Gnome? Overused? Really? In all the groups I've played in Gnome is usually not even considered by most PCs. I love'em, but I don't see it.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
I think the gnome is really under utilized. (Hence the several threads on this boards praying for a new take on gnomes and halflings so that people take them more seriously.)
I agree about the Drow though. Cool concept, they've just been beaten into the ground and now I'm sick of them.
I think dragon hybrid races are overused as well (including half dragon templates, dragon disciples, dragon whatever).
Gnome? Overused? Really? In all the groups I've played in Gnome is usually not even considered by most PCs. I love'em, but I don't see it.
I not only echo Khezial sentiments on gnomes, but extend them to drow as well. The Level Adjustment are just too steep to make drow a playable character IMO. I think game designers in the latest DnD podcast agree.
I not only echo Khezial sentiments on gnomes, but extend them to drow as well. The Level Adjustment are just too steep to make drow a playable character IMO. I think game designers in the latest DnD podcast agree.
I'm surprised you don't see Drow popping up in your games often. Despite an question of their LA, my players still try to slip them in. After those damned RAS novels we had to start a whole drow party because everyone was so caught up in the "woe-is-me-nobody-likes-me-but-I'll-save-them-anyway" CG Drows. Except me and the GM. I hadn't read the books yet and he hated them and told me not to. I wish I followed his advice...
Would this be a bad place then, to mention I plan on introducing Drow in my setting as a decadent dying Empire dedicated to the Abyss and finally destroyed by it's Albino emperor in Exile?
Well elves are kind of overused - and in general stereotypical - My name is Kyr and I am an elf-o-holic - though I am proud to say I have been able to muster enough of my tattered willpower to never cross to the "Darkside" and play a Drow. Most probably because D'Rzzt (or whatever his name is) favorite drow strikes me as broken, overpowered, and well silly. Anyway...
I think that of playable races Genesi ingeneral are the most overlooked - it would be great if they were adjusted to have a level adjustment of +0 but I think the concept of characters with a touch of magic, especially an elemental spin, is cool.
I also think goblins and normal orcs could be good +0 player races and are often overlooked.
Agree on the goblins and orcs thing. The main brawler in my current group is a LG Orc battle sorceror/dragon disciple. In another side campy, we're running an all kobold party, which is always fun. Goblins just get no respect no matter what you do with them. And yeah, I'm over the million different varieties of elves and dragon crotchfruit. Oi.
Contributor
|
I've run an all goblin campaign and it was excellent. I gave the players options of goblins, hobgoblins and bugbears and they all opted for goblins.
Size small with a 30' move makes up for the -2 Cha. I think Goblins are the most playable humanoid race in the monster manual beyond the 7 major races. Orcs are probably second. I'd never play a creature with a LA, I've never seen it be worth it.
I really like the Shadar-Kai race from Fiend Folio. They have a cool concept and good abilities, although they have a ECL of waht...+1 as I recall. In my campaign there is a Shadar-Kai cohort of one of the PCs. She is a Cleric/Acolyte of the Ebon Flame, so a clerical assassin, she is awesome at hiding and sneaking, but also disarming (with her spiked chain) and other tactical support for the main players. I have not heard of many other folks running/playing a Shadar-Kai, but I know the race has traction, or at least thats what they say over a WoTC.
The coolest thing about them, is how their souls are bound for the shadow plane. I expanded on this using the information given about the shadow plane in Dragon Issue #322, associating them with the God of Shadows. When the Shadar-Kai cohort was killed by a fallen sword archon's discorporating attack, her soul was captured by a Shadow Demon who works for the Shadow God, and tortured to prepare her to meet and become enslaved to the evil God guy (all part of the Shadar-Kai pact when they tried to blot out the sun). Needless to say, the PCs saved her, by trading a more powerful soul to release hers.
It was great fun.
I've run an all goblin campaign and it was excellent. I gave the players options of goblins, hobgoblins and bugbears and they all opted for goblins.
Size small with a 30' move makes up for the -2 Cha. I think Goblins are the most playable humanoid race in the monster manual beyond the 7 major races. Orcs are probably second. I'd never play a creature with a LA, I've never seen it be worth it.
I ran an old school Broken Lands game once to great effect there with lots of humanoids especially goblins.
If the Original Poster is looking for unusual NPC races might I suggest yak folk. I mean they could be in you game right now hidden amongst your seemingly good outcast, dual-scimitar-wielding drow rangers, no one would even know. And if anyone did you could bet that they would get there genie slaves to silence them forever. They are, big, smart, have strange arcane powers (like drow), are overlordy, stylish, self-righteous, masters of manipulation, can inject paranoia into the game and just appeared in the Seeds of Sehan adventure arc. Also they are associated with a good number of other races (such as genies, PC races and giants). What more could you want in an under-the-radar race? I'm willing to bet by next summer players will catch on and everyone will be playing good outcast, dual-scimitar-wielding yak folk rangers.
Another possibility, though they are not quite as under-the-radar, might be the yuan-ti. There are so many monsters and variants associated with them as well as their own considerable snakey style that you could run a very interesting campaign with them as the primary antagonists and never have it be dull.
-GGG
|
|
Gnome? Overused? Really? In all the groups I've played in Gnome is usually not even considered by most PCs. I love'em, but I don't see it.
Agreed. In my experience, the Gnome has always been the most underused, and to some extent, so are the Drow, for they rarely get any playtime either. Since they first came into D&D, I've seen Drow play perhaps a handful of times.
All this being said, the most played races are Humans, surface Elves coming in a close second.
Thoth-Amon
I'm willing to bet by next summer players will catch on and everyone will be playing good outcast, dual-scimitar-wielding yak folk rangers.
... I don't see it.
Anyway, I do like the idea of yak folk or yuan-ti as the main antagonists of a campaign or campaign arc. I've only run one adventure with yuan-ti, but even that was enough to demonstrate that these things are freaking scary (me likey abominations!).
Re: the humanoid discussion above. I agree that "savage humanoids" (orcs, goblins, kobolds, etc.) make very good player races. The only problem is a lack of a defined culture. This hurts them in two ways.
1. It makes it difficult to see/explain how they could turn from being "just monsters" (which is how they are treated) into PCs. The general impression one gets is that "normal" folk run from these beasts on sight (or kill them, if capable).
2. They all overlap. Just about every savage humanoid is portrayed as a stupid, evil, tribal, cave-dwelling monster. Do we really need more than one of those? The amount that any given race gets used then become a matter of DM preference- why specific set of stat bonuses do you find the most appealing, or which looks the coolest? Rather than actually having identities that make sense in the game world.
I've done quite a bit of work on the races in my world so that I can actually make them distinct and "valid" (gnomes need this treatment, too, and even elves and halflings to an extent, as mentioned above), and I encourage all DMs to do so as well. I am sooo happy Pathfinder is actually working on racial identities. And I dare say that players will respect the singing, psychotic goblins of Varisia!
Oh, and (although I love them) I think elves are probably the most overused "common" race, and only second in underdevelopment as a (PC) race and culture (after gnomes).
IMC, I've been runnng a huge gnoll invasion, but I made them usually LE, vice CE, and gave them a mongol/ arab warrior culture. "Me against, my brother, my brother and I against the Farang!!!" The next story arc will pick up some time down the road, and Gnoll may be a playable PC race. The LA+1 and 2 HD may dissuade some, but they are pretty strong critters for all that.
|
Contributor
|
I agree with Saern about overlapping monstrous humanoids.
I tend to focus on one type for a given campaign. Usually goblinoids.
In one of my earlier campaigns (under 2E), I actually merged several humanoids and said that the different names were just different names for the same creature. Notably, orcs=hobgoblins, bugbears=ogres=trolls.
This was fun too, because i never revealed anything about their stats. It took a long time for the PCs to figure out that the bugbears were regenerating.
I've never viewed any humanoid race as just being there to kill. Certainly they frequently come up as opposition, but for the most part, if my group were exploring a wilderness area and found a humanoid village, they would not immediately respond violently. They wouldn't be blindly trusting either... and of course if they encountered a bunch of gnolls (or whatever) in a 'dungeon' setting, they would likely attack first and ask questions later.
EDIT: I forgot to mention, I do also have the general population of npcs treat monstrous humanoids as monsters to fear or fight.
|
IMC, Orcs are nomadic plains dwellers (no penalty from bright light). Hobgoblins mostly live in cities, often intermixed with humans. Cave dwellers run more to the non-homeothermic races: kobolds, lizardmen (though there are swamp-dwelling lizardmen, too), and troglodytes (who knew?).
I've had one goblin and no drow PCs in the campaigns I'm currently running or playing in, so I agree that they are dramatically overrepresented. (Not overrepresented would be no PCs, no NPCs, and no mention of the possibility of their existence.)
I like what Pathfinder did with goblins; still trying to figure out if that makes them more acceptable as PCs or not (they're even creepier now, but at least they have an identity to work with).
I think of hobgoblins as roving bands of professional soldiers. They move into an area and fight for dominance. They construct a fort and live a spartan, military lifestyle. If they secure a position, then they continue to build and soon form a fortress community, which often serve as trading posts for other savage or evil races that humans don't like to trade with. If they loose position or dominance, then the survivors retreat and invade somewhere else, until they all die or conquer a region. Where there are hobgoblins, there is war (or at least the simering potential for it).
I like orcs as mountain dwellers (but not necessarily in caverns, and I disposed of the light sensitivity as well). Dwarves live under the stone, and the orcs live above it. Dwarves have to be very careful if they ever come out of their underground kingdoms, because the orcs rule the slopes. They like spears (because Gruumsh does), and so they use bones, sharpened timbers, and even metal to make all of their art, architecture, and tools/equipment spikey.
Gnolls are hunter/gatherers, but tend to lead raids for slaves, who build large, wooden and earthen, walled compounds where the gnolls live. They leach off an area and raid for as long as they can, and then migrate when opposition is too tough. They use wolves more than hyenas, and are fond of hunting at night.
Kobolds live underground and are a problem for miners, who often stumble into their warrens only to find the territorial creatures throwing javelins and lightning bolts at them. They feature dragons prominantly in their culture and pride themselves on the supposed relation. If you at least feign respect, awe, and present them with treasure for their "hoards," they can be bargained with.
Lizardfolk are swamp dwellers, a tribal, shamanistic people who care little for the fleshy folk, but trade with them more frequently than fight. That is, unless they catch you trespassing on their lands. Then there's about a 50/50 chance of being eaten.
Troglodytes are strange cave dwellers who rarely interact with kobolds more than any other race. Little is known about them, except that they stink and are exceptionally foul-tempered.
I still don't have much of an idea for bugbears.
I also like to keep in mind that the "evil" humanoids are like mirror images of the typical PC races- most are assumed good, or at least neutral, but there are plenty of evil ones as well. Likewise, most "savage" humanoids are evil, but there are plenty of neutral or even good ones, as well (although their cultures and deities make the latter rare).
In all of my years as a Forgotten Realms DM, from about 1987 on, I have had exactly one player want to play, and proceed to play, a drow, and that was last year, in my first real "evil" campaign, as a drow hexblade in Skullport trying to prove his worth as an assasin to the Zhentarim. Not exactly a Drizzt clone.
Has WOTC had RAS write too many novels focusing on Drizzt? Yeah, most likely. Are drow overused in D&D (for example in adventures and the like)? I don't really think so. You can find more undead, dragons, fiends, etc. than drow in official adventures, or even as statted NPCs in campaign settings.
Its funny that RAS and FR get brought up as the reasons that people want to play drow as PCs. I won't deny that Drizzt made the "drow PC" seem like a cool option. But why was it an option? Because, before The Crystal Shard ever came out, the 1st edition Unearthed Arcana introduced drow as a PC race. Including allowing drow to be rangers (which meant, by extention, that good drow were being tacitly allowed, since in 1st edition, rangers had to be good).
Drizzt was a good drow ranger because it was an option in Unearthed Arcana.
To be honest, no matter how much I like a character, I don't get the "complete emulation" concept of character design. I liked Raistlin when I first read DragonLance novels, but I don't want to play a sickly possessed sarcastic wizard. I liked Caramon too, but I always liked to play intelligent fighers, and never really wanted anyone in my groups to play his twin.
I can't really cite an "overused" race, unless you count human, because most of my players in all editions have choosen humans. As far as underused goes, I'm hard pressed to remember any gnomes, halflings have been pretty rare, and half-orcs haven't come up very often either.
|
|
Gnolls are cool, hobgoblins are neat, I like lizardfolk.
What about bugbears ?
Yep, I know you've got that +1 ECL, and 3 monster level to go through, but bugbear is really a powerful race, IMHO.And quite interseting since it's easy to take 2-3 rogue levels in any kind of multiclassing.
However, the bugbear in a group will NEVER be the hottest spellcaster, may it be divine or acane...
I've found that just a little bit of planning can give any race the edge with surprise
ON HALFLINGS
I was playing around with Halfling character concepts and found it's incredibly easy to come up with a stunningly powerfull melee combatant.
I decided to see what a halfling could do as a barbarian. His starting scores after racial adjustment were STR 16, DEX 14, CON 18, INT 10, WIS 11, Cha 10. He used a small Great Axe (1d10 damage, x3 crit), and wore studded leather. The barbarian class raised his base speed to 30, and His +2 DEX racial bonus and +1AC size bonus offsets the -2 AC penalty during a rage. BA +4 (+3STR, +1 Size) Damage 5-14, Damage RAGING 8-17
At 4th level or higher if he has a spellcasting friend (arcane or divine) cast bulls strength on him he would do 11-20 points of damage while raging Str 24 (16+4 rage, +4 enhancement). a successful critical would mean 33-60 points of damage.
ON KOBOLDS
Although Kobolds are often considered cowardly simpltons. They aren't actually any less intelligent than your average race (elves, Humans, Halfling, etc.) and played right the "cowardance" is a cover used most often to buy time for them to regroup and set up ambushes.
The Races of the Dragon gives a general overview of kobold culture on pgs 37 -54. It also has a section for designing a Kobold community on pages 142-145. In the section that describes the population makeup it shows that 25% of the general population can be Multiclassed sorcerers. and another 25% could have undergone what's called the Draconic Rite of Passage (DRP) where they sacrifice 1 HP to gain a 1st level sorcerer spell as a spellike ability useable once per day.
So even in a group of 12 average kobolds (CR2) three of them could cast 1 spell, Burning hands, Magic Missile, ray of enfeeblement, and cause fear are just some of the possibilities.
I like lizardfolk.
FH
Me too!
I also like kobolds.
You no I never used drow as an npc antognist. I ones had a druid character in a campaign my uncle ran who had an affair with a drow, way back in 1st edition. I have only had one player play a drow. You seee them every where though in games and literature. So for that reason I am tired of them.
I love gnomes though, it seems that I have been the only person to play them. I also have a vampire gnome bard who was a sneaky, beguiling antoganist who was always charming one pc or another to escape.
I like the genasi as a pc but that pesky LA.
I am also a fan of goblin pcs. I remember playing one back in college during the 90s.
I also like the idea of a kobold pcs. I think I'll play a kobold sorcerer next time I get a pc.
As a PC race .., Humans are overused. The majority of pcs I have seen at the game table have been human.
How about a campaign with no humans.
|
|
As a PC race .., Humans are overused. The majority of pcs I have seen at the game table have been human.
How about a campaign with no humans.
A lot of our old 2E games ended up with no humans in the group.
The last 2E game I was a player in before we changed to 3E, we had a Sylvan Elf, a dwarf, an Aasimar, a Cambion, a half elf, an Urda, a Drow and a satyr.
Not a human to be seen...
Humans have been much more common in our 3.x games though.
Overused; Tends to be Humans and Elves
Underused; Gnomes and Halflings, no one ever seems to play them. Not sure why but they never do, and if they do they either act like the dragonlance alternatives, or a bumbling imbecile!
Overlooked; All the Humanoid races, orcs, goblinoids, gnolls I love these races and will always try to play one if able to.
I think a lot of problem is LA/Ecl adjustments especially for the stronger none-magical/special power races.
The LA/Ecl always cripples your character so much, that most people avoid it and play humans for the extra feat!
Always humans, always the humans.
I do have two guys in the group, that will always play a Dwarf and Elf.
They always seem to be best buddies (they work together) its Tanis and Flint, every cursed campaign.
|
|
I do have two guys in the group, that will always play a Dwarf and Elf.
They always seem to be best buddies (they work together) its Tanis and Flint, every cursed campaign.
Love the takes on elves and halflings in Eberron (where I'm currently setting my game). Also with Gobbies and Orcs. Orcs being shamanistic is very much like the half orcs me and a friend PCed in our last game and worked great (I got into a Barney with a PC elf once over the table along the lines of "why are we going to go attack a village of orcs for money again other than the usual xenophobic elf race hatred?")
Also I fing the Drow in Eberron refreshing. Even the humans invading from Sarlona is great (I live in Australia so an invading Caucasian population a a rich indigenous culture is fresh in our minds). But the biggest 2 thumbs up for me is the half elves! They are their own race (Khoravar) and are a massive power block with a racial history. Don't trust Dwarven bankers either ... I have currently goblin workers in Sharn unionised striking for better conditions after Dwarven run mining operations under the city were accused of unfair dismissal of Indiginous (Goblin) labour due to hiring warforged (Golems) for less pay (Figgured it was better to lay down tools than take up arms and hit the dwarves where it hurts ... their pockets).But I agree with some about GNOMES - never really got them. Like a cheesy fey dwarf crossbreed and just seem to be comic relief or plain unnessecary.
What I have never understood though is why there has never really been any difference in the look of hobgoblins and orcs. We can argue over alignment, statblocks and even social dynamics but although I know a kobold and a bugbear when I see one I've yet to see anything difinitive that allows me to tell an Orc from a Hobgoblin. And that's why they get underused in many games.
RE: Hobbo's v Orcses- the big difference is the CE v LE alignment. It keeps the Orcs primitive and tribal, raiding for resources and living in filth, while the hobbos create mountain strongholds filled with slaves who toil over beautiful weapons and armor, while the hobbos themselves drill relentlessly, adding strength to strength. One area of my home brew uses hobbos extensively as the elite troops of the empire, sort of a fuzzy Varangian Guard. I think what holds them back is a slightly underpowered LA, in that the +2 dex and Con don't really add up to a good reason to take the hit. IRC, hobbos used to be the DnD version of the Uruk Hai, bigger, stronger goblins, but that role has been taken by Orcs in the latest edition.
I never even considered Gnomes as a race before when creating characters, and then along came Sir Fonkin. For a bit of a laugh when we were down 2 people one night we created a group characters for an "arena battle" with various monsters. Trying to create the most ridiculous character I could I created a Gnome Knight (PHBII)called Sir Fonkin. I didnt realise then how much he would rock.
I used a 27 point buy on him his stats are roughly
STR 10
DEX 12
CON 18
INT 13
WIS 8
CHA 14
He has TOWER SHIELD PROF, SHIELD SPECIALISATION, and COMBAT EXPERTISE
At level 5 he has 59 HP, and when fighting full defense has an armour class of about 32 (+1 Small, +1 Dex, +8 full plate, +6 Towershield (+4 Base, +1 knight ability and +1 Shield spec) +4 full defense, +2 amulet of natural armour). His knight challenges also forces everyone to attack him, usually this cause's them to miss.
Sometimes the party Sorcerer casts Reduce Person on him make hia armour class even higher. :D
Gnomes rock.
|
|
There may be 7 player races, but in my games there are really only 2. This is because my players only choose human or elf. I'd rather give my players 7 PC races that they'd like to play instead of only two. Therefore, the unchosen 5 are going the way of the dodo. I am going to replace them with more interesting races-- races that the players might actually WANT to play.
For example, I will probably replace the halflings with KENKUS. Kenkus could easily fill the small-halfling-rogue stereotype. But I find the Kenkus to much more interesting and cool. I think my players will as well and may actually choose one for their character.
|
There may be 7 player races, but in my games there are really only 2. This is because my players only choose human or elf. I'd rather give my players 7 PC races that they'd like to play instead of only two. Therefore, the unchosen 5 are going the way of the dodo. I am going to replace them with more interesting races-- races that the players might actually WANT to play.
For example, I will probably replace the halflings with KENKUS. Kenkus could easily fill the small-halfling-rogue stereotype. But I find the Kenkus to much more interesting and cool. I think my players will as well and may actually choose one for their character.
Thats weird. My group always picks Dwarves and Humans, with a smattering of halfling and gnome. Elves are almost never picked. Strange how different groups have different attitudes towards the races.
FH
|
|
There may be 7 player races, but in my games there are really only 2. This is because my players only choose human or elf. I'd rather give my players 7 PC races that they'd like to play instead of only two. Therefore, the unchosen 5 are going the way of the dodo. I am going to replace them with more interesting races-- races that the players might actually WANT to play.
For example, I will probably replace the halflings with KENKUS. Kenkus could easily fill the small-halfling-rogue stereotype. But I find the Kenkus to much more interesting and cool. I think my players will as well and may actually choose one for their character.
A possible salve for your problem is having a good look at the Eberron Campaign Setting book. Not to say that it is a setting you would want to play, though it is my favorite but:
Halfling rogues are kind of boring, but halflling rogues attached to the Boromar clan, one of the most powerful organized crime families in the largest city have a certain spark. Barring that, the thought of dinosaur riding halfling barbarians is a tad more unique still.
PHB gnomes, meh, gnomes who are racially obsessive/compulsive in regards to the pursuit of information and intrigue a tad more. And when that pursuit has lead them to discover and horde ancient magical secrets yet better. Add an organized, nigh permanently invisible secret police force protecting gnome interests.
Half-orcs, or even full orcs are brutish. But if that brutishness and connection to nature was once harnessed by an ancient dragon, who taught the orcs to commune with nature and use it to defend their world from an extra planar invasion?
Oh well, you get the point. If you only look at the PHB, every races has been effectively pigeon holed into typical roles, and they are pretty drab. But if you dress up those roles (like the crime family example) or completely break archetype using nothing more than backstory (halfling barbarian) you can make them interesting again.
Just my 2 coppers
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
There may be 7 player races, but in my games there are really only 2. This is because my players only choose human or elf.
I've run into this problem a lot, too. My players seem to enjoy planetouched characters as well, either tiefling or aasimar mostly but the occassional genasi gets through. Half-elves pop up from time to time (usually half-drow). Every once in a great while we'll get a dwarf and, even less often than that, we get a half-orc. Gnomes and halflings just aren't done. In fact, let me think here...
PbP #1 (Fade): PCs are 3 human, 1 dwarf.
PbP #2 (Echoes): PCs are 3 human, 1 half-drow.
PnP #1 (Spellfire): PCs are 2 elves, 1 aasimar.
PnP #2 (Plague): PCs were 2 human, 1 elf.
PnP #3 (Neverwinter): PCs were 2 human.
PnP #4 (Twisted): PCs were 1 human, 1 elf.
PnP #5 (Dragonstar): PCs were 6 human, 1 elf (later turned half-dragon).
PnP #6 (Ravenloft): PCs were 3 elf, 1 human, 1 half-elf.
Out of 30 total characters we have 18 humans, 8 elves (one became a half-dragon), 1 half-elf, 1 half-drow, 1 dwarf, and 1 aasimar. That's our gaming group for ya. The campaign titles are just there for me to organize my thoughts. This is also not counting a few of our limited-run "oddball" games where the DM MAKES US play something that isn't in the PHB. The last one of those featured 2 tieflings and a full drow.
I've seen mostly humans and a few elf-spawn in my games, with only one dwarf, one halfling, and one half-orc thrown in for variation. The "small folk" are largely disregarded in terms of playability, which is a shame.
Also have yet to have a player roll up a bard, but that's another thread.
|
i love gnomes...+1 save dc on illusions, free SLA's and +2 con...sure i'll take it.
(currently playing Gnome Beguiler/Mindbender in an Eberron Campaign...with the Least Mark of Scribing. he's loads of fun)
i also like Goblins. especially in Eberron. with the above gnome, i made a racial affiliation in Sharn w/ my leadership feat...all goblin/hobgoblin inquisitive organization. they're fun, too.
halflings are also cool. especially my sorcerer with a ridiculous charisma.
most overused i would say human...feats and skill points just seem to be in such a demand.
-hamster
Given a choice I play anything but a standard race.
Half-ogre is a favorite the same +1 LA as a hobgoblin but over instead of underpowered.
As was mentioned a hobgoblin gets +2dex, +2con, that's it.
A Half oger gets +6str, -2dex, +2con, -2int, -2cha, has a +4 natural armor and best of all his large size gives him reach. Give him a reach weapon and he can hit (or at least swing at) everything within 20 feet. The Shorten Grip Feat even alows him to use a polearm on a target next to him. Best polearm for damage? The sugliin from the frostburn accessory. Damage 2d8 for medium, 3d8 for a Large version. It's cumbersome so you need the Sugliin Mastery feat to use it fully but with a little patience you can deal damage like there's no tomorrow.
I also seem to be one of those strange people that prefers Psionics to the standard classes. Even a few psionic feats can drastically change the flavor of a standard class.
If you really want to play a cinimatic monk a few general Psionic feats go a long way.
1st level Wild talent: Benefit +2 PP. It doesn't sound like much but it lets you use the feats that follow. All of them Require you to be Psionicly focused.
Speed of thought: Benefit +10 speed
Up the walls: Benefit move (run) on walls like they were level ground. Makes climbing a 40 foot cliff a little trivial.
Mental Leap: Benefit expend your focus and get a +10 to your jump check
Psionic dodge: Benefit expend your focus and make up to a 90 degree turn while charging.
Even without the Mental leap or psionic dodge a Medium sized 6th level monk would have a speed of 60. With a modest 14str and full ranks in jump he could jump gaps of 23 feet without needing to make a check.
Half-ogre is a favorite the same +1 LA as a hobgoblin but over instead of underpowered.
Depending on how current your game is, half-ogres are now a LA +2 race, as per Races of Destiny, which is the only (fully) 3.5 rules for them.
thanks GGG yak folk could be cool.
No problem Sexy. (Hmmm. Am I allowed to call you "Sexy?" ::More hmmm-ing::) It was our -us OG Were-Cabbages- idea to take some lesser known and/or under-used monster races and give them the drow-treatment (i.e. make 'em popular). It just so happened that a couple of us liked spriggan and yak folk. I quite like both. I liked the yaks from their discription in MM2, and never actually saw their Al-Qadim appearances where Wolfgang Baur tells me they were quite terrifying. One day, I might post the "Ecology of..." article I penned for them that a certain yak-phobic Dragon editor passed on, (I'm not bitter or anything ::grinds teeth down to gums:: while sticking pins in voodoo doll ;) ) though I might try shooting it over to Wizards first. Check out this link for more Pagoda goodness as well as more insight into my take on the Inscrutable Ones who dwell there.
-GGG
Depending on how current your game is, half-ogres are now a LA +2 race, as per Races of Destiny, which is the only (fully) 3.5 rules for them.
True, I only had RoD as a loner for a few Months but the higher LA makes sense given the advantages.
The wisdom isn't penalized so Cleric, Druid or Monk really wouldn't be affected. Or If your comfortable with Psionics Psyicic warrior, SoulKnife, Ardent, or Divine mind all use wisdom to determine there casting/manifesting power level.
The wisdom isn't penalized so Cleric, Druid or Monk really wouldn't be affected. Or If your comfortable with Psionics Psyicic warrior, SoulKnife, Ardent, or Divine mind all use wisdom to determine there casting/manifesting power level.
My daughter plays a half-ogre monk, and I allow for LA to be payed down. Even before she paid them down though, she was a pretty effective monk, and with the increased damage, she could tank a bit better than a standard monk as well.
I've run an all goblin campaign and it was excellent. I gave the players options of goblins, hobgoblins and bugbears and they all opted for goblins.
Size small with a 30' move makes up for the -2 Cha. I think Goblins are the most playable humanoid race in the monster manual beyond the 7 major races. Orcs are probably second. I'd never play a creature with a LA, I've never seen it be worth it.
not worth it? are you kidding me? look at the stat adjustments for Minitaurs, bugbears, centaurs, and satyrs. an ecl 3 barbarian minitaur gets his rage, fast move, reach 10ft, 6d8+1d12 hp dark vision out to 6 feet, crazy bonus' to stats (i think +6 str and +4 dex and con -2 Cha)bab +7 i think (no mm here) and what did you give up for all that? uncanny dodge and trap sense 1?
and as far as cool concepts that are fun to play, you cant beat a bard satyr with pan pipes
back to the point of the thread though, goblins make excelent NPC merchents in shady areas and i do love saytr inn keeps, maybe a centaur stable keeper.
Re: the humanoid discussion above. I agree that "savage humanoids" (orcs, goblins, kobolds, etc.) make very good player races. The only problem is a lack of a defined culture. This hurts them in two ways.1. It makes it difficult to see/explain how they could turn from being "just monsters" (which is how they are treated) into PCs. The general impression one gets is that "normal" folk run from these beasts on sight (or kill them, if capable).
2. They all overlap. Just about every savage humanoid is portrayed as a stupid, evil, tribal, cave-dwelling monster. Do we really need more than one of those? The amount that any given race gets used then become a matter of DM preference- why specific set of stat bonuses do you find the most appealing, or which looks the coolest? Rather than actually having identities that make sense in the game world.
I've done quite a bit of work on the races in my world so that I can actually make them distinct and "valid" (gnomes need this treatment, too, and even elves and halflings to an extent, as mentioned above), and I encourage all DMs to do so as well. I am sooo happy Pathfinder is actually working on racial identities. And I dare say that players will respect the singing, psychotic goblins of Varisia!
Oh, and (although I love them) I think elves are probably the most overused "common" race, and only second in underdevelopment as a (PC) race and culture (after gnomes).
dragon put out two incredible issues 291 gnomes and i cant find my halflings (my first issue) add in eccologies for the kobald and omg does that shoot a hole in your argument. i could agree more on the goblinoids though
We have had two minataurs in two differant campaigns. The last player did the best job. I was running game in my homebrew in which the players were villians. I was inspired by the movie "Knockaround Guys." Anyway i started the party at 1st level, and purly by accident the minataur became a PC. I did have a problem with the LA. It threw some ballance off, but we coped with it mainly because the player was such a good roleplayer and really got into the character, and added to the story so much that i could not see to pull the PC or make any changes.
You wouldn't have to keep the minataurs evil. keep in mind that it is your game and you can make neccesary changes to make a good story.
Im my campaign, the primary city we play in has these races. (the order listed is not significant): Humans, Elves- halfe elves, dwarves, Halflings, centaurs, gnomes.
We felt like the centaurs give the city an intersting feel, as all shops and buildings have to make accomadations. they are major players in the city's development and history, being part of the city councel and government as well as involved in big business in the city.
If you put a lot of thought into the campaign you can make the race work really well with everbody else sot that the game has a realistic feal to it.
The wisdom isn't penalized so Cleric, Druid or Monk really wouldn't be affected. Or If your comfortable with Psionics, Psyicic warrior, SoulKnife, Ardent, or Divine mind all use wisdom to determine their casting/manifesting power level.
My daughter plays a half-ogre monk, and I allow for LA to be payed down. Even before she paid them down though, she was a pretty effective monk, and with the increased damage, she could tank a bit better than a standard monk as well.
I forgot to add Ranger to the list of possibilities for Half-oger (The -2dex penalty is more than offset by the +4 Natural armor)
I was also wondering if anyone knew if The Feral Creature template had been updated to being more than a +1 LA (especially if a DM allows LA pay down).
dragon put out two incredible issues 291 gnomes and i cant find my halflings (my first issue) add in eccologies for the kobald and omg does that shoot a hole in your argument. i could agree more on the goblinoids though
Re: the humanoid discussion above. I agree that "savage humanoids" (orcs, goblins, kobolds, etc.) make very good player races. The only problem is a lack of a defined culture. This hurts them in two ways.1. It makes it difficult to see/explain how they could turn from being "just monsters" (which is how they are treated) into PCs. The general impression one gets is that "normal" folk run from these beasts on sight (or kill them, if capable).
2. They all overlap. Just about every savage humanoid is portrayed as a stupid, evil, tribal, cave-dwelling monster. Do we really need more than one of those? The amount that any given race gets used then become a matter of DM preference- why specific set of stat bonuses do you find the most appealing, or which looks the coolest? Rather than actually having identities that make sense in the game world.
I've done quite a bit of work on the races in my world so that I can actually make them distinct and "valid" (gnomes need this treatment, too, and even elves and halflings to an extent, as mentioned above), and I encourage all DMs to do so as well. I am sooo happy Pathfinder is actually working on racial identities. And I dare say that players will respect the singing, psychotic goblins of Varisia!
Oh, and (although I love them) I think elves are probably the most overused "common" race, and only second in underdevelopment as a (PC) race and culture (after gnomes).
The only problem is that those articles don't seem to be too widely regarded (I don't know if it's that people haven't read them or they just choose to ignore them). Just look at the anti-gnome and halfling sentiment that many posters have expressed their groups hold in this thread. There are several threads buried deep within the archives of this site (but more recent than the gnome article) in which gnomish, halfling, and elvish cultures have been discussed, complained about, and theoretically revamped, and no one really seemed to pay much attention to the Dragon articles.
Also, have they put out articles about any other races? I've seen the gnome article, but no other ones. It seems to me that the fact that these races have articles indicates that it was deemed they needed an explanation, unless they were attempting a series on every race in the PHB.
Until they are more widely regarded, it seems to remain the consensus (of this internet community at least) that these races are underdeveloped.