Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion
Whatever happened to the classic races?
Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion
201 to 250 of 1,044 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Meepo the Kobold Mar 6, 2014, 11:48 am
Charlie D. wrote:
I guess it depends on the type of players. If they want to do cool stuff and kill things they might not be big into immersion. Hence, wanting to teleport and breathe fire.
I think I'd tailor the race choices and the tone of the campaign to the group of players. Trying to get players to act in the way I as the GM want normally does not work out well for me!
Hence, I compromise.
Basically, as a player, what would be my reward for immersion if immersion isn't my thing? In other words, why give up my demon guy with a whip for a human with a sword just to please the GM? What would be in it for me? I may want to play in the campaign but time is limited, so going with restrictions I don't understand won't get me to stay.
As the GM, I would than try to find cool stuff that player could do and still be human if it mattered that much to me as the GM. Or you could say you play the game as a human but we'll let you have the race template of another race. You get it from a pact with a demon (tiefling), or the Monkey God (monkey-guy), or...
The benefit is you get to play in a game I'm running, haha. That having been said it's usually not an issue except for one of my players. Then again he's the guy who tries to "win." Also he only plays humans and half-elves. (I WONDER WHY.)
I'm not dismissing the play-style you are referencing at all. It's a fine way to play, but it's not the way I personally want my game to play. When I run a game I want it to run in a certain why. I explain this to my players and if they are still interested we run with it.
(EDIT: Because when he said classic he was referring to table-top and fantasy RPGs. Therefore monkey men are not classic, despite the fact they existed a long time before DnD. I'm arguing semantics at this point, I've realized. Oops.)
Ravingdork Mar 6, 2014, 11:52 am
Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
I think my Skull and Shackles group has the most oddballs in one place.
We have a Catfolk (tiger), Human Red Mantis Assassin (mantis), Tengu (crane), Vanara (baboon), and a Vishkanya (viper).
They call themselves the Furious Five. Not kidding.
Most of our other groups/games have fairly traditional races, though there is almost always one crazy outlier: kitsune, assimar, centaur, homebrew rabbitfolk, weartiger, etc.
LazarX Mar 6, 2014, 11:57 am
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
There are posters on this board that insist that the only way to make an interesting character is to start with some exotic race or mutant halfbreed, because ordinary races are "too boring".
This video is my rebuttal to that postulate.
Meepo the Kobold Mar 6, 2014, 12:00 pm
LazarX wrote:
I haven't seen that in awhile, I LOVE that animation.
gamer-printer Mar 6, 2014, 12:07 pm
Perhaps, though I am not one of those people.
There are many very inappropriate race possibilities that would not fit in my specific settings that I play. Although elves, dwarves, halflings, etc are among those races never normally available for my games, also most of the other exotic races as well. Generally I have a specific list of available races, usually 6 to 8 different ones. If the race you want is not on my list, more than likely you won't get to play it.
Now I can be talked into anything, as long as logic I accept does the convincing. If not logical enough, I won't change my mind.
I have to clarify in stating I have 7 people at our table, and all accept these limitations. We don't generally allow new people with their own specific and different wants at our table - so its generally not a problem.
rando1000 Mar 6, 2014, 12:10 pm
Wizard of Oz - 1900
The Hobbit - 1937
Monkey men FTW!
Xenophile Mar 6, 2014, 12:16 pm
I don't think anyone is saying "you can't do cool fantasy with humans anymore," it's just that 99% of cool fantasy is about humans and human lookalikes already. I don't think it makes you a special snowflake for wanting something that hasn't been the default for forty years.
Though the obvious rebuttal to that is, "Then why are you playing Dungeons & Dragons?"
J-Gal Mar 6, 2014, 12:17 pm
Xenophile wrote:
I, for one, find Gnomes woefully underrepresented.
Ellis Mirari Mar 6, 2014, 12:22 pm
J-Gal wrote:
Just to add some context to this, I have run parties with a tiefling, drow, dhampir, fetchling, and an orc. (I like to call this group the dark and edgys)
And another group with 2 half-orcs, a kitsune, a human (thank the lord) and a vishkanya.
Neither group could provide any context for why they might be together, forcing me to either do the "YOUR LORD HAS SUMMONED YOU" or "at the same bar" intros, and the weirdness just got worse.
It's as much your job as the one created the story to come up with a reason they're all on the same mission as it is theirs.
Frankly, I think this is your fault, not theirs.
137ben Mar 6, 2014, 12:22 pm
Humans are the preferred racial choice for powergamers. They aren't a jack-of-all-trades in D&D/PF, they are the best or near best at everything. How many optimization handbooks don't recommend human as the top choice for every build and every class?
Admit it, your demand for "classic races" is nothing but pure muchkinism.
Khazrandir RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32 Mar 6, 2014, 12:25 pm
From my perspective, Dwarves are entirely underrated and not played enough! <3 Dwarves!
Anyways, the OP seems to have come to the forums to vent a frustration he has in games he see. He seems to have taken effort to express many times that this is just his personal preference and venting an understandable frustration.
Nobody is telling anybody else that they are playing the game wrong. Some people like their games certain ways. It's called having a personal opinion. Now maybe I should make a thread that laments on the lack of all-Dwarf parties on epic adventures filled with mining and booze.
Hurlof-Goldbeard Mar 6, 2014, 12:26 pm
J-gal, i understand the problem you are having and have had it myself . Im actually getting ready to run rise of the runelords anniversary edition this weekend., and all i did was limit my players to the core rule book and the players guide for rise of the ruin lords. To solve the problem of having players walk into towns with out of ordinary common races. My explination to my players is that the local populace wouldnt react well to any other race than the common ones. Hope this helps and good luck
Umbriere Moonwhisper Mar 6, 2014, 12:27 pm
to any of you, whether or not you are familiar with my unique aesthetic tastes.
how many of you, would allow me to play a conversion of a Tera Online Elin in your games?
if we go by the game and it's mechanics
it's a small fey race with a pair of flexible ability bonuses without penalty (as per dual talent human), the ability to wield medium weapons and count as medium for the purpose of manuevers, darkvision 60 feet, and a 40 foot land speed, as well as a 30 foot swim speed and the ability to cast an AoE version of calm emotions centered around itself once per hour.
i need help fleshing it out, but it's one of my favorite MMO races.
thejeff Mar 6, 2014, 12:29 pm
Ssalarn wrote:
gamer-printer wrote:
Meepo the Kobold wrote:
(Also monkey men are not 'classic' in any sense when applied to the world of table-top RPGs. I have no idea why people latched onto the fact there were monkey men in China 3000yrs ago. What possible relevance could that have with classic Fantasy and DnD races?)
Why is there a need to be relevant to any classic RPG/D&D races, ever? I don't think there is need. Now if someone wanted to play a game that somehow was a nostalgic style to old-time D&D fine. But why is there some kind of general expectation that all games must also be that?
Agreed! I think 3000 years of Asian mythology is a lot more "classic" than what Mr. Gygax decided to put in the first D&D game a mere handful of decades ago.
If you're planning an Asian, or more precisely Indian, based game that would be classic. If you're planning a more traditional pseudo-European game, not quite so much. Things more based on European myths would be more classic.
TriOmegaZero Mar 6, 2014, 12:29 pm
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
The Golarion take has made them more fresh for me, and I'm enjoying my gnome druid and my brothers gnome dragon disciple.
Dungeon Master Zack Mar 6, 2014, 12:33 pm
Playing odd races is as old as the game itself. In the original Blackmoor campaign player characters included a vampire and a balrog. In fact, the only reason the "classic" races made it into the game is that people wanted to play them. Gary Gygax originally see the point in including the "classic" Tolkien races in the published game.
TriOmegaZero wrote:
I'm pleased with the Golarion treatment of Gnomes. They are finally distinct from halflings. They've always struck me as almost the dwarven fey, much in the same way that elves are sort of the human fey, and Golarion finally treats them with the... lunacy they deserve.
rooboy Mar 6, 2014, 12:35 pm
Gilfalas wrote:
Oddly enough in all that time I have never played a gnome. I don't know why but gnomes do not appeal to me in any way.
Ironically (as I noted above, I almost always play humans, usually ethnic Varisians or Ulfen, occasionally planetouched), Pathfinder gnomes are the only gnomes that have ever appealed to me. I think it's the callback to the old red-capped gnome illustrated stories from my childhood. Plus I have to admit that I like the opportunity to have like Fire Engine Red Hair and Blue Skin or whatever Star Trek combination I want.
RaFon Mar 6, 2014, 12:38 pm
I love the "basic" classes and races. I'm so tired of seeing half this and half that blades of the Northern Sky or some other such nonsense. Give me a elven fighter/mage anyday!
No reason not to play gnomes.
One interesting curiosity (to me), is that most standard non-human races are at least loosely based on their folkloric forebears. However, gnomes never existed in folklore in any culture of the past. Gnomes were the anthropomorphized representation of the Earth element as found in books on alchemistry. Gnomes = earth, Sylphs = air, Nereids = water, and Salamanders = fire. When 19th century scholars were studying these old alchemical tomes, the gnome was discovered, and subsequently entered fictional literature at that time.
Adjule Mar 6, 2014, 01:11 pm
I find it strange that the OP said that the "monkey men" were recent editions into D&D (even though they first appeared in 1st edition AD&D on page 12 of Oriental Adventures [though as a type of hengeyokai]), but when it was pointed out that half-orcs were around since 1st edition AD&D, he doesn't count that? And the Vanara (under that name) first appeared in the 3rd edition Oriental Adventures, all the way back in 2001.
As for the whole "freak show", this argument shows up every couple months, and the proponents of "core only" races always have to throw around the "fiendish half dragon vampire catgirl" crap. I personally like playing the more "out there" races as I have grown tired of the bland core races. If forced into "core only", then I go for dwarf or half-orc.
Atarlost Mar 6, 2014, 01:24 pm
Ilja wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Either compare the RPG version of vanaras to the RPG version of elves or compare the mythical version of vanaras to the mythical version of elves.
Legends of elves may not go back quite as far as the Indian classics, at least not in written form, but they certainly go back farther than Tolkein.
The Vanara of pathfinder are fairly close to the Vanara of Ramayana; curious and sometimes michivous ape-people living in deep in forests and jungles. The elves of Pathfinder are fairly close to Tolkien's elves...
They're really not. Tolkien's elves have two defining characteristics: They don't age (which allows eg. Thranduil to carry a grudge for longer than humans have known how to work bronze) and they aren't homogeneous. The Noldor are about as similar to the Silvani as the Gupta are to the Sioux. They are the primary recipients of his conlang obsession and therefore culturally fragmented to support linguistic fragmentation in spite of the first defining characteristic.
Adjule wrote:
I never found the core races bland. If anything, they're the ones with more roleplaying material to work with. More cultural information and more cultural variation. More depth.
The "out there" races tend to be a couple of paragraphs and bunch of statistics.
kyrt-ryder Mar 6, 2014, 01:44 pm
If they released a new book with stats for AK-47s and Rocket Launchers I believe that would be going against the spirit of this specific game.
No it wouldn't.
LazarX Mar 6, 2014, 01:50 pm
Umbriere Moonwhisper wrote:
It depends on whether or not the race fits into whatever world I'm running. Characters in my world have a background and history, they just don't pop out of the Aether. If the campaign was being run as a Golarion AP, the answer would be no.
If it was a crossplanar bar, the answer might be different.
Not so for 3PP material, as Rite Publishing has entire supplements (multiple pages, not just a few paragraphs) for: Fey, Gargoyles, Giants, Hengeyokai, Lurkers, Minotaurs, Medusae, Ironborn (constructs), Kappa, Tengu, and still in play-test, but Dragons too. Of course there are other 3PP companies doing pretty much the same with other, different races.
Hengeyokai for example has racial stats, height/weight/age tables, henge specific feats, 7 subspecies each with their own racial traits and preferred classes, as well as details unique to each subspecie. Preferred alignments, 3 racial class archetypes, and one racial paragon class.
Details on their culture, where they live, who leads their communities, their social hierarchy, the crops they grow, the food they eat, what family life is like, and what reasons do individuals leave those communities. A brief on their religious practices and more.
And that is just one of the above list of races - seems like a lot more than just a few paragraphs and stats...
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Depends. As part of a specific adventure or maybe only in a specific region of the setting, not really.
As just another entry in the equipment book, available for anyone to buy, Absolutely.
Elins
they could work just fine as a race of small fey dedicated to doing genocide of undead, aberrations, demons, and the tainted in the name of nature. in fact, the flavor screams. "i'm an axe crazy pint sized berserker whom slaughters undead like sheep because they are abominations to the natural order"
we could always work on a compromise to tie them to Golarion. maybe they are a recent invading force from the first world and my PC could be a messenger telling cities that their wasteful course of action is bad for nature and will anger the goddess Elinu.
What do your players want? That is a compelling reason.
This is at the core right here. At some point, you either have to compromise with your players and enjoy the game you're playing, or stand your ground and say "this is what I'm running. If you want to play, fine, if not, I'll find someone else."
I'm not recommending either course, but I've been in the same boat for different reasons for a while. It finally came down to my being called out for starting too many different campaigns. And the reason for my doing that was that each one of them was too much catered to my players' desires and not enough to what I wanted to run. Finally, I took what absolutely HAD to be included to run the game I wanted, offered it to the players with as much of their requests as I could handle included, and let them choose. In my case, they were good with it.
Apotheosis Mar 6, 2014, 02:26 pm
With some work, sure why not? I'm familiar with the Elin and Popori and I don't see a problem with either so long as we worked out a good 'why are they here' answer for Golarion.
To the OP: I used to be the same way. I grew up in the 1E era with BECMI, back when Gary's "if you want to play anything other than these guys then you're bad and you should feel bad" era was still in full swing. But times change, and while some people like LOTR still, it and Tolkien aren't the same draw anymore. To get to the point where I could deal with other races without having a kneejerk 'special snowflake/edge/emo' response was difficult.
I had to relax and quit worrying about what some guy wrote 30 years ago. Not easy to do when it was repeated as a mantra during your formative years, but it can be done. I'm living proof.
And Golarion gnomes are better than any of the other races! Erm...and halflings. Halfling-Gnome solidarity!
Zhayne Mar 6, 2014, 02:30 pm
My only objection would be on the basis that I question its balance, not the concept proper.
I mean, frag, they're fey. If that isn't carte blanche for weird stuff, I dunno what is.
i was considering playing an Elin sent on an Expedition from the first world into the material plane to scout territory to start a colony worthy of pleasing her goddess queen.
probably an Elin Berserker whom the locals mistake for a Fox-Eared Halfling with a deeper agenda that involves starting a new Poporia in Golarion.
the tie in, would be the first world and Elins, would be a species from the first world.
i figure i could have been planeshifted by a high level Elin Cleric of Queen Elinu to scout lands with which to found another colony, for an Elin Agricultural empire.
Especially since it's already been done. If my sources are accurate, modern firearms, including machine guns, flamethrowers, and tanks made their debut in Pathfinder Adventure Path #71.
And let us not forget that the AD&D DMG had rules for converting Boot Hill and Gamma World characters to and from D&D.
And either way, you could just choose not to purchase or allow said book, so that argument is completely irrelevant.
Zhayne wrote:
As I said above, rules in an adventure or for a restricted part of the setting wouldn't really change anything.
Rules in an equipment supplement without strong language about "Not standard gear" would.
Much like the Advanced firearms rules. In there, but with warnings.
i guess some of the abilities could be dropped
but it's primary things would be
*+2 to 2 attributes of your choice (as per human dual talent or Variant Aasimaar, to represent their class flexibility) (most Races give +2 to two of the primary stats for a given class anyway)
*Small Size
* able to wield medium weapons without penalty or change in handedness if Strength 13+ (Elin Berserkers, Slayers and Lancers are often seen carrying Large Greataxes, Greatswords and Polearms in one hand, but being able to carry a medium weapon without a change in handedness, would be a more reasonable compromise)
*40 foot base speed (in Tera, their speed is 40% faster than that of any other race in the game, but 40 ft, or 33% faster than a human is reasonable)
*darkvision (it would replace low light, it's handed out like candy in PF)
*Swim Speed 30 feet (Elins are known to swim faster than the other races too)
*AoE Calm Emotions effect centered around self once per hour with a Requirement of 13+ Cha, doesn't affect self
Rubber Ducky guy Mar 6, 2014, 02:56 pm
Do you have access to the Advanced Race Guide?
They have rules and point buys for custom races to keep them balanced with the core rules.
Lazurin Arborlon Mar 6, 2014, 03:01 pm
Not an issue in our games, we see maybe one unique race every couple of campaigns, which last about a year. Even if they were more common though who cares? I have never understood get your chocolate out of my peanut butter posts, and I hope I never do.
Rubber Ducky guy wrote:
i do have access, but the rules and point buys, aren't really providing balanced costs, and there are some abilities that can't be priced very well, such as the flexible attribute bonuses, the ability to wield medium weapons without a penalty or change in handedness, or the burst of calm emotions once per hour. so i will need help pricing those.
but something like this, shouldn't be too different from an Aasimaar, Human or Dwarf.
plus i don't like fully relying on the Race Builder because it is easier for me to judge a race by Eyeballing it is than relying on a point system that is skewed to make the core look balanced and make the noncore races, appear stronger than they are.
Mikaze Mar 6, 2014, 05:36 pm
Might I interest you in a half-dwarf/buggane, half-oread/rakshasa, or a half-gnome/flumph? ;)
Draconian could work for the Dragonborn analogue
or you could simply use Dragonborn because WotC can't technically copyright the name Dragonborn for a Draconic humanoid due to the concept of dragonborn being a generic concept anybody could come up with.
at least, certain concepts are so generic that they can't be copyrighted.
thaX Mar 6, 2014, 06:01 pm
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Yeah, I think Paizo would change the name anyways to avoid any problems. Draconian is a Dragonlance thing, right? Not the same, me thinks.
thaX wrote:
Draconian sounds cooler than Dragonborn
or create something fancy like Skyrim did, that basically translates to Dragonborn in Orcish
aboniks Mar 6, 2014, 06:10 pm
Yeah, I think Paizo would change the name anyways to avoid any problems.
Just call them Eivolk and leave it at that.
knightnday Mar 6, 2014, 06:10 pm
Ah good, this week's race thread is up! ;)
I like a variety of races and I like the core ones as well. I guess my response to it all is that there are no boring races, only boring players. (sort of like the comment about boring roles for actors).
The sterotypes that Umbriere mentions is not the only representation of that race. There are lots of ways to be different as a human or elf or whatever, just like there are lots of ways to be different as a cat person or giant slugman.
Todd Stewart Contributor Mar 6, 2014, 06:24 pm
Despite the fact that I've run almost exclusively planar campaigns since 2001, the majority of the PCs in those campaigns have been more conventional than not. At most one template really.
But the thing is, it's so much a bizarre coterie of races represented by the PCs (or not) in my experience, its that my players' selection of characters have always fit the tone and atmosphere of the setting.
If you're in Sigil or Galisemni, sure you'll see lots of tieflings, aasimar, and other planetouched alongside normal humans, more monstrous races, and some full blown outsiders. If you're playing in a less exotic setting, it rather behooves your players to pick less exotic PCs I think. As long as people keep that self-imposed notion of be in line with the setting when you pick PC concepts, you'll avoid many issues. Don't pick a half-celestial qlippoth blooded tiefling rogue/wizard/3 different PrCs if you're playing in virtually any place on the material plane (or heck if ever anywhere else as well). Respect the setting constraints as they are are you'll be fine (and yes, this is coming from the person who played a half-faerie dragon PC).
But you'll take my CN tieflings from my cold dead hands. >:)
knightnday wrote:
my issue with the steriotypes
is when i play a character so drastically different from the steriotypes of their race, even if they are of a similar race class combination, people tell me i'm having BADWRONGFUN.
whether it's the Dwarven Druid that speaks to the earth, works as a Feng Shui Master, and has a pet Jaguar he rescued from slavers in a jungle ship
or the Elven Huntress whom uses every part she can of what she kills, including, consuming the flesh of her slain humanoid foes or feeling more like a bounty hunter and brigand than a proper tree hugger.
or heck, a Gnome whom doesn't have a 50 syllable name, doesn't tinker with gears, and lives a warden in service to a nymph matron whom abuses her if she doesn't remember to clean the pond on the new moon of every month.
DM_aka_Dudemeister Mar 6, 2014, 06:27 pm
My groups are primarily composed of core races, with the occasional exotic outlier.
I'll say it again:
There is no one true way. Tastes vary from player to player, group to group.
It may not be in the spirit of the specific game, but definitely the spirit of the specific world. For semi spoiler free disclosure, the events in AP 71 don't take place in Golarion.
This is a game of creative freedom, imagination, and infinite possibilities. The only thing against the spirit of the game is saying that your* personal preferences should be how everybody else should play the game.
*Generic 'you'.
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Whatever happened to the classic races? All Messageboards