play goliaths on this side of the planes too?
Thank you and all the best.
-IronHi Paizo (i.e., Mr. James Jacobs, Mr. Jason Bulmahn, Mr. Logan Bonner, Mr. Mark Swifter, Mr. Luis Loza, Ms. Lyz Liddell, Mr. F. Wesley Schneider, et al).
Hi.
Again, I want to thank you for most of what you have done with my favorite incarnation of "D&D Evolved" and I would like, once again, to ask about the inclusion of two of MY FAVORITE "D&D 3.5" material:
Goliaths and the prestige class, Radiant Servant of Pelor/Sarenrae.
Would one, all, some of you *please* consider and discuss if one (or ideally for me and possibly others) to include both of these officially in PF 02 and possibly PF 01 also?
Please.Thank you for your time.
-Ironhammer
Hate to break it to you, but James Jacobs already said Goliaths wont happen. Part of the reason being that they're WotC IP. And for that reason, things connected to Pelor also wont appear in Pathfinder.
|
Creative Director
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Goliaths are the intellectual property of Wizards of the Coast. We may do a Large ancestry some day, but I'd personally rather not since that fractures the baseline assumptions of what a PC is as far as giving out treasure, deciding how big to make encounter maps, combat balance, and a lot more.
We also can't just "port" over D&D concepts directly, because that'd get us sued. Pathfinder is similar to D&D, but it is not D&D and can't be D&D ... and vice-versa.
You won't see Pelor in the game, but you will see Sarenrae. You won't see a "radiant servant of Pelor" in Pathfinder, but you will see all sorts of class support for various types of Sarenrae worshipers, be they neutral good champions or clerics or oracles or any number of potential archetypes. In 1st edition, we had a LOT of options for Sarenrae worshipers.
Nothing's stopping a GM from adapting D&D material to their home game, or from adapting Pathfinder material to their D&D game, but that's not something either us or Wizards of the Coast can do without copyright infringement.
Furthermore, we're pretty much full-steam ahead on second edition Pathfinder now. We've got a 1st edition "bestiary" in the works to support the 2nd edition hardcover of Kingmaker in the works for the second half of 2021, but that's pretty much it. We'll still sell 1st edition content as long as it's still in print, of course, but we don't have the capacity to support an edition of the game that isn't the one we're currently working on.
EDIT: It's Mark Seifter, not Swifter. And Wes hasn't worked at Paizo for many years.
If a 3'8" dwarf woman and a 6'6" human man can both be medium creatures, I don't know why something like an 8' hypothetical ancestry couldn't be medium too.
|
Creative Director
|
If a 3'8" dwarf woman and a 6'6" human man can both be medium creatures, I don't know why something like an 8' hypothetical ancestry couldn't be medium too.
They could certainly be Medium, but they'd be treated as Medium, not Large, and wouldn't gain the advantages of that size category.
I never looked too much into how goliaths worked in 3.5 D&D, but isn't that one of the whole points of the ancestry? That it's a Large-sized PC option?
Of course, none of this changes the fact that they're not open content and thus we can't use them as a rules element in the same way WotC does.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If a 3'8" dwarf woman and a 6'6" human man can both be medium creatures, I don't know why something like an 8' hypothetical ancestry couldn't be medium too.They could certainly be Medium, but they'd be treated as Medium, not Large, and wouldn't gain the advantages of that size category.
I feel like the impulse worth catering too is "I want to play a character who is just a really towering individual." The "I want to get natural reach for free at chargen" impulse is something we can safely ignore.
After all, the "I want to have really long arms or arm analogues" fantasy is handled by a first level Leshy feat and that still doesn't let you get 15' of reach cheaply.