Martiln wrote:

To those of you referring to the race builder in terms of qualifying for archetypes and so on: Race building is something dramatically different from each home game to the next, whereas the racial archetypes are meant to thematically fit each of the specific races in general, not the humanoid humans you create in your own game, that's your GMs prerogative if he wants to allow those. Another point I want to bring up are these lines taken from the ARG that most of you seem to have glossed over when making your case: "Typically, only members of the section’s

race can take the listed archetype, bloodline, or order,

though such options rarely interact with the racial traits

or alternate racial traits of that race. An archetype usually

features a thematic link to the race, granting it class

features that complement the abilities and the background

of the race."

Now I do see the contradiction in FAQs, but that quote from the ARG sums up most of the racial archetypes intended uses to begin with. Alas, I digress, the main question in this thread has officially been answered, whether you agree with the official ruling is up to you. It's not my job to tell you how to run your games, but as far as my games go, I'll be siding with the Devs on this matter.

Talk about glossing over...

, only members of the section’srace can take the listed archetype, bloodline, or order,though such options rarely interact with the racial traitsor alternate racial traits of that race. An archetype usuallyfeatures a thematic link to the race, granting it classfeatures that complement the abilities and the backgroundof the race."

I know of this passage and consider it a non-issue due to the presence of the word, "Typically". If that were not there, and it just started with "Only members of the section's race can take..." then I'd consider that RAW basis for limiting said archetypes, bloodline, etc. to the specific named race. However, the way it is actually written indicates that there is possibility for another race to qualify for the archetype (ie. hybrid, Racial Heritage).

The official answer given is in contradiction with both the rules and the previously issued FAQ (which, mind you, hasn't been retracted). That means that the officially given answer to the original question is invalid just as a programmer's code that crashes is invalid. It's useless because it can't be used in conjunction with other applicable rules. Furthermore, if the rationale is that the racial archetypes are supposed to represent certain genetic and cultural predispositions, I'd think that a Half-Orc is more qualified to take Scarred Witch Doctor than a Human with Racial Heritage (Orc). Half-Orcs actually do live in orc tribes and, occasionally, they achieve places of honor like chief's adviser or shaman. A Human who's great grancestor happened to be an Orc, on the other hand... I'd question how he came to learn such a closely tied cultural archetype. To put it exceedingly crassly, it'd be like a white guy who looks, talks, and acts "stereotypical white" but happens to be 1/32 black heading over to "da hood" and trying to pal around with "da brothas". Do you think a tribe of orcs, on being greeted by a human who claims to be a long-lost part of their tribe would take him the least bit seriously? The ruling fails on both mechanical and aesthetic levels. This isn't a matter of "siding" with anyone. There are no sides; it isn't a contest. It has been demonstrated logically (and, less important, fluff-wise) that the ruling is inadequate because it doesn't work. It's a defective product. The most important thing is to address that inadequacy. The Devs, presumably, want their game to run well and as free of such contradictions as possible. If they make an error such as this, they want to correct it. So you are not on the "side of the devs" because you would take a contradictory answer that effectively breaks the game system.