6 hours ago, tank0625 said:

What I'm hoping for is pretty straightforward. I want to find out if anyone else has used a mixed-species character. How they handled the stats for them. I have some ideas for background for creation.

I for one would argue that you shouldn't need to do this. I understand the min/max opinion of doing this taking the best of two different species and combining them. Instead I would follow Kualin's answer and choose which of the species is the dominant half and take those. I would not, for instance, try to combine the attributes of a Wookiee and a Defel to get a 3 in both Brawn and Cunning. If anything, I believe it would more neutralize imbalances, pushing the characteristics closer to all 2s. In my example of a Wookiee/Defel offspring, I would question if it would be as strong as all other Wookiees, it may have the cunning of the Defels but that may be more of upbringing and training.

Take the characteristic bonus of species A and the secondary bonus of species B and give him all the negatives from both species. Chances are there's already a species with those stats, you just have a different flavour (and probably more downside so munchkins will avoid it)

There you go.

The only time i've seen this mentioned in legends was in the Triple Zero novel of Karen Traviss. They mention about the clone whose girlfriend is a twi'lek that they can't have children (because she is twi'lek)

Obviously the TCW and Rebels rewrites everything, and lot of times contradicts the established universe / introduces new elements (from certain point of views) so go whatever you like

At the risk of derailing an otherwise highly amusing thread, we have some conflicting information between Legends and canon as well as inside Legends itself.

According to Legends, a large number of near-human species were the results of genetic engineering of baseline humanity by a sentient computer to solve a genetic defect another species. These new offshoot species were then enslaved by the creators of the machine and seeded to their respective 'homeworlds'. This brings us to the interesting question of what happens when you mix them together: obviously there are some rank incompatibilities - you will never see a Verpine/Wookiee cross - but with the species that are in Legends closer together you might get children, albeit those may not necessarily be viable. @Rimsen already stated that in Triple Zero we have it stated that Human/Twilek doesn't work, whereas we have in TCW and Rebels it working; this is a pretty easy solution: it's rare, most human-twilek couples are sterile but when you get the right mix of genetics on both sides you can get offspring. We also know humans can interbreed with successfully with Arkanians and somewhat less successfully with Miraluka (who are a canon species now by the way). For purely non-human couplings, I'd imagine Neimoidian/Duros should be functional as despite knowing little about the respective reproductive habits of the species we do know that in both canon and legends that Neimodians are a genetic offshoot of the Duros, although one far enough separated that they are considered a new species.

After this I'd imagine the potential fertility of the child of such a coupling would be a coin toss. We do after all have cross-species breeds in real life that are fertile even when the archetypal representative of that crossbreed is sterile (did you know that there are over sixty recorded cases of mare mules giving birth to functional offspring?).

Mechanically, I'd handle it as such: pick one species as the baseline (for my given examples: Human and Duros) and then use the stat block of the other species in the coupling. If you have a more patient GM or you are said more patient GM you might be inclined to mix the stat blocks between the two but remember that balancing such a thing is a little more tricky than it sounds.

Thank you for all the good feedback. My plan is to use the starting stats of of one species add/spend points to increase their stats. Example would adding to points to increase brawn in a Drall. This would make him a larger then average and possibly giving him a reason to leave. I don't think it will balance well if you mix states between two species. I feel it would be easier to balance species abilities and starting skills. Taking some from both but not all.

1 hour ago, BipolarJuice said:

At the risk of derailing an otherwise highly amusing thread, we have some conflicting information between Legends and canon as well as inside Legends itself.

According to Legends, a large number of near-human species were the results of genetic engineering of baseline humanity by a sentient computer to solve a genetic defect another species. These new offshoot species were then enslaved by the creators of the machine and seeded to their respective 'homeworlds'. This brings us to the interesting question of what happens when you mix them together: obviously there are some rank incompatibilities - you will never see a Verpine/Wookiee cross - but with the species that are in Legends closer together you might get children, albeit those may not necessarily be viable. @Rimsen already stated that in Triple Zero we have it stated that Human/Twilek doesn't work, whereas we have in TCW and Rebels it working; this is a pretty easy solution: it's rare, most human-twilek couples are sterile but when you get the right mix of genetics on both sides you can get offspring. We also know humans can interbreed with successfully with Arkanians and somewhat less successfully with Miraluka (who are a canon species now by the way). For purely non-human couplings, I'd imagine Neimoidian/Duros should be functional as despite knowing little about the respective reproductive habits of the species we do know that in both canon and legends that Neimodians are a genetic offshoot of the Duros, although one far enough separated that they are considered a new species.

After this I'd imagine the potential fertility of the child of such a coupling would be a coin toss. We do after all have cross-species breeds in real life that are fertile even when the archetypal representative of that crossbreed is sterile (did you know that there are over sixty recorded cases of mare mules giving birth to functional offspring?).

Mechanically, I'd handle it as such: pick one species as the baseline (for my given examples: Human and Duros) and then use the stat block of the other species in the coupling. If you have a more patient GM or you are said more patient GM you might be inclined to mix the stat blocks between the two but remember that balancing such a thing is a little more tricky than it sounds.

This is true of Ligers and other hybrids as well. Apparently, it’s the male hybrids that typically have trouble with fertility. This was brought up in a show on ligers on National Geographic Wild.

Tramp and Bipolar: Fascinating, both of your posts. Thanks!

On 11/9/2019 at 11:52 PM, ExpandingUniverse said:

wookie and ewok... ewokie? wookiewok?.. or ewwwwwwe

When I was little I do remember thinking that ewoks were some kind of small relative of wookkies... Probably a common mistake for kids.

What about a Gamorrean and Mon Cala mix. You'd get a Gamormon. They'd travel around the galaxy in pairs, wearing suits and referring to themselves as "elder", while peddling their own weird sci-fi religion. I wish I had an app to mix up a picture of that.

It's funny, my kids were asking me about why they are called "species" in Star Wars and "races" in Middle Earth. I understand the connotations, and it fits the sci-fi setting for Star Wars, but it would be weird calling elves, and dwarves and orcs "species", not to mention, feels anachronistic.

Actually, I just looked at The One Ring and they seem to use the terms "folk" or "cultures". Both of those terms seem pretty problematic too. Maybe the creators are steering clear of "race" as it was used in Tolkien's books, and "folk" isn't terrible, but I definitely wouldn't call elves and dwarves, or Wookies and humans, just different "cultures." Adventures in Middle Earth also uses "peoples" which isn't bad.

My kids were confused by "species" because it doesn't convey any sentience. A rancor, or a blurrg or a womp rat is also a "species", where as a "race" seems to have some kind of "personhood" about them. Maybe there is a better term than any of these? What about just defining "race" as what it was used for and explaining it has nothing to do with ethnicity?

As for the OP, I'm also curious as to what interesting mix you came up with and how it would benefit you.

Pathfinder 2e now refers to the races as Ancestries

5 hours ago, Mandelore of the Rings said:

What about just defining "race" as what it was used for and explaining it has nothing to do with ethnicity?

You can't do anything nowadays without hurting some special snowflake. Somehow for decades players could distinguish "race" in games and "race" IRL. But we constantly have to search for reason to get offended....

I always figured the parts didn't work together. Square pegs/round holes type scenario...

Wait, what do you mean it's not supposed to be square, stop body shaming!

The term "race" in DnD etc. Conotes 3 things: 1 personhood (although there were a lot of 'monsters' that straddled the line of having personhood), 2 that they different races could breed have children (e.g. half elves and half orcs), and 3) that PCs could play them (although this last one isn't a strict requirement)

The term species has historically connoted that they couldn't breed (or if they could the offspring probably wouldn't be fertile)

1 hour ago, EliasWindrider said:

The term "race" in DnD etc. Conotes 3 things: 1 personhood (although there were a lot of 'monsters' that straddled the line of having personhood), 2 that they different races could breed have children (e.g. half elves and half orcs), and 3) that PCs could play them (although this last one isn't a strict requirement)

The term species has historically connoted that they couldn't breed (or if they could the offspring probably wouldn't be fertile)

Race, in DnD, also connotes a fourth thing. (Though the term appears in other RPGs, old and new, and these are message boards for the Star Wars RPG, which uses "species", so it's not entirely clear to me why people keep bringing up DnD.) That fourth thing is mechanical (and, in-fiction, consistent biological) difference. This claim that there is a deep-seated biological difference, offering distinct advantages and disadvantages, is what has, in the majority of the past and a lot of the present, led directly to mass violence and injustice inflicted on the undeserving. That's not all that controversial a stance, I hate to relate. It's also not that controversial, especially in the medical or biological sciences, to understand that race is essentially a thing that exists in people's minds and not in genetics. The term for creatures that are truly, biologically different from one another, with attending advantages and disadvantages, is species. ( Even this is slightly more complicated than it appears. ) So, yeah, the right term is species. Even for people in a game where you tell stories about space-mages and planets that make sparks when they are exploded my layzors.

Oh, hey, look! The writers at FFG used the correct term already so there's really no debate here! That's a relief. For a second, I thought I was having to explain racism=bad on the internet.

Oh, hey, look, one or two of us were still trying to at least give the OP some useful replies! That's a relief. Now I can get to what I really logged on to say: if I were GMing for a player who wanted to play a hybrid-species character, I would ask them to take the most extreme base characteristics of each species--all the threes and all the ones, essentially--when they created the character. I like the idea of pushing the character to stand out, a la the liger.

42 minutes ago, BrickSteelhead said:

Though the term appears in other RPGs, old and new, and these are message boards for the Star Wars RPG, which uses "species", so it's not entirely clear to me why people keep bringing up DnD.

Probably because it was the first of many, many games to use this term during the innocence of our youth where it held absolutely 0 negative connotations for 99.99% of gamers.

Thank you for reminding everyone that the meanings of words change and what was once an innocent term is now considered socially taboo. I'm sure the ancients will appreciate your modern education.

My guideline for subjects like this is: "How would this play in a Flash Gordon serial?" - and Princess Aura was horny for everyone. Baren, Vultan, Clytus, the Boreworms (although that was more an S&M thing than sexual attraction to the species). So if all those races can generate the right pheromones to make them attractive to a nympho like that, then BOOM! compatibility! Sure!

This was actually brought up in one of the stories in Tales from the Mos Eisley Cantina . In particular, the one about the Gotal and Hn'meth couple. IT's stated by a friend of the Gotal that if members of two different alien species finds the other attractive enough to actualy want to mate with that other individual, then it is likely that they are also genetically compatible enough to produce offspring.

And if cloning technology is advanced enough to make custom genetic modifications, then it should be good enough to mix up some genes from two different species. 😲

6 hours ago, BrickSteelhead said:

For a second, I thought I was having to explain racism=bad on the internet.

Oh, please do explain. I know nothing about racism or injustice and I also have a hard time differentiating between my fantasy games and reality.

Yeah, I agree that it should be pretty rare to have mixed species. Makes for some fun characters though. I wonder what kind of advantages a Jacen Syndulla like character would have, if any. He kinda just looked like a greenish human. Yeah, "ancestries" isn't bad I guess but none of these terms seems perfect because they are all defining things that don't really have real world equivalents.

14 hours ago, Mandelore of the Rings said:

Oh, please do explain. I know nothing about racism or injustice and I also have a hard time differentiating between my fantasy games and reality.

Yeah, I agree that it should be pretty rare to have mixed species. Makes for some fun characters though. I wonder what kind of advantages a Jacen Syndulla like character would have, if any. He kinda just looked like a greenish human. Yeah, "ancestries" isn't bad I guess but none of these terms seems perfect because they are all defining things that don't really have real world equivalents.

Though the only things really green on him were his hair and the tips of his ears.

On 11/12/2019 at 7:38 PM, Ahrimon said:

Probably because it was the first of many, many games to use this term during the innocence of our youth where it held absolutely 0 negative connotations for 99.99% of gamers.

Thank you for reminding everyone that the meanings of words change and what was once an innocent term is now considered socially taboo. I'm sure the ancients will appreciate your modern education.

Do you honestly think that "99.99%" of DnD players, in some distant and "innocent" past, were both white AND socially unaware? Do you truly know and think so little of the gamers of history? And, further, that some older and dumber form of language, by its historical inertia, protects it from being changed or improved?

Eyeroll emoji, my dude. Eyeroll-freakin'-emoji.

On 11/9/2019 at 2:26 PM, Varlie said:

who wouldn't want to play a Toghutta character?

don't tempt me with this accursed potential!!!! lol I could easily toss this at my players.

in serious, as far as lore is concerned (given the twi'lek/human crossbreeds seen above), it's probably safe to assume that the more near-human the species are, the higher the probability is that a mixed-child could occur. So Pantorans, Mirialans, and Umbarans would be the most plausable ... whereas a MonCal/Wookie is something I wouldn't try to make your party buy into.

And yeah - stats I'd suggest just taking an average of perks.

On 11/8/2019 at 4:14 PM, EliasWindrider said:

My hypothesis had nothing to do with the guy being a clone, it was based on interspecies breeding...Horses and donkeys can mate to produce mules which are sterile. That was the thought process/reasoning.

Medical technology in Star Wars could probably overcome that for enough credits.

2 hours ago, thinkbomb said:

don't tempt me with this accursed potential!!!! lol I could easily toss this at my players.

in serious, as far as lore is concerned (given the twi'lek/human crossbreeds seen above), it's probably safe to assume that the more near-human the species are, the higher the probability is that a mixed-child could occur. So Pantorans, Mirialans, and Umbarans would be the most plausable ... whereas a MonCal/Wookie is something I wouldn't try to make your party buy into.

And yeah - stats I'd suggest just taking an average of perks.

I wouldn't even bother with that. I'd just have them pick one of the parent templates, and just go with that. And leave the hybrid nature as narrative flavor text or something. The species traits are incredibly minor in their variation really, as is the attribute distribution. I've got better things to do with my time than try and make some "balanced" but also getting both benefits type template. Just let them roleplay out the mixed heritage as dramatic flavor, but run with a regular template for mechanical purposes.

On 11/13/2019 at 7:59 AM, BrickSteelhead said:

Oh, hey, look! The writers at FFG used the correct term already so there's really no debate here!

Was just looking at my copy of Enter the Unknown. Most books list "Species Abilities" but this book lists "Racial Abilities", for the species Chiss, Duros, and Toydarians. Neither one bothers me. I'm not sure if it's just Enter the Unknown or if other books also use "Racial Abilities" interchangeably, but there we have FFG using the term.