Never mind missed the bonus language option.
Guys - I’m not sure I’ll be able to add custom race building to the Player’s Companion. If we make it to Bonus Goal #2, I can add a couple more race options. What races would you want to see?
I would LOVE to see goblins as a player race. In my homebrew they’re aliens (along with humans) and thus genetically pure, instead of being a beastman created by the Zahars. So, completely selfishly, I’d like to see an example of goblin kind 
To expand slightly - Goblins are a race that has mastered the secrets of elemental electricity. However, the dwarves stole it and there’s a bit of a cold war as a result. It fits fairly nicely with the Dwarven Machinist idea and I’m hoping to have a Goblin Tinkerer class that can produce something similar to the Kobold Clonker on the machinist thread but using lightning instead of clockwork. Then there’s goblin electrical abominations, a la http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-1Ly1fmY6bsY/TcedMcrtCYI/AAAAAAAAB_k/XLOAZg9smeg/s1600/Electrician.jpg
It’s a bit more Magic-punk than Classical era D&D, so I’d settle for a goblin race as class that I can riff off and reverse engineer a bit
Nobody wants to see the halfing, surely 
I suppose there’s gnomes if needs must.
What races would you want to see?<<
Well if you put new races, wouldn’t you also have to put a new class for that race (for the book not looking incomplete). That asite: i would like to see a mysterious gnome (not that dragonlace tinkerer - we have dwarves for that). - perhaps a druid/illusionist…i would’t mind a goblin snack, too
I have a preference (half-orc) but I think it would be better to poll all the backers who’ve contributed to the bonus when/if we get there
The tragic heritage of the half-orc, especially in this setting, offers a lot of roleplaying possibilities. (“Am I human or abomination? Curse the mad wizard that bred me in his sanctum!” or “Throk smash puny mage!”) So, I’m voting for a half-orc race-class.
I’m also a sucker for gnomes.
I am new here and don’t understand the hate-on for halflings, but if that is not on the table, I would also vote for gnome!
My hope was that my dwarves would have a PC-eligible servitor construct race.
I don’t personally like “half-X” races, and wouldn’t want another tinkerer (the dwarves have that covered).
If I was going to go for one of the monstrous races as a PC race, I’d go with Goblin, Hobgoblin, or full-blooded Orc.
A Goblin Wolf-Rider could be cool, and Hobgoblins and Orcs could work as mercenaries.
Colin
creases - the source of the halfling hate is me! Halfings were created by JRR Tolkien specifically as an example of a race that was NOT good at adventuring. That’s their whole point in the story; they are the unlikeliest heroes imaginable, the meek, the average, the overlooked. But because the Fellowship of the Ring was the original adventuring party, and it had halflings, every RPG since has riffed on Tolkien and made halflings one of the core adventuring races – missing the entire point. When a game includes halflings, they are aping the trappings of our fictional sources without understanding their context. Thus I refuse to make halflings a core playable race in ACKS for this reason!!*
I equally despise the idea that Klingons should be a core race on Star Trek: The Next Generation Federation starships (again, Worf was the exception, not the rule); the idea that Ewoks should be a core race in Star Wars RPGs; and so on.
*Except if Patron Deity-level backers want me to. I’m not THAT much of an idealist about it. Come on now.
Hey Alex, can you tell us your thoughts on Kender?
Don’t make me destroy you!
With the whole “Beastmen are constructed abominations good only for slaughter” vibe of ACKS, I’m actually against having goblins, orcs, etc as PCs.
I like the idea of half-beastman characters because in ACKS, the whole inner-man/inner-monster conflict would be much more crucial. Good role-playing fodder. The “unfortunate implications” of their conception probably wouldn’t be as sanitized as they are in D&D, either.
All that said, when I eventually get to play (as opposed to GM) ACKS, I’m totally going chaotic, just so I can hire me some wolf-riders.
Alex, thank you for your response!
I’m sorry to hear it though; some of the most fun I’ve had has been playing a halfling. I understand your point as far as it applies to Tolkien, but I have a different view about their role in fantasy rpgs. Oh well, I guess I’m out of luck!
As I take a closer look at the class-building rules, I can see that it’s actually fairly easy to separate race from class: one could simply create race-specific “packages” of abilities that are added onto the existing classes. Picking such a package would require recalculating the class’ XP chart and level limit, but it looks like it wouldn’t be too difficult, meaning that one could make a dwarven shaman or elven priestess if one desired.
Alex
I’m really sorry (and a bit confused) to hear race building guidelines couldn’t be included. Do they not follow some internal math that can be shown like classes?
But if we are limited to just prebuilt races…for the love of Zahar, please don’t do beastman or tinker races. Give us the Dragonmen of the mysterious East, the Dhamphir scions of Old Zahar, or the elemental children of the Jinn races. I realize that Acks is a retroclone, but it is unique in so many ways…let the races be different too!
((the Dhamphir scions of Old Zahar))
Oh now THAT sounds interesting! Of course, I’d be happy to hear anything more about Old Zahar.
It occurs to me that instead of making a whole Half-Orc class, I can just make a “Tainted by Beastman Blood” proficiency, modeled after the “Elven Bloodline” proficiency, and get what I want RP-wise. Neat!
Now to brainstorm…
Zing!
“Beastmen’s Blood”
Sometime the past, the seed of the hideous Beastmen entered your family line. This corrupted blood has manifested in you, twisting your body but granting you some monstrous benefits. You receive a +1 bonus to reaction rolls with Beastmen, but suffer a -1 penalty with Humans and Demihumans. You also have infravision of 90 feet. Evidence of your tainted ancestry manifests in some physical characteristic (prominent canines, sallow skin, porcine nose, red eyes, excessive body hair, etc.)
Available to: Assassin, Fighter, Shaman, Thief (and probably Barbarian when that class is released).
luftmensch: I’d think twice before making 90’ infravision available for a single proficiency. It’s more powerful than the infravision that “full-blooded” orcs have, for one (60’). If you analogize that to the Elven racial powers for the analogous bloodline proficiency, it should be a partial form of one-third to one-half strength. I’d also expect it to be somewhat disruptive to the Thief and Assassin classes, as the corresponding benefit to them would be a bit out of proportion to other proficiencies.
Remember also that the playable demihumans in core ACKS have no infravision at all, so I’d suggest that having such a power implies a difference that would have farther-reaching effects than a -1 to reactions.
I have also been trying to come up with a proficiency, similar to Elven Bloodline, to allow for half-orcs in my campaign. I’m kind of struggling as to what benefit it ought to provide. I want half-orcs to count as beastmen when part of a military unit consisting entirely of beastmen and/or half-orcs, but that has little or no impact on a PC. I definitely don’t want a proficiency that grants infravision. I was considering a +1 bonus to melee damage, as “mighty” is the half-orc’s traditional schtick, but I think that would be too generous. I like your +1 reaction rolls with beastmen, -1 with everyone else" idea, but is that enough for a proficiency? It seems like it’s kind of a push. Maybe a couple of bonus hit points, to model half orcs being “tough”? Or what about giving them a bonus on the Mortal Wounds table to make them tough guys? Hmm…I kind of like that idea. Has anyone experimented with granting bonuses on the d6 roll on the Mortal Wounds table?
Orc Blood: Due to some unfortunate event, you have at least one orc ancestor within the previous six generations. Your tainted ancestry manifests in some physical characteristic (green skin, prominent cainines, bestial eyes with little or no whites visible, etc.). You suffer a -1 penalty on reaction rolls when dealing with humans and demihumans, but gain a +1 on reaction rolls when dealing with beastmen. You gain 1 additional hit point at first level and a +1 bonus on the d6 roll on the Mortal Wounds table. You count as a beastman when part of a military unit consisting entirely of beastmen and/or other people with this proficiency.
Available to: General.
I’ll admit that giving “Beastmen’s Blood” infravision doesn’t really “pop” for me either. It’s the only thing I could come up with, though, that made me think of “half-human monster that lives in the night.” Originally it was just going to be 60’, but I changed it to 90’ because that’s what goblins have. In retrospect, that may have been a mistake.
I not’t entirely sure that having the equivalent of an Infravision Spell with the Permanency ritual is too game breaking for Thieves and Assassins.
James: I really like the bonus to the Mortal Wounds roll idea. That’s inspired!