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...
As far as racial overviews go the Races expansions do a good job of doing a solid overview on the races covered.
Races of the Wild: Elves and Halflings, plus Raptorians
Races of Stone: Dwarves and Gnomes, plus Goliaths
Races of Destiny: Humans, Half-elves and Half-orcs, Plus Illumians
Races of the Dragon: Kobolds, Plus Dragon born and Spellscales
The thing is they are overviews with SOME examples. Basically Ecology manuals written with pages intentinally left blank so the user can fill them in so the races best fit into the setting s/he wants to use. There are a few suggestions to help, but your left to fill it out (to one extant or another), on your own.
|
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?
How are you managing an ECL 3 Minotaur Barbarian? 6 HD + 2 LA + 1 Level = ECL 9. If you're thinking that an ECL 9 character is an ECL 3 character, no wonder you think they're overpowered.
ps. Please use your shift key; it really makes posts much easier to read.
Maybe it's just me, but I really didn't like the way elves, halflings, and half elves were presented. It all seemed so cliche. Yes, we know elves live in trees and don't like dwarves. What about elves that live in the desert, jungle, or swamp? Yes, we know halflings are sneaky. What about the ones that live by elves/gnomes and have become more fey? What about halfling paladins? Half elves are outcasts, got it. What else? Anything? Nope.
The gnomes were presented as a little less silly and more like shin buddhists, which I liked a lot. I've had an affinty for gnomes for a while becuase they are fluffy. I like that they're like dwarves that have hung out with elves a bit too long. There are many ways to make them interesting. We have a silly campaign called Alesclosh where the entire party is made up of gnomes and it's a blast becuase it is so silly. But, all of the gnomes are different. The illusionist isn't silly, at all, and is very clever. The bard/cleric of Garl is a crossdresser. The druid is very quiet and contemplative, kinda like a Zen buddhist monk with rock gardens and stuff. The swashbuckler starts fights and drinks too much. All in all, I think that the "I-hate-gnomes-becuase-they-are-silly" etc debate is taking the game too seriously. Yeah, they're little and goofy. Maybe that's how they've learned, as a culture, how to deal with the bigger people. Just becuase they joke around doesn't mean they can't be taken seriously as a people.
Maybe it's just me, but I really didn't like the way elves, halflings, and half elves were presented. It all seemed so cliche. Yes, we know elves live in trees and don't like dwarves. What about elves that live in the desert, jungle, or swamp? Yes, we know halflings are sneaky. What about the ones that live by elves/gnomes and have become more fey? What about halfling paladins? Half elves are outcasts, got it. What else? Anything? Nope.
Unearthed Arcana presents some options for variant races(with the exception of humans for some reason) including Arctic, Aquatic, Desert, and Jungle. No swamp elves but maybe you could make them amphibious water dwellers and use lizard folk instead of dwarves as a racial dislike due to direct competition for resources.
There are halfling paladins, mostly of Arvoreen (Defense, Halfling Warriors) with those following Cyrrollalee (Hearth, Hospitality), Urogalan (Protection of the Dead), and Yondalla (Protection, security, Leadership) making up the rest these dieties can be found in FR Faiths and Pantheons.
The Fiend Folio of all things has a half-fey template that can be added to any creature that was born to or spent enough time around Fey. WotC web archives even have a Half-Fey template progression so you could add the +2 LA gradually. Even taking just one level of it lets you cast Hypnotism 1/day and cast Charm Person at will.
One of the things that I absolutely hated in the Races books (and in a few other 3.5 projects) has been the "reinventing the wheel" problem. There was already an elven, dwarven, halfing, and gnome pantheon, and yet "new" gods, many of whom served the same purpose as older gods, were created. I get that now that elves are able to take any class, a god that could serve as a patron of elven paladins might be nice, but then why not present the Seldarine as is, and add a LG or NG good to it? Heck, there were even minor Seldarine gods from Dragon that fit the bill from 2nd edition.
Maybe it's just me, but I really didn't like the way elves, halflings, and half elves were presented. It all seemed so cliche. Yes, we know elves live in trees and don't like dwarves. What about elves that live in the desert, jungle, or swamp? Yes, we know halflings are sneaky. What about the ones that live by elves/gnomes and have become more fey? What about halfling paladins? Half elves are outcasts, got it. What else? Anything? Nope.Unearthed Arcana presents some options for variant races(with the exception of humans for some reason) including Arctic, Aquatic, Desert, and Jungle. No swamp elves but maybe you could make them amphibious water dwellers and use lizard folk instead of dwarves as a racial dislike due to direct competition for resources.
There are halfling paladins, mostly of Arvoreen (Defense, Halfling Warriors) with those following Cyrrollalee (Hearth, Hospitality), Urogalan (Protection of the Dead), and Yondalla (Protection, security, Leadership) making up the rest these dieties can be found in FR Faiths and Pantheons.
The Fiend Folio of all things has a half-fey template that can be added to any creature that was born to or spent enough time around Fey. WotC web archives even have a Half-Fey template progression so you could add the +2 LA gradually. Even taking just one level of it lets you cast Hypnotism 1/day and cast Charm Person at will.
Yeah, I know all of the mechanical ways to make those things but what I'm really looking for is "fluff to support the crunch" (some Paizonian said that once, and I liked it. Rambling Scribe, maybe? Consider it yoinked.)
And while Yondalla is a LG deity, there are very very very very few mentions of halfling or gnome paladins. Gnomes I'm not really concerned about, considering that Garl is CG and all, but no mention of Yondallan paladins is just a crime.
Anyway, to stave off a long rant that won't go anywhere, I'm just sticking to my "Gnomes are cool, back off" stance. xD
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...
i dont know. no one seems to have a problem playing elves, dwarves, or humans. the explanation for humans seems to be there everything you want. but theres no more develepment for any one race over another. i know im my games my characters just wont take the penalty to weapon damage.(were crazy minmaxers)
The gnomes were presented as a little less silly and more like shin buddhists, which I liked a lot. I've had an affinty for gnomes for a while becuase they are fluffy. I like that they're like dwarves that have hung out with elves a bit too long. There are many ways to make them interesting. We have a silly campaign called Alesclosh where the entire party is made up of gnomes and it's a blast becuase it is so silly. But, all of the gnomes are different. The illusionist isn't silly, at all, and is very clever. The bard/cleric of Garl is a crossdresser. The druid is very quiet and contemplative, kinda like a Zen buddhist monk with rock gardens and stuff. The swashbuckler starts fights and drinks too much. All in all, I think that the "I-hate-gnomes-becuase-they-are-silly" etc debate is taking the game too seriously. Yeah, they're little and goofy. Maybe that's how they've learned, as a culture, how to deal with the bigger people. Just becuase they joke around doesn't mean they can't be taken seriously as a people.
Personally, I think gnomes would be better if the "standard" was less of the bard/prankster than presented in the PHB and Races of Stone. I'd prefer to have Whisper Gnomes from RoS be the standard, with favored class illusionist and highlighting ties to the plane of shadow (i.e., Shadowcraft Mage, Shadowdancer, and Shadow Sentinel PrCs). Yes, gnomes should have a sense of humor, but it should be a dark, gallows humor ("Don't you understand, you filthy kobold? This is our cave. Here, let me enlighten you!" Bashes the kobold in the head with a hooked hammer. "You're not arguing anymore, so I guess my point got through your thick skull after all.").
And while Yondalla is a LG deity, there are very very very very few mentions of halfling or gnome paladins. Gnomes I'm not really concerned about, considering that Garl is CG and all, but no mention of Yondallan paladins is just a crime.
Ditto, since halflings get +1 AC from being small and a +2 Dex, +1 on all saves (which stacks with Divine Grace), and +2 on saves vs. fear (which stacks with the previous bonus) from the start. Take Devoted Inquisitor and a couple levels of rogue, invest in a mithril breastplate, and you can benefit from Evasion, Smite Evil, and Sneak Attack for the cost of losing +1 from your BAB (which the +1 from being small counteracts). In addition, the mount helps improve the halfling's 20 ft base speed.
Also, halfling monks kick butt. Especially the Sleeping Tiger variant with Ascetic Rogue and a few rogue levels. The Hand and Foot style is also a good choice (with Fiery Fist and Ki Blast from PHB II, although it's a little Street Fighter-esque).
Personally, I think gnomes would be better if the "standard" was less of the bard/prankster than presented in the PHB and Races of Stone.
Agreed. This is the major reason people don't take them seriously as a player option more often than not, I think. Unless you like being a comedian or acting bizarro all the time, the race has little to offer because that's what everyone expects.
I've toyed with playing up their fey connection even more (meaning the dangerous part) and shifting their "typical" alignment to CN, but I've already done something like that to halflings (made them gypsies), and don't want to overdo it.
I like the inquisitive inventor aspect of gnomes, and explain their affinity for illusions as being a race of philosophers who feel that reality is more a construct of the mind than something objective (as evidenced by the very existence of magic), and thus 90% of all gnomes learn at least a little (often much more) about altering their reality or its perception.
But the prankster thing makes it difficult. I think "core" gnomes can get by as the curious philospher/inventors if they're played less "zany and totally insane!" and more as just eccentric. I like what YeuxAndI said about taking things too seriously; in that spirit, completely dispelling the standard that gnomes are strange, sometimes comical little beings isn't something I want to do. But it still needs a little toning down. (I also want to get rid of Garl Glittergold)
Underused: Kenku, Monster Manual III. Perfect for a PC race.
Overused, at least in my campaigns: Drow, half-dragons, kyton, gelatinous cube. Yes, they're a race. They have a kingdom in my campaign! Well, by kingdom I mean they live in the sewers.
|
try making an illumian mystic theurge. our group fought one once and it was just a big mess because we couldn't figure out what he was. he kept healing his teammates and then shooting fireballs at us
or if you dont want a spellcaster NPC you could try a Killoren ranger.
the killoren is an animal type race out of the races of the wild i think.
I'm actually a gnome fan--partly converted by James Jacobs' excellent article on their culture in the issue devoted to them (291?), which got my own creative juices flowing. In my homebrew, the silliness of gnome names is mostly derived from the fact that they sound silly in the ears of larger races and thus get made fun of (kind of like we used to do with Chinese back when I was a kid, before we all became sensitized to that form of racism). Gnomes do have a sense of humor, and pranks play into their culture, but there's much more to them than that--the various affinities they have for alchemy, illusion magic, and nature make them interesting and can make for some interesting character concepts. I've ditched Garl Glittergold IMC (in fact I've created an entirely new pantheon, not just for gnomes, but for each of the PC races and for each of the main human cultures). What I don't really like is the Greyhawk conception of gnomes (I love GH, but this is one aspect that I don't like), in which they are just smaller dwarves who like gems more than gold. Boring. Oh, and 3.5's bard as favored class. Limiting.
Several things I'm thinking of doing to make non-humans more attractive PC races, in general:
Do away with favored class. It's stupid, it forces you to channel certain races into certain career paths, it's a book-keeping headache, and it doesn't really make the game any more balanced.
To address the ECL problem, it seems to me you could use a fairly high point-buy, then reduce it by say one point for ECL +1, two points for ECL +2, four points for ECL +3, and so forth. Essentially, you're letting players trade ability score points for unbalanced adjustments and/or minor special abilities. That way you don't have PCs that are always way low on HP and caster level for the challenges the party faces, but they've done something to balance out the fact that they have SR or whatever.
In general, I'd rather make the listed PC races more attractive, while maintaining some flexibility to accommodate a player who has a really cool character concept and backstory that's outside the box.
Finally, I think that a lot of the problem that is being addressed here relates to how the DM sets things up. It takes a lot of work to displace the accumulated baggage of images and expectations that players bring to the table based on previous campaigns, reading Drizzt or Dragonlance novels, etc., etc. I think if you want to get players excited by what appears to be a suboptimal race on the surface, you've got to come up with a little player's guide to your campaign world, with a well-thought-out paragraph or two on how each race fits in (not necessarily to the world as a whole, but to the society where the campaign starts). "Here's what's special about gnomes in this campaign . . . " This makes it easier for your players to imagine being a gnome in your game world without resorting to the dull stereotypes everyone is complaining about in this and other threads.
Or, stay with your all-human group. There's nothing wrong with that, really, and it can be just as interesting, especially if you've got different cultures or backgrounds represented in the group.
not worth it? are you kidding me? look at the stat adjustments for Minitaurs, bugbears, centaurs, and satyrs....
Just making sure you realize, a 6 HD critter with +3 LA is equivalent to a 9th level PC. HD +LA = Effective Character Level (ECL).
|
To address the ECL problem, it seems to me you could use a fairly high point-buy, then reduce it by say one point for ECL +1, two points for ECL +2, four points for ECL +3, and so forth.
Peruhain, you've just solved my ECL problem! What a great idea. I wish I would've thought of this much sooner. Thanks!
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
To address the ECL problem, it seems to me you could use a fairly high point-buy, then reduce it by say one point for ECL +1, two points for ECL +2, four points for ECL +3, and so forth.Peruhain, you've just solved my ECL problem! What a great idea. I wish I would've thought of this much sooner. Thanks!
I think that the point drop-off would need to be a little more significant than that. Think about the drow as an example: +2 Dex, +2 Int, +2 Cha, -2 Con, SR, spell-like abilities, darkvision. This is an ECL +2. If you reduce your point buy by only 2 points for this race, the drow is still netting +2 ability points, SR, and spell-like abilities.
IMO, it should be -3 points for ECL +1, -6 points for +2, and -9 points for +3.
|
|
Underused: Kenku, Monster Manual III. Perfect for a PC race.
We think alike my friend. I've already replaced halflings with kenkus for my next campaign. I'm replacing all the unplayed core races with more interesting counterparts (to tempt the players away from humans and elves). Kenkus for halflings is just such a perfect fit.
|
|
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:
Yes, I really like the Eberron campaign setting. Especially shifters. I really really really like shifters! I also like their takes on the core races, as you mentioned. However, I know my players. I know that no matter how you shake things up, they are still not going to play a halfling.
However, the bugbear in a group will NEVER be the hottest spellcaster, may it be divine or acane...
Funny thing, though he may never be the HOTTEST spell caster (arcane-wise), he could be a decent one.
They don't get an intelligence decrease.
Thats what my friend likes about them so much....They can play almost any class.
And apparently Bugbear Monks are beasts.
Dragon 357 has an interesting take on mages. they presented a type called an Eidetic Mage.
You trade in your familiar and the feat scribe scroll at first level and gain the ability to use your mind as your spellbook.
It might actually go better with a more monstrous N/PC than a standard race.