Personally I feel that the bonus feat humans get at first level is too powerful a racial perk. Specifically because there are too many feat chains that have some sort of feat tax. That extra feat is just too appealing if you are trying to make your pc fit a concept.
For example: Technically no one but a human or a fighter can use a ranged weapon reliably in combat before 3rd level.
So, if the extra feat wasn't a human racial, what could Humans gain in return to keep them appealing as a choice?
"And so there was much gnashing of teeth by those who only play humans due to that bonus feat."
When thinking about this problem, I decided to give everyone a bonus feat at 1st level. People play other races now, since the powerful allure of the human isn't so strong if everyone gets an extra feat. I've had multiple people decide to play non-human races thanks to this.
Ideas for how to replace the bonus feat could be one extra Trait AND the ability to have more than 1 trait from the same category. So for example, the human could take 2 combat traits, and 1 social trait. Or all 3 traits would go to Magical traits. I haven't thought about this too much.
This way the versatility aspect is still there, but people won't feel the need to play human like they do now.
When thinking about this problem, and the overwhelming recommendation to always play humans by many people shows that it is one, I decided to give everyone a bonus feat at 1st level. People play other races now, since the powerful allure of the human isn't so strong if everyone gets an extra feat. I've had multiple people decide to play non-human races thanks to this.
So do humans get 2 bonus feats at 1st level now, or are they just totally unappealing since the only thing they have over other races is 1 skill point/level?
One idea is to simply add in one of the three alternate racial traits from APG. Persoally i don't feel like that'd be enough for me to mechanically want to play a Human, but the APG designers seem to think that's a sensible alternative. :)
When thinking about this problem, and the overwhelming recommendation to always play humans by many people shows that it is one, I decided to give everyone a bonus feat at 1st level. People play other races now, since the powerful allure of the human isn't so strong if everyone gets an extra feat. I've had multiple people decide to play non-human races thanks to this.So do humans get 2 bonus feats at 1st level now, or are they just totally unappealing since the only thing they have over other races is 1 skill point/level?
First level humans with no class features that grant bonus feats receive 3 feats at first level. 1 from the race, 2 from the 1st hit die.
If I see good ideas here, I'll probably snag them as a replacement for the free feat they get from being human, as long as they preserve the "human versatility" feel that they're going for.
Frankly the feat is the only real reason I ever see to be a human. the whole lack of darkvision or even lowlight vision is frankly debilitating with a smart GM and the extra favored class bonus choices, while nice, aren't enough to make up for the fact that other races gain large save bonuses and other such things
+1. I always play a dwarf or half-orc (if the DM is generous, a half-drow), just to get Darkvision.
I once felt the same way about humans and the bonus feat. Then I went out of my way to try new races and honestly? I really overestimated the importance of that bonus feat. It's nice, but my gnome and half orc characters were perfectly fine without it. I still had a lot of fun and my character was not terrible. It's a similar thing I found with not having an 18 in a stat.
Frankly the feat is the only real reason I ever see to be a human. the whole lack of darkvision or even lowlight vision is frankly debilitating with a smart GM and the extra favored class bonus choices, while nice, aren't enough to make up for the fact that other races gain large save bonuses and other such things
Agreed, The only thing that players like about human is the bonus feat.
They get stiffed in a lot of ways; no special vision, no racial skill or save bonuses, no resistances, no immunities, no racial weapon proficiencies.You name it they don't got it, they have only 2 things; a bonus feat and an extra skill point per level.
Flak: Yes the change I was leaning towards was granting everyone the extra feat humans get to compensate for the feat tax in a lot of trees.
But in doing that Humans need something in return.
I like Cheapy's trait idea but I am not sure that is enough and would like to hear some more ideas.
I'll go look at the alternate racial stuff for humans.
Thanks Cheapy, that's the clarification I was asking for.
Here's a suggestion: Give your humans an additional bonus feat, but limit them to certain feats, those that are sub-optimal choices, such as anything that gives a bonus to certain skill checks.
The half-elf called.. he wants his racial trait back. Juuuuuust kiddiiiiiiing.
Seriously, though, it could work.
The rationale behind the trait idea is that a) traits are worth half a feat (theoretically), so this is worth half of Extra Traits, and b) the ability to have more than one trait from a category is something that no other race can do. This won't be as powerful as the extra feat in some cases (Extra Traits isn't usually as good as say...precise shot), but the second part of the human ability will allow for some really cool combinations. You could have Hedge Magician and Magical Knack for your crafting Mystic Theurge, or Reactionary and Threatening Defender.
Basically, it allows for humans to do something no-one else can do from the start, no matter the class. Plus, with that ability it means that Extra Traits might be better than precise shot :)
But as I said, I came up with the idea while typing that post, so haven't really thought hard about it or checked all the possible combinations that could cause things to go whacky.
Or, if you prefer something less powerful, allow humans to have one skill that is always a class skill for them, regardless of class. I've been playing in my friends game where that is a house rule.
mmm, you're kinda stepping on the half elf's toes then Thomas
The class skill of your choice and the extra trait together don't seem bad at all.
Well there are other advantages to being a human. First of all your a human... so RP wise you will be accepted in most games.
Second the alternate favored class bonus for humans can be really insane for some classes.
If you wanted to give everyone a bonus feat at first level I would either use Cheapy's Idea or try giving humans 2 bonuses for their favored class bonus... so you would get an extra skill point and an extra hit point. Or a spell each level, and a skill point.
Basicly Humans would get an extra trait, and two bonuses from their favored class.
I don't see the extra feat as being that overpowered. Especially since humans also only get one attribute they can boost and lack any racial benefits such as vision which is truly a serious problem for most games I am in where the GM enforces vision limitations.
I can see how humans become the dominant "optimized" choice for concepts which have feat taxes, but I'm OK with that too since I don't really optimize that much.
If you want to give all classes a bonus feat and want to do something to benefit humans I think some of the suggestions here have merit, but I just don't see that it's necessary to give all races an extra feat. In fact it feels like power creep to me.
It is a little bit of a power creep. I can't argue that it isn't. But that extra feat at first level give humans a boost in power the other races don't get. And honestly open up a lot more cosmetically cool builds that the other races have to sit around and wait to pull off.
At 1st level, because of that extra feat,
The human can be firing (be it ranged weapon or spell) into combat better then any elf. Never mind try using guns with the new rules as a non-human.
Which leads to the fact Humans can be wielding exotic weapons in general faster and better.
Is changing it really necessary? no not at all, there's just something that seems OP about that extra feat, or that makes my players pick human 8 times out of 10 because that extra feat lets them create a guy that fits the image in their head without having to wait until 5th level for it to not suck.
The optimization crowd will go NUTS, but in my game, I keep humans much like humans in 3.5. They get a bonus feat; they get an extra skill point; they do not get any Stat bonus.
While I enjoy Pathfinder immensely, I think all of the races got boosts they didn't need. For Dwarves, Elves, Gnomes (grrr), and Halflings, they get a single +2 bonus and one -2 bonus. Dwarves are +2 Con, -2 Cha. Elves are +2 Dex and -2 Con. Gnomes are -2 Str and +2 Con. Halflings are -2 Str and +2 Dex.
Half-orcs get +2 Str and -2 Cha. Half-elves get NO attribute bonus or penalty, and replace their Skill Focus feat with any bonus feat they qualify for.
Works for me and my group.
Master Arminas
I don't see the extra feat as being that overpowered. Especially since humans also only get one attribute they can boost and lack any racial benefits such as vision which is truly a serious problem for most games I am in where the GM enforces vision limitations.
I can see how humans become the dominant "optimized" choice for concepts which have feat taxes, but I'm OK with that too since I don't really optimize that much.
If you want to give all classes a bonus feat and want to do something to benefit humans I think some of the suggestions here have merit, but I just don't see that it's necessary to give all races an extra feat. In fact it feels like power creep to me.
O I agree. I think humans are fine the way they are. In fact I like the idea of humans being the "Master Race". There are supposed to be more humans then the other races after all. But if the original poster has an issue or if the group likes to RP different races then the suggestions posted seem pretty fair. Everyone gets a feat and the humans get some other small bonus to compensate.
Atarlost, that's precisely why I give everyone a bonus feat. I also give weapon finesse and agile maneuvers for free. All that combined allows for playing your character concept earlier.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The problem is that because of tax feats only humans can play certain concepts at level 1.
That's not a bug. It's a feature.
Yes Atarlost, that's exactly it!
and stated more eloquently then I was managing.
Generally characters are supposed to suck at level 1.Thats why they're level 1. They're brand new and it takes a few levels to figure out all the tricks of the trade. Saying they suck just because they're level 1 and cant bash with their shield yet is like saying a wizard is level 1 omg he can't cast level 5 spells yet. Yet no one here is trying to rework casters so they don't suck compared to melee at low levels (Yes at low levels Fighters, Barbarians, and Paladins are the most powerful thing out there)
In short if you want something obscenely powerful late game the general rule is you have to give up something early. If this is just about rp and how you envision your character why change the mechanics? I feel that changing in game functional mechanics for flavor reasons is generally a bad idea but thats just me
So why should humans be exempt from sucking (as you put it) at level 1?
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
The rationale behind the trait idea is that a) traits are worth half a feat (theoretically), so this is worth half of Extra Traits, and b) the ability to have more than one trait from a category is something that no other race can do. This won't be as powerful as the extra feat in some cases (Extra Traits isn't usually as good as say...precise shot), but the second part of the human ability will allow for some really cool combinations. You could have Hedge Magician and Magical Knack for your crafting Mystic Theurge, or Reactionary and Threatening Defender.
Basically, it allows for humans to do something no-one else can do from the start, no matter the class. Plus, with that ability it means that Extra Traits might be better than precise shot :)
But as I said, I came up with the idea while typing that post, so haven't really thought hard about it or checked all the possible combinations that could cause things to go whacky.
I really like this idea. But is 1 extra trait and the ability to have 2 in one category = to 1 feat? Maybe not, but an intersting concept. I will try 2 bonus traits instead of the bonus feat in my next campaign. And be able to have 2 traits from only 1 category.
|
The problem is that because of tax feats only humans can play certain concepts at level 1.
Non-fighter archer? Must be human to not suffer being useless without precise shot. Until level 3.
Errol Flynn style finesse disarm build? Human fighter or wait until you level up.
TWF finesse rogue? Prepare to be absolutely useless until you get finesse from your first rogue talent. Unless you're a human.
Sword and board paladin? TWF and improved shield bash. Have fun with one missing until level 3 if you're not human. Seriously, that's like the most iconic paladin build ever.
Ye olde mace and shield cleric? Same problem as the paladin.
A lot of these are iconic concepts that are closed to nonhumans if play starts at level 1 unless you're willing to suffer through your character not matching your concept until level 2 or 3.
I don't see the problem. So you have to wait a few levels to be good at something. Aren't third level characters supposed to be better than first level characters. Hey Its not fair my wizard has to wait until 5th level to get fireball. I want fireball at first level! I know the issue is not exactly the same, but what happened to character develpment being fun. My elven rogue starts with 1 weapon but by 3rd level has developed the skill to fight with 2 weapons. This issue just does not bother me.
When I chose to play my Cavalier for Kingmaker, I chose the Eye For Talent over the bonus feat.
The bonus feat is nice, and it has an allure over the other traits for other races, but it is by no means (in my opinion) "necessary" to have to not suck.
I think the problem is with other races, since all their racial traits are very specific, so only specific builds can take advantage of them.
So why should humans be exempt from sucking (as you put it) at level 1?
Everyone who plays human at my last session was certainly sucking due to 20% miss chance thanks to the enemies using darkness spells to cover up our light.
I play a non-human archer druid. She is pursuing the point blank shot feat tree. At level 8 she has PBS, Precise Shot, Rapid Shot and Manyshot. I have played her from level 1, and our group levels up slow, so I played her in real life time over a year before she gained "precise shot".
I am sure she would be viewed as sub-optimal by many players.
I love the heck out of her. She views herself as an archer warrior who happens to be able to cast spells.
Yes, it would have been nice to have another feat to get a leg up on the feat tree. But she does OK. And if we take another round or two to win an encounter because she's one feat down compared to a human, well, that's fine with me. I like combat. It's fun.
Remember back when 7 feats was all you got by level 20 unless you were human? wow back then it was actually much more difficult to power game because you had to make sure you were getting the biggest bonuses you could so taking feat trees was risky business unless you were assured a big pay off at the endI play a non-human archer druid. She is pursuing the point blank shot feat tree. At level 8 she has PBS, Precise Shot, Rapid Shot and Manyshot. I have played her from level 1, and our group levels up slow, so I played her in real life time over a year before she gained "precise shot".
I am sure she would be viewed as sub-optimal by many players.
I love the heck out of her. She views herself as an archer warrior who happens to be able to cast spells.
Yes, it would have been nice to have another feat to get a leg up on the feat tree. But she does OK. And if we take another round or two to win an encounter because she's one feat down compared to a human, well, that's fine with me. I like combat. It's fun.
Indeed I do. In fact I remember when there were no feats...
As do I, having played 2nd ed. for years. But this isn't really a question of power gaming from my perspective. It's about the fact that humans, through their extra feat, get to:
a.) be better then all of the races even at what are supposed to be the other races niches.
and
b.) effectively make any other choice a poor one mechanically if you want to play a variety of classic character types.
Thats their racial trait. They're fast learners as 3.5 put it. They learn faster than other races. Thats the one leg up they get is they adapt quickly to the new lifestyle due to the background reading of humans. If you look at background reading of humans their one pride is their adaptability and thats what shows up in that feat.
Here's my problem with that. The other races are all longer lived.
So the 17 year old human picks up a bow and is automatically better at it then the 80 year old elf, that has proficiency with the long bow because of his alleged 30+ years of training and racial affinity.I'm not looking to change that though. That tidbit of warped verisimilitude has been around for decades.
I've seen more than one human ending up taking shadowstrike or blind fighting to compensate for not having decent vision. And there goes the bonus feat.
If humans could take lowlight or darkvision as their bonus feat a lot of PCs would do it. So in the end they would give up their strong point and end up having less then everyone else. So much for beingt overpowered.
I don't see the problem. So you have to wait a few levels to be good at something. Aren't third level characters supposed to be better than first level characters. Hey Its not fair my wizard has to wait until 5th level to get fireball. I want fireball at first level! I know the issue is not exactly the same, but what happened to character develpment being fun. My elven rogue starts with 1 weapon but by 3rd level has developed the skill to fight with 2 weapons. This issue just does not bother me.
This.
Humans in most worlds ARE the dominant/ most prolific race. WhY? Because they ARE good at things from go. They don't live to be 4000 years old. They don't see well at night. They have no innate magic. But they learn quickly.Realistically, Elves, 1/2 Elves and Dwarfs should only level every few years but game balance kinda blows that out. Players can choose to be something other than human and they get benefits for it, but they lose the bonus feat. Some players play Wizards and lose the bonus feats of 3 kinds of armor and martial weapons. Should we give everyone all the feats of every race and class?