As more info about the Book of the Dead got revealed during the past few days, I can't help but think about how exactly do the developers plan to handle what I believe to be one of the bigger issues with undead player characters: immunities.
As of Second Edition, most undead are immune to death effects, disease, paralyze, poison, sleep (or unconscious if it never rests at all), which is quite the baggage of stuff to be immune to.
How do you think these immunities could/should be handled? Should they be left as is, tweaked or removed altogether?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Undead are showing up as playable in PF2 because we no longer have so many hard-baked rules. There's no need to deal with the "no Con score", we had a plant ancestry with no immunities or resistances months into the game, and even "not humanoid" is no longer a big deal for spells. Undead immunities are a way shorter list, too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Probably going to be a scaled down version like the androids +1 to saves vs diseases, poisons, and radiation, combined with the negative healing from the dhampir. I'd guess that it would be a +1 to saves vs death effects, disease, and poison. (Though that does make it stronger than the androids version as there aren't any radiation effects in the game sofar).
It is worth keeping in mind that the GMG monster creation rules list what a creature type usually has, but specifies that its not a hard and fast rule and that you can have creatures that don't have all of the immunities and abilities that their creature type usually has.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Alternatively, they could just let it ride with the advice that undead PCs are innately stronger in some ways than most ancestries, and so are best played in a game where everyone is undead.
They could also pair each undead with a vulnerability of some kind as part of the archetype that transforms you.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Alternatively, they could just let it ride with the advice that undead PCs are innately stronger in some ways than most ancestries, and so are best played in a game where everyone is undead.
They could also pair each undead with a vulnerability of some kind as part of the archetype that transforms you.
Negative Healing is usually a huge disadvantage when adventuring with groups of mostly living people, which makes their immunities a bit more manageable in mixed groups.
Another thing that I've been thinking about is the Undead trait, which states that when an undead creature reaches 0 hit points it is immediately destroyed, which feels like a pretty hefty downside. If I recall correctly, only vampires and their variants can sort of get around it due to Coffin Restoration.
I'm p sure they are doing undead via archetypes, so i expect we'll see mechanics like living monolith, golem grafter, and oozemorph where you start off in the process of becoming undead and each feat progresses your apotheosis. Because they use class feats though, I suspect we'll actually immunities down the line
I'm p sure they are doing undead via archetypes, so i expect we'll see mechanics like living monolith, golem grafter, and oozemorph where you start off in the process of becoming undead and each feat progresses your apotheosis. Because they use class feats though, I suspect we'll actually immunities down the line
Skeletons have been confirmed to be an ancestry. They're also the type of undead that has the most reason to be immune to poison, disease and such.
Skeletons are Ancestry, because you're just bones and your living body matter not. Lol
Ghouls and Vampires are Archetypes, because what you were when you were alive still matters.
I don't think they've mentioned any potential Heritage related Undead.
I'm surprised no one asked how many playable Undead options there would be. Then we could kind of sus them out. I think it's safe to assume things like Zombies, Mummies, and Ghosts might be possible at low levels; then maybe Lich and Graveknight at higher levels.
Skeletons are Ancestry, because you're just bones and your living body matter not. Lol
Ghouls and Vampires are Archetypes, because what you were when you were alive still matters.
I don't think they've mentioned any potential Heritage related Undead.
I'm surprised no one asked how many playable Undead options there would be. Then we could kind of sus them out. I think it's safe to assume things like Zombies, Mummies, and Ghosts might be possible at low levels; then maybe Lich and Graveknight at higher levels.
If I recall correctly, they were asked, but were cagey about it. We did learn that Mummies are a playable option and the possibility of playing a Lich was hinted at, but not confirmed in any way.
I think it's safe to assume that the "major" kinds of Undead are a safe bet as options. I wouldn't bet on getting another book down the line that includes more options.
Zombie
Skelton
Lich/Graveknight
Ghoul
Mummy
Ghost
Wraith
Wight (maybe?)
That may be a lot, but I just can't imagine we would see more Undead later.
The Incorpreal ones may be the biggest stretch. If we were to question any of their immunities and resistances, Ghost and Wraith would be the ones.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I imagine it will be similar to how Leslie's don't have typical plant immunities, or how Sprites can only fly with appropriate feats, or how Consuru (sp?) can still bleed and such.
There are no plant immunities in PF2. Many plant creatures have immunities, but the type itself does not even mention them.
|
I imagine it will be similar to how Leslie's don't have typical plant immunities, or how Sprites can only fly with appropriate feats, or how Consuru (sp?) can still bleed and such.There are no plant immunities in PF2. Many plant creatures have immunities, but the type itself does not even mention them.
Fine, yes of course you are right. However I was answering the OPS question directly based on similarexamples. Then again, undead have no immunities either aside from negative damage, so you've solved it. Your answer is why this thread has no relevance, case closed. Thanks for the insight.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think it'll be more along the lines of skeletal, fleshy, incorporeal w/ build options afterward that lead toward specific types. That tightens up the build system and expands options to allow hybrids (at least within type, perhaps w/ Dedications to expand further).
So you might get "Fleshy" as one's Ancestry w/ Zombie as one's Heritage.
Separately, I wouldn't want these options to balance well against regular options because then they'll just play like pale people w/ quirks. It'd take who knows how many levels for the PC concept to come to fruition, and not just for the Liches, i.e. ghouls wouldn't paralyze until what? 13th?
I wonder how Paizo will balance those wanting Ghoul as their focus (and therefore taking the role of a class) and those wanting access to regular classes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Fine, yes of course you are right. However I was answering the OPS question directly based on similarexamples. Then again, undead have no immunities either aside from negative damage, so you've solved it. Your answer is why this thread has no relevance, case closed. Thanks for the insight.I imagine it will be similar to how Leslie's don't have typical plant immunities, or how Sprites can only fly with appropriate feats, or how Consuru (sp?) can still bleed and such.There are no plant immunities in PF2. Many plant creatures have immunities, but the type itself does not even mention them.
I got what you are trying to say, but in PF2 leshies don't have typical plant immunities because there are no typical plant immunities, so your example isn't actually similar.
Look at creatures of the undead type versus the plant type. If you pick any five undead at random, at least 3 of them will have the immunities OP lists. I actually haven't found an undead that doesn't have those immunities, but I assume there's at least a couple if I were to search the entirety of pf2easy. Plants just don't have a similar line up. Closest they come is resistance to bludgeoning and piercing, but about half the ones I've come across don't have that either, and that's counting the ones with a weakness to slashing as close enough.
I think it'll be more along the lines of skeletal, fleshy, incorporeal w/ build options afterward that lead toward specific types. That tightens up the build system and expands options to allow hybrids (at least within type, perhaps w/ Dedications to expand further).
So you might get "Fleshy" as one's Ancestry w/ Zombie as one's Heritage.
Separately, I wouldn't want these options to balance well against regular options because then they'll just play like pale people w/ quirks. It'd take who knows how many levels for the PC concept to come to fruition, and not just for the Liches, i.e. ghouls wouldn't paralyze until what? 13th?
I wonder how Paizo will balance those wanting Ghoul as their focus (and therefore taking the role of a class) and those wanting access to regular classes.
I mean, I like the idea. But they've straight up said Skeleton is an Ancestry, while Ghoul and Vampire are Archetypes. They even showed an example of a Lvl 1 Feat for Skeleton called "Play Dead". So I don't think they are going to do anything as ambiguous as "you are a Fleshy Undead w/ a Ghoul -or- Zombie Heritage"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They even showed an example of a Lvl 1 Feat for Skeleton called "Play Dead".
Honestly a feat or ability that lets undead characters play dead was weirdly 1# on my wish-list of things for this book so I'm pretty stoked.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yea. I'm glad they are having fun with them. Like, the skeletal musician that playsnits ribcage like a xylophone is probably going to be my favorite thing in this book. Hope a Skelton Bard can do the same.
The Incorpreal ones may be the biggest stretch. If we were to question any of their immunities and resistances, Ghost and Wraith would be the ones.
I think incorporeal undead were mentioned at some point during one of the livestreams, but I can't remember which one, however I don't think they were confirmed as playable.
I think they would need some fairly heavy limitations, since the incorporeal trait would allow you to bypass a lot of common obstacles.
Another issue would be, IIRC, the inability to attempt Strength-based checks of any sort, alongside the issue I mentioned before with Undead trait and dropping to 0 hit points destroying them immediately.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
They even showed an example of a Lvl 1 Feat for Skeleton called "Play Dead".Honestly a feat or ability that lets undead characters play dead was weirdly 1# on my wish-list of things for this book so I'm pretty stoked.
And now I wonder if all the skeletons in that cave had the feat and rolled some kind of secret critical success when they all rose while we were in the middle of them.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I may not be enthusiastic about having undead PC rules, but if you say 'You can play undead, but have none of the things that make being an undead relevant' then the whole exercise is pointless.
We could say the same for any Ancestry or Heritage really. Up to now, they have never disappointed IMO.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
The game still needs to maintain a measure of balance. Undead traditionally have a lot of defensive abilities that, in a group of PC's, would grossly imbalance encounters. Especially in 2e, where encounters became a little more dangerous. So, restricting most the abilities of Undead PC's to Feats is necessary imo. It in no way invalidates being Undead to have to spend resources in order to do so.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't get why the PCs, regardless of their backstory, always have to start off as inferior examples of their ancestry. Was it really so hard to balance things around ancestries being full strength from level 1?
To frame this in a context that anybody can understand, do you feel 'more human' now than you did a few years back? Have you ever suddenly gained an ability that we're supposed to have but you just lacked for reasons that can't be explained?
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
The reason why 2e generally doesn't do immunities - only heavy, heavy "resistance" (e.g. greater juggernaut) - isn't because of balance reasons, it is about engaging the player. As Mark pointed out in another thread, anything you do to interact with a part of the game is more interesting. If you are immune to something, that whole part of the game simply doesn't matter anymore and you stop caring. Which in my opinion is a very good reason for such a design decision.
That said, some things just don't make sense without immunities. I can see an intelligent skeleton needing a sort of "maintenance period" instead of sleep, that is no problem. But an animated pile of bones being affected by poison or most diseases just doesn't work.
If the team has good ideas how to get around those issues, then I'm totally down for that, though. 2e has shown a remarkable consistency in marrying rules and lore in a way that feels like it makes sense. Both in-lore and in a way that fits the fantasy of many concepts.
Edit: Also, I need this ability:
Screaming Skull - Two Actions (auditory, emotion, fear, mental) - The skeleton removes its skull and throws it, making a jaws attack with a range of 20 feet. It then attempts to Demoralize each foe within 10 feet of the target. The head bounces, rolls, or even flies back, returning to the skeleton at the start of its next turn. The skeleton is blind until then.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's not that you are an inferior example of your Ancestry. Rather, you are a TYPICAL example of your Ancestry. Even Humans irl are capable of developing mental and physical abilities not typical of the majority. Not everyone can see in the dark as well as others, not every person has the same mental fortitude to deal with fear inducing situations, not every person is capable of dealing with pain, or has an immune system capable of fighting off disease and poison. These are not things typical to us as Humans, but these are things that many people are capable of doing.
The expectation that a PC should be the apex example of their peoples biology, psychology, and culture is silly. Because, I know I'm certainly not the apex of Humanity and I'd wager no one else here could claim to be either. But there are certainly things I am more capable of doing as a Human than some other people are, and vice versa.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's not that you are an inferior example of your Ancestry. Rather, you are a TYPICAL example of your Ancestry. Even Humans irl are capable of developing mental and physical abilities not typical of the majority. Not everyone can see in the dark as well as others, not every person has the same mental fortitude to deal with fear inducing situations, not every person is capable of dealing with pain, or has an immune system capable of fighting off disease and poison. These are not things typical to us as Humans, but these are things that many people are capable of doing.
Yes, I've heard of people who've reached the peak in their field suddenly developing darkvision or realizing they can more easily survive getting critically injured without lasting harm.
This gets more absurd with non-human ancestries. Such as cat-folk not learning proper grooming techniques until level 9. Leshy not being poisonous until level 13. Every PC Sprite being wingless until 17 when they can finally manage to fly the way a level 1 NPC Sprite can.
Paizo is literally pants-on-head when it comes to bending fluff to fit their desired level of balance.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To frame this in a context that anybody can understand, do you feel 'more human' now than you did a few years back? Have you ever suddenly gained an ability that we're supposed to have but you just lacked for reasons that can't be explained?
You mean you don’t?
More seriously, of course they could have balanced them with ancestries stronger at level 1. Simplest method would be to allow multiple heritages on the same character, but there’s other ways. They simply chose a different balance point than you would have, but any balance choice would have been mostly arbitrary.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To frame this in a context that anybody can understand, do you feel 'more human' now than you did a few years back? Have you ever suddenly gained an ability that we're supposed to have but you just lacked for reasons that can't be explained?You mean you don’t?
More seriously, of course they could have balanced them with ancestries stronger at level 1. Simplest method would be to allow multiple heritages on the same character, but there’s other ways. They simply chose a different balance point than you would have, but any balance choice would have been mostly arbitrary.
My point about balance is that ancestry feats shouldn't be a thing. Unless you're playing an ancestry as a class, such as could be done with 3.x Savage Species content, an adult character should have all the abilities they'll ever get from their ancestry already. Beyond that, the choices the player makes should shape that character.
PF1 and 3.x, while still having a small and often niche selection of ancestry-locked feats, both dealt with variation between members of a given ancestry better than PF2 does and didn't do that by selling you back bits of it at higher levels.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, I believe someone during the playtest described it as “chopping down my tree and offering to sell me back the lumber.”
Again, all of these decisions are arbitrary and could have gone a different way. They went the way they did. I happen to favor this format, but as I said it was fairly contentious at the time and since, so it doesn’t surprise me there are those that dislike it and would have preferred something else.
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
1) Sprites literally still have wings, there is literally a level 1 feat that gives minor flying capabilities.
2)It's not that you weren't taught proper grooming skills. Its that your grooming skills have become so skilled, that they now offer a bonus.
3) most ancestry eats that grant darkvision, cant be taken past level 1. The few ones that can are from heritages that are *known* for mutations or magical mishaps. Changelings, and Ganzi come to mind.
If you don't like the system that's fine. But to take an ability and spin it in the worse possible ways when their are other options that probably make more sense work better.
And heck for sprites and strix (which are the ones that i personally have an issue but a still playball for balance reasons) they encourage you to ignore those feats and just give then flight if it breaks your verisimilitude but warns against potential issues it may cause.
Edit: on the actual topic of the Undead and Immunities. I am curious how they intend to handle it. I will be fine one way or another. If they grant immunities i feel like its balanced by the social issues of being undead and trying to hide that. If they come up with a fluff reason for why they lack immunities then thats neat too.
Eh. I'll just leave it as agreeing to disagree here. I doubt there is any convincing you otherwise, so I won't bother debating the matter. I for one like the new system. It ensures that your choice in Ancestry matters from Lvl 1 to Lvl 20. If that isn't your preference, I'd recommend playing with Ancestry Paragon rules, or sticking with 3rd edition D&D.
EDIT: I wouldn't be surprised if they have minor resistances at first. For example, the Skelton Ancestry having like 5 resistance /void Bludgeoning. I suspect things like GHOUL and Vampire wouldn't come online until say Lvl 4, when you get your first Ancesyry Feat (since it has to do with you being rather than your choice in adventuring career). At which point, I'd imagine they'd give slightly better resistances than Lvl 1 would give.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Eh, I like the options. Gimme.
Not everyone liked all the innate stuff you had to take (like Weapon Proficiencies, Spell Resistance, etc).
Let's use a simple example to illustrate how wrong you are:
According to the SRD a PF1 Dwarf gives you 8 options base with the option to swap them out for 49 other abilities. Toss in favored class options (39), racial feats (21), and racial traits (13) and that makes 91 options, nearly all open to you right from level 1.
The same source lists 1 (two if you count the clan dagger, three if we're counting starting HP) starting abilities. Then you get 8 subtypes of Dwarf to choose from. Finally, there are 32 feats. That is, at best, 43 options, only 24 of which are open at level 1.
PF2 cut down the tree that was PF1 and is literally selling it back to you book-by-book but also figuratively doing it again at levels 5, 9, 13 & 17.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
They even showed an example of a Lvl 1 Feat for Skeleton called "Play Dead".Honestly a feat or ability that lets undead characters play dead was weirdly 1# on my wish-list of things for this book so I'm pretty stoked.
I kinda feel like a Skeleton shouldn't need a feat for that. Lay down. Stay still.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Eh, I like the options. Gimme.
Not everyone liked all the innate stuff you had to take (like Weapon Proficiencies, Spell Resistance, etc).
Let's use a simple example to illustrate how wrong you are:
According to the SRD a PF1 Dwarf gives you 8 options base with the option to swap them out for 49 other abilities. Toss in favored class options (39), racial feats (21), and racial traits (13) and that makes 91 options, nearly all open to you right from level 1.
The same source lists 1 (two if you count the clan dagger, three if we're counting starting HP) starting abilities. Then you get 8 subtypes of Dwarf to choose from. Finally, there are 32 feats. That is, at best, 43 options, only 24 of which are open at level 1.
PF2 cut down the tree that was PF1 and is literally selling it back to you book-by-book but also figuratively doing it again at levels 5, 9, 13 & 17.
91 over 10 years of game development vs 24 in what 3 years? If you include the various versatile heritages that is even more.
And yes, a new system means new rules, which comes in new books. If you anger is at a system change then your point will not be taken into consideration by someone who actually likes the new system. Because for them they like the fact that the system was changed, that it is a new game. Since it is a new game they are also not chopping up your mechanics and selling them back to you, they are in fact just selling a new game, built from the ground up. with different assumptions about mechanics.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
91 over 10 years of game development vs 24 in what 3 years? If you include the various versatile heritages that is even more.How many new ancestry feats have been added in supplemental material thus far into PF2?
And yes, a new system means new rules, which comes in new books. If you anger is at a system change then your point will not be taken into consideration by someone who actually likes the new system. Because for them they like the fact that the system was changed, that it is a new game. Since it is a new game they are also not chopping up your mechanics and selling them back to you, they are in fact just selling a new game, built from the ground up. with different assumptions about mechanics.It's not that it's a new system. It's a new system that is offering less than what it came from while releasing more slowly with less support.
If Paizo hadn't alienated 3rd party devs and had a store page that wasn't objectively worse than DTRPG I might not have so many complaints in terms of the PF2 content drought.
if I limit myself to your parameters
4 new dwarf heritages4 new 1st level dwaqrf feats
12 versatile heritages
and
103 1st level versatile heritage feats.
Paizo Just announced pathfinder Infinite to support 3rd party options.
The slower release has lead to imo stronger books over all. This is again something that will come down to personal preference.
That being said we have swerved off course quite a bit. I will probably not respond to any further comments out of respect for the OP and topic.
you clearly have your issues with the system at a fundamental level and trying to engage with you about it will probably just derail the thread further.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I kinda feel like a Skeleton shouldn't need a feat for that. Lay down. Stay still.They even showed an example of a Lvl 1 Feat for Skeleton called "Play Dead".Honestly a feat or ability that lets undead characters play dead was weirdly 1# on my wish-list of things for this book so I'm pretty stoked.
It's rather hard not to giggle.
"Tee hee, they think I'm dormant."If PC paranoia is the norm then seeing a relatively intact skeleton raises alarm bells, especially when decked in well-maintained gear. :) Not that I could see spending a feat to look disassembled, but maybe as part of a package.
To frame this in a context that anybody can understand, do you feel 'more human' now than you did a few years back? Have you ever suddenly gained an ability that we're supposed to have but you just lacked for reasons that can't be explained?You mean you don’t?
More seriously, of course they could have balanced them with ancestries stronger at level 1. Simplest method would be to allow multiple heritages on the same character, but there’s other ways. They simply chose a different balance point than you would have, but any balance choice would have been mostly arbitrary.
My point about balance is that ancestry feats shouldn't be a thing. Unless you're playing an ancestry as a class, such as could be done with 3.x Savage Species content, an adult character should have all the abilities they'll ever get from their ancestry already. Beyond that, the choices the player makes should shape that character.
PF1 and 3.x, while still having a small and often niche selection of ancestry-locked feats, both dealt with variation between members of a given ancestry better than PF2 does and didn't do that by selling you back bits of it at higher levels.
With all the optional racial variance in PF1e where exactly was the fully fledged racial paragon for every race? Seems that a little bit of choice gave way to greater amounts of choice.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's rather hard not to giggle.
"Tee hee, they think I'm dormant."If PC paranoia is the norm then seeing a relatively intact skeleton raises alarm bells, especially when decked in well-maintained gear. :) Not that I could see spending a feat to look disassembled, but maybe as part of a package.
Perhaps somehow tied into the whole Bloody Skeleton thing, perhaps with a reaction? Like, you spend a reaction in response to receiving an attack, and literally fly to pieces. You go prone, and get some sort of nice defensive benefits/resists/something. At the beginning of your next turn, you reassemble (still prone) and get your standard number of actions. Combos well with kip up.
"Ah Hah! You thought I was defeated, just because I was smashed into pieces, but in truth it was all a trick!"
"That's the third time you've done that this fight, Burke. No one actually thought you were defeated."
Bloody Skeleton could just start out as a heritage with a bonus to death checks, and go from there.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm just thinking of that one meme where it's a party and the person in the corner is like "they don't know..." but its a skeleton going "they don't know I'm an undead."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
if I limit myself to your parameters
4 new dwarf heritages
4 new 1st level dwaqrf feats
12 versatile heritages
and
103 1st level versatile heritage feats.Paizo Just announced pathfinder Infinite to support 3rd party options.
The slower release has lead to imo stronger books over all. This is again something that will come down to personal preference.
Thanks, for posting these numbers. While I do my best to keep up with PF2 releases even though I don't play it I don't have the same level of knowledge as those of you who play regulary. In light of the versatile heritage feats, it seems like Paizo is doing as much as can be expected of them.
That being said we have swerved off course quite a bit. I will probably not respond to any further comments out of respect for the OP and topic.
you clearly have your issues with the system at a fundamental level and trying to engage with you about it will probably just derail the thread further.
That I do and I make no attempt to hide it. I'll respect your choice to not continue this topic and also leave off it.|
Thanks again for the numbers and the conversation!