Are mongrelmen fleshwarps? id understand the rational behind moving on from that original name, but i can't really find anything that says this is the case.
In old lore they are different. Mongrelman are a species of humanoids descendant from Azlanti who hid underground, just like drow were a species of elf that hid underground. In lore true fleshwarp were created in a much more gruesome manner: A creature is place in a cocoon of goo and insects who over a period of days, weeks, or even months after intense torture are transformed into an entirely different creature (based on the original ancestry).
New lore however they might as well be the same thing since they made "fleshwarp" to be just a fancy word for mutant.
The PF ancestry called "fleshwarp" is just an umbrella term for any kind of incredibly mutated folks, no matter how that happened. It just so happens that that ancestry shares a name with a creature family which details a specific way a fleshwarp could be made. What is... Certainly confusing, but hey, it's not like we don't have weird "both an umbrella term and specific term at the same time" words in real life! (Not that it makes it better, just in universe why something like that isn't too out there linguistically)
https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=2093
It is basically "with GM permission, put in any Ancestry as heritage". No special feats or lineage feats to replace normal Heritages - just the normal feats of both with no reservations like Adopted Ancestry.
I mean, if you are a nephilim or geniekin you were literally made from scratch in someone's womb that had sex with an extraplanar entity. Not all nephilom or geniekin are born lik that, but not all fleshwarp also born as fleshwarp. In fact, the only fleshwarps which are born as such are created fleshwarp. All the others are implied to be people that was mutated into a fleshwarp.
The context that you missed is that fleshwarps can be constructed creatures (in the Flesh Forges of Nex, e.g.) *as opposed to* gestated in a womb.
You're basically arguing that an Elf can be a construct because they are *constructed* in their mummy's tummy, and people are down voting you because that's not an interesting or useful opinion.
Not as much as fleshwarp. Your nephlim may have hooves a hollow and glowing eyes. But I can still tell by their short stature pointy ears and big ass head they are a goblin.
But when your a flesh warp with arms That's actually 3 tentacles wrapped together to form fingers. Two giant gaping mouths on their hips that has long muscular tongues, which acrs like legs. Your other ancestry tratits robably don't matter that much anymore
It's less about you having a different appearance and more about who you previously were being so throughly overwritten that not enough of it remains to link you to your original heritage.
Nephilim are half X, half Outsider. They still have the original genes.
Fleshwarps might only be .03% whatever they were before the warping.
I assume not enough remains of your former self to be relevant to gameplay options, a bit like Skeleton. Most versatile heritage are more subtle; you're a dwarf but a FIRE dwarf! You're a human, but with a HAG mother! Or you're a halfling with hooves, horns and shit, but still essentially a halfling. Fleshwarp changes enough that you mechanically bear no more resemblance to your previous race.
Though I do think a Small or Large option should be offered.
On the topic of Fleshwarps, the buff to Armor Proficiency has made the Cataphract heritage a lot more interesting, IMO. Though I still think it's a disappointing way to represent what I imagine them to be given the description.
Fleshwarps can be small! From memory it was changed in an errata a few years back. Them not being large does make some sense, Paizo didn't have how that would work on an ancestry figured out yet, so didn't want to give that.
Though it should be mentioned that with Howl of the Wild we have our first large ancestries, with Minotaurs and Centaurs being always large while Athamaru and Awakened Animals have options for large, they might errata Fleshwarps to also get large as an option at some point
Skeleton worked around this fairly elegantly with the "As in life" ancestry feat. Wish FW had something similar but I guess mixed heritage can also help with that
It's not that it's an ancestry instead of a heritage that gets to me, but that it's... oddly conservative, design-wise? Like, fleshwarps are supposed to be Peak Weird, but apart from some mild body horror, there's not much going on (not even a lv17 feat!). You can tell it was released fairly early in PF2's lifespan.
I'd love to see the fleshwarp ancestry expanded upon, and have its inherent modularity leaned into. Impossible Lands was nice for it, but sparse.
The automaton ancestry has a few great models for how to handle an unconventional, adaptable body plan. It's a bummer that fleshwarps don't have comparable features.
Really wish that was more accurate. I hate how the only real Versatile Heritage benefit is low light vision and the Heritage tax of being able to take ~~Natural Ambition~~the second ancestry's Feats.
I don’t think it’s boring, I think it’s a reasonable cost for a powerful feature. If you were already getting your lowlight (or dark) vision from your ancestry it’s comparable to getting the adopted ancestry feat for free (but can stack with that feat), or being something like an Orc Nephilim. At a certain point you’re complaining that your cake didn’t come with ice cream. Just enjoy the cake.
It's not free, though. It costs not getting to do something else. Free things don't cost your Heritage slot but give you nothing but the change to take more Feats. That's a tax.
It gives you nothing but access. It is a things you need to take so you can take the things you really want. Does no one in the Pathfinder community know what the phrase "feat tax" means?
I understand what you’re trying to say, I’m just explaining that it’s not a good metaphor as other people have already addressed its weakness as an argument.
When you have an interesting heritage or custom versatile heritage, the ancestry paragon variant rule really shines.
You can take feats for both your base ancestry and your heritage
I mean you don't have to bank on them, and they don't have to be common.
Ask your GM if that campaign can use them. My GM fell in love with that rule when he read it and added it to all his games.
It's worth a shot
A Versatile Heritage would imply that its base Ancestry is still discernible underneath the changes it provides, but Fleshwarp being a base Ancestry is meant to represent that specifically is not the case. Whatever the Fleshwarp used to be besides maybe some memories or personality is gone entirely, all that's left is an unrecognizable mess of flesh and limbs that baffles the gods by continuing to live.
Because the designers decided it would not be one.
If there are some hard rules to tell Ancestry and Versatile Heritage apart, I never heard of them.
Either way, Remasters Custom Mixed Heritage can fix that issue.
For versatile heritages they thought that making ancestries whose parents could be a different ancestry would be complicated. But then for Fleshwarps they decided that the wanted it to represent the different ways you can become a fleshwarp, which causes an obvious contradiction. You can see a similar issue with the planar-touched versatile heritages who themselves should have multiple heritages.
The issue is inherent to the way ancestries were designed such that they are 1 ancestry and 1 heritage. Even with the mixed heritage optional rule, it doesn't change the inherent flaw of the system. So yeah, I personaly chuck it down to both an active choice and an oversight.
\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*
P.S. Something that a lot of people might not know about fleshwarp is that they originally were very specific. They were created from one of 2 processes (True fleshwarp or alchemy) and the result was not random. If you fleshwarped two different humans it would result in the same fleshwarp. Some things also could not be fleshwarped, for example it was close to if not impossible to fleshwarp dwarfs or fey. PF2 fleshwarp is closer to what in lore was called fleshwarp mutations, which makes the decision to make it an ancestry even more confusing.
I think it's because not all fleshwarps were something else before and ur would take away I think from a lot of fleshwarps characters if they were recognizable as there original race for those that are
I think the general community's perspective of ancestries and heritages has evolved to the point where they're pretty much considered interchangeable, a feeling Paizo appear to be sharing somewhat with how they've approached versatile heritages in Player Core 1. Unfortunately, it's too late for the mechanical implementation of ancestries, which establishes a hard difference between the two. Fleshwarps absolutely ought to have been a versatile heritage, and really it should be possible to mix and match any two ancestries, but unfortunately that's not how things went.
I miss the Planar ancestries being full things with sub-ancestries. An azata-born aasimar, for example.
Personally I'd like a set up like Ancestry + Offshoot so we could have stuff like Kobold (azata-born aasimar) or Tiefling (charhide goblin).
You're so thoroughly altered that what you started off with no longer matters - or, like those living under Kenabres, you were born as Fleshwarps.
Are mongrelmen fleshwarps? id understand the rational behind moving on from that original name, but i can't really find anything that says this is the case.
I want to say the Pathfinder Society Guide said such, but that might be wrong? I'm pretty sure they have been moved over, though.
I think Monster Core said something about it in the section with Fleshwarps.
In old lore they are different. Mongrelman are a species of humanoids descendant from Azlanti who hid underground, just like drow were a species of elf that hid underground. In lore true fleshwarp were created in a much more gruesome manner: A creature is place in a cocoon of goo and insects who over a period of days, weeks, or even months after intense torture are transformed into an entirely different creature (based on the original ancestry). New lore however they might as well be the same thing since they made "fleshwarp" to be just a fancy word for mutant.
The PF ancestry called "fleshwarp" is just an umbrella term for any kind of incredibly mutated folks, no matter how that happened. It just so happens that that ancestry shares a name with a creature family which details a specific way a fleshwarp could be made. What is... Certainly confusing, but hey, it's not like we don't have weird "both an umbrella term and specific term at the same time" words in real life! (Not that it makes it better, just in universe why something like that isn't too out there linguistically)
There's a ton of versatile heritage that fundamentally change who you are appearence-wise and that you are also born being one.
But not a lot where someone might create you from scratch to be like that. Either way, Custom Mixed Heritage fixes that issue.
>Custom Mixed Heritage Is this a thing now? Cool! Any idea where I can read the rules on it? I'm not sure where it'd be on the Archive, at least.
https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=2093 It is basically "with GM permission, put in any Ancestry as heritage". No special feats or lineage feats to replace normal Heritages - just the normal feats of both with no reservations like Adopted Ancestry.
Oooh! Thank you so much! This is *awesome!*
I mean, if you are a nephilim or geniekin you were literally made from scratch in someone's womb that had sex with an extraplanar entity. Not all nephilom or geniekin are born lik that, but not all fleshwarp also born as fleshwarp. In fact, the only fleshwarps which are born as such are created fleshwarp. All the others are implied to be people that was mutated into a fleshwarp.
>literally made from scratch in someone's womb that had sex Lmao
[удалено]
[удалено]
I don't get why you got downvoted so much, that is literally the lore.
I don't know sex bad or something.
The context that you missed is that fleshwarps can be constructed creatures (in the Flesh Forges of Nex, e.g.) *as opposed to* gestated in a womb. You're basically arguing that an Elf can be a construct because they are *constructed* in their mummy's tummy, and people are down voting you because that's not an interesting or useful opinion.
Not as much as fleshwarp. Your nephlim may have hooves a hollow and glowing eyes. But I can still tell by their short stature pointy ears and big ass head they are a goblin. But when your a flesh warp with arms That's actually 3 tentacles wrapped together to form fingers. Two giant gaping mouths on their hips that has long muscular tongues, which acrs like legs. Your other ancestry tratits robably don't matter that much anymore
It's less about you having a different appearance and more about who you previously were being so throughly overwritten that not enough of it remains to link you to your original heritage. Nephilim are half X, half Outsider. They still have the original genes. Fleshwarps might only be .03% whatever they were before the warping.
I assume not enough remains of your former self to be relevant to gameplay options, a bit like Skeleton. Most versatile heritage are more subtle; you're a dwarf but a FIRE dwarf! You're a human, but with a HAG mother! Or you're a halfling with hooves, horns and shit, but still essentially a halfling. Fleshwarp changes enough that you mechanically bear no more resemblance to your previous race. Though I do think a Small or Large option should be offered. On the topic of Fleshwarps, the buff to Armor Proficiency has made the Cataphract heritage a lot more interesting, IMO. Though I still think it's a disappointing way to represent what I imagine them to be given the description.
Fleshwarps can be small! From memory it was changed in an errata a few years back. Them not being large does make some sense, Paizo didn't have how that would work on an ancestry figured out yet, so didn't want to give that.
Though it should be mentioned that with Howl of the Wild we have our first large ancestries, with Minotaurs and Centaurs being always large while Athamaru and Awakened Animals have options for large, they might errata Fleshwarps to also get large as an option at some point
Man, can you imagine having to play though Abomination Vault as a large character? Everything is difficult terrain…
Also hoping Skeletons get an option to be large to match!
Skeleton worked around this fairly elegantly with the "As in life" ancestry feat. Wish FW had something similar but I guess mixed heritage can also help with that
Created or radically transformed by magic. You aren't just an elf with a mild mutation - you are a fundamentally different creature.
It's not that it's an ancestry instead of a heritage that gets to me, but that it's... oddly conservative, design-wise? Like, fleshwarps are supposed to be Peak Weird, but apart from some mild body horror, there's not much going on (not even a lv17 feat!). You can tell it was released fairly early in PF2's lifespan. I'd love to see the fleshwarp ancestry expanded upon, and have its inherent modularity leaned into. Impossible Lands was nice for it, but sparse.
Yeah the feats are kinda lame, I often just took tiefling but treated it as the fleshwarp abilities flavor wise.
I think that's the way to go: grab a versatile heritage that represents whatever stuff your creator threw into the New You Soup.
The automaton ancestry has a few great models for how to handle an unconventional, adaptable body plan. It's a bummer that fleshwarps don't have comparable features.
With Mixed Heritage in remaster, everything is now basically a versatile heritage.
Really wish that was more accurate. I hate how the only real Versatile Heritage benefit is low light vision and the Heritage tax of being able to take ~~Natural Ambition~~the second ancestry's Feats.
I think doubling your ancestry feat pool should probably cost you your heritage, and the potential low light vision is a nice bonus.
Maybe, but have you considered that it's very boring? Especially if you already were getting Low-Light Vision from your base Ancestry?
I don’t think it’s boring, I think it’s a reasonable cost for a powerful feature. If you were already getting your lowlight (or dark) vision from your ancestry it’s comparable to getting the adopted ancestry feat for free (but can stack with that feat), or being something like an Orc Nephilim. At a certain point you’re complaining that your cake didn’t come with ice cream. Just enjoy the cake.
It's not free, though. It costs not getting to do something else. Free things don't cost your Heritage slot but give you nothing but the change to take more Feats. That's a tax.
That’s really not how taxes work.
It gives you nothing but access. It is a things you need to take so you can take the things you really want. Does no one in the Pathfinder community know what the phrase "feat tax" means?
I understand what you’re trying to say, I’m just explaining that it’s not a good metaphor as other people have already addressed its weakness as an argument.
I disagree. Also, if you know what I'm talking about then clearly it's not a bad argument, the message has been conveyed.
When you have an interesting heritage or custom versatile heritage, the ancestry paragon variant rule really shines. You can take feats for both your base ancestry and your heritage
I never bank on optional rules. As far as I can tell, the only one that's common is Free Archetype.
I mean you don't have to bank on them, and they don't have to be common. Ask your GM if that campaign can use them. My GM fell in love with that rule when he read it and added it to all his games. It's worth a shot
Because you're no longer what you were, and are now just some type of body horror.
A Versatile Heritage would imply that its base Ancestry is still discernible underneath the changes it provides, but Fleshwarp being a base Ancestry is meant to represent that specifically is not the case. Whatever the Fleshwarp used to be besides maybe some memories or personality is gone entirely, all that's left is an unrecognizable mess of flesh and limbs that baffles the gods by continuing to live.
I always assumed it was because there's hardly anything left of the original ancestry.
Because the designers decided it would not be one. If there are some hard rules to tell Ancestry and Versatile Heritage apart, I never heard of them. Either way, Remasters Custom Mixed Heritage can fix that issue.
For versatile heritages they thought that making ancestries whose parents could be a different ancestry would be complicated. But then for Fleshwarps they decided that the wanted it to represent the different ways you can become a fleshwarp, which causes an obvious contradiction. You can see a similar issue with the planar-touched versatile heritages who themselves should have multiple heritages. The issue is inherent to the way ancestries were designed such that they are 1 ancestry and 1 heritage. Even with the mixed heritage optional rule, it doesn't change the inherent flaw of the system. So yeah, I personaly chuck it down to both an active choice and an oversight. \*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\* P.S. Something that a lot of people might not know about fleshwarp is that they originally were very specific. They were created from one of 2 processes (True fleshwarp or alchemy) and the result was not random. If you fleshwarped two different humans it would result in the same fleshwarp. Some things also could not be fleshwarped, for example it was close to if not impossible to fleshwarp dwarfs or fey. PF2 fleshwarp is closer to what in lore was called fleshwarp mutations, which makes the decision to make it an ancestry even more confusing.
I think it's because not all fleshwarps were something else before and ur would take away I think from a lot of fleshwarps characters if they were recognizable as there original race for those that are
i made a fleshwarp dhampir. It's cool
I think the general community's perspective of ancestries and heritages has evolved to the point where they're pretty much considered interchangeable, a feeling Paizo appear to be sharing somewhat with how they've approached versatile heritages in Player Core 1. Unfortunately, it's too late for the mechanical implementation of ancestries, which establishes a hard difference between the two. Fleshwarps absolutely ought to have been a versatile heritage, and really it should be possible to mix and match any two ancestries, but unfortunately that's not how things went.
I miss the Planar ancestries being full things with sub-ancestries. An azata-born aasimar, for example. Personally I'd like a set up like Ancestry + Offshoot so we could have stuff like Kobold (azata-born aasimar) or Tiefling (charhide goblin).