I am reviewing the Alpha release chapter by chapter, This is my review upon the races. As note, this is a review based strictly on the text presented, I will bring the feedback from my groups once we get together.
I particularly like the expansion of Weapon Familiarity without the need of additional feats.
I also feel that the adjustments to the races, specifically half-elf and half-orc have made them more desireable to play. Of all the standard races these two races were rarely played, most of the players in my groups finding them under par incomparison to other races.
Favoured Classes? And multiclassing? Are there still going to be xp penalties?
~Anry
All the races used to get a +2 boost in one skill and a -2 drop in another.
Half-Orcs were the exception. They got a +2 in Strength and a -2 in TWO abilities.
The logic behind this was that Strength was a "better" or "superior" ability score and getting a boost in strength had to be balanced out.
I tend to agree with this.
Do you think the Pathfinder Half-Orc should be +2Str +2Wis -2INT -2Cha?
Maybe its more balanced that way. Also doesnt anyone find it strange that Half-Orcs dont take a Charisma penalty?
All the races used to get a +2 boost in one skill and a -2 drop in another.
Half-Orcs were the exception. They got a +2 in Strength and a -2 in TWO abilities.
The logic behind this ws that Strength was a "better" or "superior" ability score and getting a boost in strength had to be balanced out.
I tend to agree with this.
Do you think the Pathfinder Half-Orc should be +2Str +2Wis -2INT -2Cha?Maybe its more balanced that way. Also doesnt anyone find it strange that Half-Orcs dont take a Charisma penalty?
Not really, incomparison the half-orc got squat for racial abilities. It still does get much in regards to racial abilities really even in the new right up but the new build puts them more on par with the rest of the races.
I have only two moderate concerns on the race changes. Overall, I like what I've seen.
1) Why give the races a total +2 racial modifier? This is a piece of 4E we don't really need. Further, it's going to cause a lot of interesting problems with non-base races - goblins, kobolds, aasimar, minotaurs, ogres, half-giants, etc. Mainly because the DM will have to decide what ability gets a +2 modifier to match the base races. I'd rather racial ability modifiers not be changed from the SRD except for maybe dropping the -2 Int penalty on SRD half-orcs (and maybe a happy for the half-elf). If the net +2 modifier is going to be kept, Paizo is going to have to ensure that this cascades down to the all the other PC-usable races & their NPC incarnations.
2) Elves should NOT automatically get proficiencies with longsword & bows. The other races get, at best exotic proficiencies turned into martial proficiencies. I think elves should treat longswords & bows as simple weapon proficiencies instead of martial proficiencies. This will grant it access to some classes, but not all and a elvin wizard can still pick it up fairly "cheaply".
It's just tradition. "Standard" elves were always considered to learn sword-fencing and archery as children, just as children today learn swiming and riding bikes. It's hard to get such things out again after so many years.
What I think is not such a good idea are some other elven traits:
- Elves get a +2 racial bonus on checks to overcome spell resistance and to identify magical items. Though elves are said to be "naturally attuned" to magic, I think this gives them too much credit. A professional wizard of 12th level or higher should be able to these things well, regardles of if he had picked up a few snippets as a child other people had not.
- Elves are so beautifull that "everyone" is much more helpful to them? a) elves have a doubious reputation as they are. Adding actual "soo much better than thou" abilities won't really be helpful. b) I also think it's unrealistic. People might be enspelled by their appearance, but personally I would like elves to be somewhat feared because they look unnatural.
I'm really an elf-lover like any other, but this has a severe touch of mary sue effect and would likely alienate more people than making them happy.
Actually, dwarves get some automatic proficiencies too, as do half-orcs. I actually like these as they encourage the race to use weapons that their races favors without having to spend a proficiency feat.
Half-orcs like the big 2-handed weapons, dwarves are axe/hammer guys, elves like the long slender blades and bows, etc. etc.
I say keep it.
Also, I don't think the race part becomes "invisible" at higher levels due to the way skills work now. A flat +2 in a skill becomes invisible real fast, but actually being considered "trained" in that skill means it goes up every level. Another great change IMO.
The favoured class change approaches that a bit. But to be honest you could quickly have power creep with levelling races. Honestly though I've never had a problem with establishing the difference between a class/race combo. It all really depends on how you build and play the characters. As such, I've never seen a need for the concept to be distinctly addressed in the rules.
On the other hand, I have played on campaign setting with levelling races. Dawnforged, I don't know how many people are even aware of existence but it is available to order through Paizo, that's how I got my copy.
In dawnforged you gained something new based on race every level all the way up to 10th level. At 1st level and every odd level thereafter, a player selected a new racial talent, which represented a races aptitude for certain tasks more than anything. At 2nd level and every even level thereafter, a race gained a racial transformation these were more physical based abilities. Also at 3rd, 5th, 7th, and 9th races gained additional +2 stat increases to different ability scores. The only thing is that the races became more powerful than the standard races as they gained levels, in comparison a Dawnforged PC between 1-2 was on par to normal characters using standard races. PCs between 3-7 would be consider to have a +1 LA. And PCs 8th and above would be considered to have a +2 LA.
The races, game rules, and mechanics of the races chapter are designated as OGC for the record.
Its a good standard model to follow though, I would perhaps remove the stat increases to stave off power creep. But it would be easy to expand this progression to 20th level or even stretch it out to 20th level.
A stretched version would probably look like so:
1st - racial traits
2nd - racial talent
3rd -
4th - racial transformation
5th -
6th - racial talent
7th -
8th - racial transformation
9th -
10th - racial talent
11th -
12th - racial transformation
13th -
14th - racial talent
15th -
16th - racial transformation
17th -
18th - racial talent
19th -
20th - racial transformation
~Anry
|
I have only two moderate concerns on the race changes. Overall, I like what I've seen.
1) Why give the races a total +2 racial modifier? This is a piece of 4E we don't really need. Further, it's going to cause a lot of interesting problems with non-base races - goblins, kobolds, aasimar, minotaurs, ogres, half-giants, etc. Mainly because the DM will have to decide what ability gets a +2 modifier to match the base races. I'd rather racial ability modifiers not be changed from the SRD except for maybe dropping the -2 Int penalty on SRD half-orcs (and maybe a happy for the half-elf). If the net +2 modifier is going to be kept, Paizo is going to have to ensure that this cascades down to the all the other PC-usable races & their NPC incarnations.
You definitely hit the nail on the head here. This is my biggest concern with the race changes. The base races are now more powerful, so shouldn't the other races be modified to reflect this, too? Sure paizo can update the races and monsters in the SRD, but what about the other 3.5 races they can't update?
This will be a problem anytime you modify something based on race. For example, the suggested hit points at first level. One suggestion included different bonus hit points depending on race. At first, I really liked this idea. But then I realized that all races/monsters would need to have the same update.
I really, really hope that Paizo keeps this in mind and considers it as they refine their new rules.
|
I think the half-orc needed the help... two mental penalties completely screened out their usage as arcane casters (not completely, I suppose, but it made them highly sub-optimal, given their inherent boost to Strength, which also benefited wizard/sorcerer to a minimal extent).
I do agree that these races now outclass some of the established La +) out there, but I've noticed a trend with the additional stat boosts (ignoring the loss of half-orc Charisma penalty).
Dwarves: Mostly fighters, but also good clerics-- +2 Wisdom
Gnomes: Natural Bards-- +2 Charisma
Elves: Natural wizards-- +2 Intelligence
Halfings-- Natural rogues-- +2 Intelligence (more skills, clever planners)
Based on these patterns, I think one could take the favored class of the other +0 races (kenku, goblins, orcs, changelings, shifters, etc.) and extrapolate an appropriate bonus, based on this class.
Fighter/Ranger/Cleric/Monk/Druid: Wisdom
Wizard/Rogue: Intelligence
Bard/Paladin/Sorcerer: Charisma
Barbarian: Wisdom?/Charisma?)
For the LA +1 (jaebrin, MMV; Hobgoblins), perhaps one could reduce the LA to +0 and call it square? Hobgoblins certainly get two physical bonuses and no penalties, but their other bonuses are rather sparse. I'd be fine if Paizo established that the hobs still have more abilities to make them LA +1, or justified them as LA +0. Either way, I allow LA buy-off w/ experience (ala Unerathed Arcana), but I'd love to see what kinds of things Paizo churns up...
|
I just want to say that I love the changes to the halfelf and halforc. Before they were subpar choices, ruleswise. Now they're definitely viable. The halfelf's adaptability is huge, but not unbalancing; and plus 2 to any stat is amazing as well. The halforc's ability scores are now balanced with everyone else's and they're fluffy, plus the weapon proficiencies and ferocity make for a very appealing character. A halforc cleric or druid would just rock.
I'm okay with the elven beauty ability because it says right in the rules that the DM can make it not work in any encounter he doesn't think it should. That fixes both balance issues and fluff issues in one fell swoop. Sure the bartender will give you a free drink, but the dwarf king isn't so shallow.
The favorite class entry for the half-elf says: "Chose any one class at first level. This choice cannot be changed."
Is that really neccessary? I think about everyone agrees, that favored classes were a no-brainer. A dwarven Fighter/Wizard doesn't get an xp-penalty, but an elven Fighter/Rogue does?
Also, what's the reason behind it? An elf has no problem being a rogue and no problem being a fighter, but when he does both, and therefore is allready worse at both, he also gets another ability? But when one class is wizard he doesn't? Why?
I think favored classes really should be removed or at least displayed as highly optional.
And even if not, don't force the players to make the choice at first level. From my own experience it allways happens that you made initial mistakes you only realize later and most gms allow to "retcon" the character accordingly. I understand it that players shouldn't take one set of abilites early, allready with the intention of switching them later, because it's only a good choice at early levels, but forcing them to plan their character so much ahead isn't a good thing either.
|
I have only two moderate concerns on the race changes. Overall, I like what I've seen.
1) Why give the races a total +2 racial modifier? This is a piece of 4E we don't really need. Further, it's going to cause a lot of interesting problems with non-base races - goblins, kobolds, aasimar, minotaurs, ogres, half-giants, etc. Mainly because the DM will have to decide what ability gets a +2 modifier to match the base races. I'd rather racial ability modifiers not be changed from the SRD except for maybe dropping the -2 Int penalty on SRD half-orcs (and maybe a happy for the half-elf). If the net +2 modifier is going to be kept, Paizo is going to have to ensure that this cascades down to the all the other PC-usable races & their NPC incarnations.
You definitely hit the nail on the head here. This is my biggest concern with the race changes. The base races are now more powerful, so shouldn't the other races be modified to reflect this, too? Sure paizo can update the races and monsters in the SRD, but what about the other 3.5 races they can't update?
This will be a problem anytime you modify something based on race. For example, the suggested hit points at first level. One suggestion included different bonus hit points depending on race. At first, I really liked this idea. But then I realized that all races/monsters would need to have the same update.
I really, really hope that Paizo keeps this in mind and considers it as they refine their new rules.
Why give other races an additional +2? The core races get an extra +2 because that's what they are: core races. If you want to play a non-standard race, you take the ability bonuses it has. They shouldn't have to match the core races. If that's the case, then there are no core races, and you're playing Talislanta, not D&D.
And it still needs to be backwards-compatible. It's easy enough to add an extra +2 to a core race NPC, but having to figure that out for every monster would be mind-boggling. Keep it simple.
That said, some LAs probably would need to be readjusted (like the hobgoblin), which is good IMO. Makes a few of the non-standard races more readily available, if that's your thing.
The favorite class entry for the half-elf says: "Chose any one class at first level. This choice cannot be changed."
Is that really neccessary?
Yes, because Favoured Class in the Alpha rules gives the PC +1 hp whenever said PC takes a level in his favoured class. So for those that don't have a set Favoured Class, defining it immediately is important.
|
|
I wanted to chime in with a few impressions on Races.
While I generally like the slight across-the board upgrade to races, two problems stick out. I think there are relatively simple fixes to both.
1) The issue of race becoming largely irrelevant at higher levels remains. I've seen various proposals for this, but I think the easiest route is to add a selection of racial feats that become available as PCs level. For example, a dwarf might qualify for Dwarven Toughness at 6th level, while an elf might qualify for Enhanced Elven Magic at 12th, etc. Adding in a few attractive feats that accentuate a race's "race-ness" at later levels adds long-term incentives without requiring anything revolutionary. I do not think additional racial abilities should be automatic, and I don't think extra feat slots for racial feats are necessary. Just add the option, make it attractive and let players make the choice.
2) This is the bigger issue, and not one I expected -- Humans got the shaft.
One thing I really appreciate about 3rd edition is that human is always an attractive choice. Although individual races often are better suited to certain classes, in my experience it's always a tough choice to pass up the free feat and skill points of the human.
In a human-dominated campaign world like Golarian, this is a good thing, but the Alpha rules don't really support it.
Every race got a power-up of some kind, and the human's +2 to any abililty is nice. But the general increase in feats (now every odd level instead of every 3) reduces the value of the human bonus feat. And the (much-needed) upgrade to the half-elf leaves the human as a poor choice. The half-elf gets everything the human has, but trades the (less valuable) bonus feat for low-light vision and a boatload of other abilities.
My proposed fix: Human Drive - at every level where a PC gets to add an ability point, a human gets to add one point to a second ability (so you couldn't add +2 to Str, but could add +1 Str and +1 Cha, frex).
I think this brings humans back into position as the race that players will always take a hard look at, and plays into the idea that humans are the dominant race because they are driven to achieve and improve more in their relatively short life spans than longer-lived races.
After seeing that all races get some sort of weapon familiarity, all of which fit within the narrative of each race, I feel that Humans should also be allowed to choose a free weapon at character creation. I felt this way about 3.5 and given the slew of bonuses that the other races receive this would help balance the faster achievement of feats.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
I wanted to chime in with a few impressions on Races.
While I generally like the slight across-the board upgrade to races, two problems stick out. I think there are relatively simple fixes to both.1) The issue of race becoming largely irrelevant at higher levels remains. I've seen various proposals for this, but I think the easiest route is to add a selection of racial feats that become available as PCs level. For example, a dwarf might qualify for Dwarven Toughness at 6th level, while an elf might qualify for Enhanced Elven Magic at 12th, etc. Adding in a few attractive feats that accentuate a race's "race-ness" at later levels adds long-term incentives without requiring anything revolutionary. I do not think additional racial abilities should be automatic, and I don't think extra feat slots for racial feats are necessary. Just add the option, make it attractive and let players make the choice.
Personally, I think that race is fine to only have game effects at 1st level. The difference between a 20th level elf vs human wizard should be based on personalilty and perspective, i.e. role playing. I don't feel any more human than I did 10 or 20 years ago, and I hope I've at least added some expert levels along the way. I do agree though, that if some racial advancement is needed, then a bonus racial feat at certain levels would be the best way to handle the situation. The other option would be to have racial feats that simply can be selected only by those of the appropriate race.
2) This is the bigger issue, and not one I expected -- Humans got the shaft.
One thing I really appreciate about 3rd edition is that human is always an attractive choice. Although individual races often are better suited to certain classes, in my experience it's always a tough choice to pass up the free feat and skill points of the human.
In a human-dominated campaign world like Golarian, this is a good thing, but the Alpha rules don't really support it.
Every race got a power-up of some kind, and the human's +2 to any abililty is nice. But the general increase in feats (now every odd level instead of every 3) reduces the value of the human bonus feat. And the (much-needed) upgrade to the half-elf leaves the human as a poor choice. The half-elf gets everything the human has, but trades the (less valuable) bonus feat for low-light vision and a boatload of other abilities.
My proposed fix: Human Drive - at every level where a PC gets to add an ability point, a human gets to add one point to a second ability (so you couldn't add +2 to Str, but could add +1 Str and +1 Cha, frex).
I think this brings humans back...
I guess I don't see this is a big problem. I think that feats are still very valuable, especially for classes without bonus feats, so an extra is always a good choice in my book. Also, many games only go to 5-10th level or so, where the extra feat is more useful than at 20th. I've played 20th level characters under 3.5 with 10 fighter levels and still wished I had more feats though, so the human bonus there will still be strong in my opinion. Also, I think lots of players more easily identify with humans than other races, and that will always make their popularity stronger than just their game mechanics.
In regards to the humans, I honestly prefer Malephant's suggestion of adding a weapon prof as a balancing act.
After seeing that all races get some sort of weapon familiarity, all of which fit within the narrative of each race, I feel that Humans should also be allowed to choose a free weapon at character creation. I felt this way about 3.5 and given the slew of bonuses that the other races receive this would help balance the faster achievement of feats.
Nice idea with the variable weapon proficiency. Perhaps take the idea a little further and give each human a little extra useful for their chosen favored class, not just a weapon, which is useful for fighters, but mostly useless for wizards. This might be a feat somehow related to the class in question. And the half-elf would not get this bonus.
Just an idea.
Stefan
I wanted to chime in with a few impressions on Races.
While I generally like the slight across-the board upgrade to races, two problems stick out. I think there are relatively simple fixes to both.1) The issue of race becoming largely irrelevant at higher levels remains. I've seen various proposals for this, but I think the easiest route is to add a selection of racial feats that become available as PCs level. For example, a dwarf might qualify for Dwarven Toughness at 6th level, while an elf might qualify for Enhanced Elven Magic at 12th, etc. Adding in a few attractive feats that accentuate a race's "race-ness" at later levels adds long-term incentives without requiring anything revolutionary. I do not think additional racial abilities should be automatic, and I don't think extra feat slots for racial feats are necessary. Just add the option, make it attractive and let players make the choice.
2) This is the bigger issue, and not one I expected -- Humans got the shaft.
...
My proposed fix: Human Drive - at every level where a PC gets to add an ability point, a human gets to add one point to a second ability (so you couldn't add +2 to Str, but could add +1 Str and +1 Cha, frex).
I think this brings humans back...
I agree on both points. Racial feats would be a nice addition, and while the upgrade to the half-elf is good, it "one-ups" the human. I also agree on giving humans some sort of special weapon proficiency (an affinity for swords perhaps?)
Nice idea with the variable weapon proficiency. Perhaps take the idea a little further and give each human a little extra useful for their chosen favored class, not just a weapon, which is useful for fighters, but mostly useless for wizards. This might be a feat somehow related to the class in question. And the half-elf would not get this bonus.
Stefan
Given the basic Human narrative of versatile and driven, a favored class based racial bonus makes sense. How, though, would the feats stay balanced. Would a free Exotic Weapon for a fighter be equal to something like free Spell Focus or Extra Turning? Would a series of new Human racial feats, one for each class to start with, that would give a bonus to the class but not as large of a bonus as a normally purchased feat be the way to go?
I really like the idea of race being more of a factor for a player if they want it too. I typically like to give my players a certain amount of leeway on character concept before design.
I think creating some really good racial feats that are available at the typical level increments (3rd, 6th, 9th etc) is the way to go. For example, by level 9 a character that has chained racial feats up to this point would be able to chose a more powerful racial feat than if they could at level 3 or if they just started on the racial feat tree.
Likewise a character that wished to have more freedom on their feats can choose to build a character that they want that fits their concept if it doesn't follow typical racial boundaries.
I think that it would create some real flexibility (reasons 3.5 is great) on how a person levels their creation be they minmaxers, storydriven-concept-gamers or somewhere in between. Very little would have to change in this model other than adding some well thought out racial feats.
The biggest issue that I could see with this system is balancing the racial feats with standard feats. You would want to make the racial path attractive enough to matter. If I make an elven ranger and employ my racial feats to do so I would like to see an advantage over just making an elven ranger or other non-prefered class with my own prefered feat choices. Yet you wouldn't want the advantage to be so great that a non-racial character would be completely outclassed by a racial one.
I believe that the +2 bonus is across the board, and by that beginning (lvl 1) characters are given a little more umph. My question is: if I was going to run Savage Tide tomorrow, I would normally give the players at least a 28 pt buy so they could have at least one exceptional trait without having a major flaw. Do I move this down by 2 to offset the +2 or keep it as is? (I am actually going to run it soon-just not tomorrow, and am considering using these rules)
I am hoping that the section on Favored Class indicating a +1 HP means that there will be no XP penalty to multiclassing, regardless of the differences in levels between your classes.
Personally, I use the spycraft/stargate idea on this, where there are no penalties for multiclassing and no favored class. To balance this out, humans get two skills that are always class skills to them, and they gain another class skill at 4th level and every 4 after that.
I too think that humans need a little more loving.
I like the free weapon proficiency. But there should be something more, just not sure exactly what yet.
I also like the idea of racial feat trees.
All the races used to get a +2 boost in one skill and a -2 drop in another.
Half-Orcs were the exception. They got a +2 in Strength and a -2 in TWO abilities.
The logic behind this was that Strength was a "better" or "superior" ability score and getting a boost in strength had to be balanced out.
I tend to agree with this.
Do you think the Pathfinder Half-Orc should be +2Str +2Wis -2INT -2Cha?Maybe its more balanced that way. Also doesnt anyone find it strange that Half-Orcs dont take a Charisma penalty?
I agree that the standard Half-Orc bonus and penalties should have been left as is. then add in the PF +2 bonus to that.
As to the posting someone made that to few players chose a half-orc chcrater i'd have to disagree, (Half-elf perhaps so). Most games I've seen, read , played in someone usually is playing a Half-orc, mostly either barbarian or fighter
here are my thoughts to the PF RPG
As many DM’s already have an alternate stat increase system in place (ex. Elite Array +3 bonus), here are a few options concerning the +2 bonus that is given to all races. First and second are to diversify one race from another of its own kind, the third is a progressive look at the ability stat increase, superseding the normal levels where stat increases occur.
First option: For all races, add +2 bonus to any one ability score, except the ability stat that normally receives an increase as detailed in the PHB for its particular race.
Races:
Dwarves: +2 any one ability excluding Constitution
Elves: +2 any one ability excluding Dexterity
Gnomes: +2 any one ability excluding Constitution
Half-Elf: +2 any one ability
Half-Orc: +2 any one ability excluding Strength
Halfling: +2 any one ability excluding Dexterity
Humans: +2 any one ability
Second option: similar to the first option but determined by the race(s) normally modified ability stat which are the defining traits of the race.
Races:
Dwarves: +2 any one ability excluding Strength & either Constitution or Charisma
Elves: +2 any one ability excluding Strength & either Dexterity or Constitution
Gnomes: +2 any one ability excluding Strength & Constitution
Half-Elf: +2 any one ability
Half-Orc: +2 any one ability excluding Strength & either Intelligence or Charisma
Halfling: +2 any one ability excluding Strength & Dexterity
Humans: +2 any one ability
Third option: Normally +5 ability stat increase, +2 PF RPG = +7 total
Level Normal PF RPG, Fast, Medium, Slow
1st --- +2 +1 +1 ---
2nd --- --- --- --- +1
3rd --- --- +1 --- ---
4th +1 +1 --- +1 ---
5th --- --- --- --- +1
6th --- --- +1 --- ---
7th --- --- --- +1 ---
8th +1 +1 --- --- +1
9th --- --- +1 --- ---
10th --- --- --- +1 ---
11th --- --- --- --- +1
12th +1 +1 +1 --- ---
13th --- --- --- +1 ---
14th --- --- --- --- +1
15th --- --- +1 --- ---
16th +1 +1 --- +1 ---
17th --- --- --- --- +1
18th --- --- +1 --- ---
19th --- --- --- +1 ---
20th +1 +1 --- --- +1
the above table looks better in word, so just line up the columns
I read over everything in this thread and I looked over the races in the Preview. I have never really liked the Favored Classes and I believe the multiclass rules should be altered in one of two ways.
A) You get XP-penalties only after picking up more then one additional class. Example Fighter/Wizard has no penalties but a Fighter/Sorcerer/Rogue would be suffering from Experience Penalties.
B) XP should be divided between your multiple classes in a sort of AD&D meets Gestalt rules.
I would personally use either of these rules and have been planning B) for a house rule in a game I am making online based off the SRD rules but it uses percentiles instead of the d20 system.
If not, I agree with what someone said about Elves should be Sorcerers instead of Wizards since Sorcerers are natural magic-users as are Elves, it could be explained as the ancestral connection to Fey that Elves should rightfully have.
I like the additional plus 2 ability bonus for +0 LA races (at this point only core races) as this will level them out with +1 LA races which I have always thought were a waste.
If I come up with anything at a later date I will add more.
I've looked over the races more than any other part of the book and I have to say I love some of the changes. Well, most, others I thinks would be fine if they were altered slightly.
For instance, I have been proven by my players, time and time again, that might doesn't make right. At least not as far as physical strength is concerned. In a group of people who blend powergaming with roleplaying to a frustrating level I never thought Str was worth 2 negative stats. Thank you Paizo for apparently agreeing. However whenever I modified the half-orc I always felt Charisma was a better negative stat. Don't get me wrong, I've been shown Charisma isn't a stat to laugh at either, but it seemed to me a Half Orc's appearance (compared to other core races) and heritage would make Charisma a more obvious choice. I was stumped on the Wisdom bonus until I noticed the pattern of the races getting a +2 in a physical stat and a +2 in a mental.
I also agree with many of the above posters, with the much needed improvements to the half elf going a touch overboard and the inclusion of far more feats I think the humans should get a little something extra beyond the +2 to any stat and the free feet and class skill. There was an idea mentioned where every 4th level when people normally got their +1 stat bonus the humans got an additional +1 but couldn't add it to the same stat as the first. Or perhaps the suggestion about the weapon group affinity or better (in my opinion) an additional 'feat' related to their class of choice.
Anyway, my two cents and all that.
|
|
... I think the humans should get a little something extra beyond the +2 to any stat and the free feet and class skill. There was an idea mentioned where every 4th level when people normally got their +1 stat bonus the humans got an additional +1 but couldn't add it to the same stat as the first. Or perhaps the suggestion about the weapon group affinity or better (in my opinion) an additional 'feat' related to their class of choice...
Don't know if the idea has been mentioned elsewhere (those boards are huge), but a house rule we use allows Human characters 4 more stat points than other characters, at the time of creation. IMO, this better reflects the versatility and the "variety" of the race.
I just did a comparison. Humans definitely got the shaft. While I seriously believed half-elves needed some improvements (no one, and I mean no one in any groups I associated with ever played them) the improvements they have along with the other races make humans about as appealing of a choice as they were in 2nd edition (which for my group wasn't much). One feat, compared to the half-elves bonuses to skills usage, immunity to magical sleep effects, and low light vision (otherwise the 1/2 elves have two of the three main benefits humans have. The primary class benefit and the skill benefit. With the Alpha rules the extra feat just isn't worth it. Please give them a little something more.
Director of Games
|
Howdy everybody,
Great discussion going on here. Keep it up.
Couple of points I want to add.
- I am shying away from racial abilities that automatically advance with level. This is traditionally a role of classes and I am not sure it is a pandora's box that I want to open (and I have opened so many :-).
- I think racial feats might be a good solution.
- I think human's might just get a free weapon proficiency.
Please continue...
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
I'd say that giving humans +2 to any two ability scores would work nicely.
For the record, the idea behind giving progressive racial bonuses is that as a character becomes high level, the small bonuses provided by race become insignificant compared to the benefits from class levels. So, you're playing a (dwarven) , rather than a Dwarven Fighter.
That said, I feel like having extra racial abilities as a character gains levels would be a bit too complex, especially when you consider that DMs will be doing a lot of on-the-fly conversion of 3E. material. While I like a lot of the ideas being thrown about here, racial feats seem to make the most sense from a backwards-compatibility standpoint.
|
|
I definitely think the adding of racial feats will go a long way towards solving the problem of races "feel" fading away as they level up. In this system, where characters receive so many feats, racial feats will present really interesting options for the players: do I learn a cool new "standard" ability this level, or do I learn one of the racial abilites that are available to *only* me.
It seems like this fix goes hand in hand with the change in number of feats. Human Fighters have 22(!) feats, I'm sure having a few racial feats available will allow the fighters to feel different from each other.
My suggestion for changes to the race section is simple:
Get rid of anything that can't be explained by the physical or supernatural nature of the specific race. Remove anything that is dependent on the culture in which the character was raised. That includes both the favored classes and the bonuses that are based on upbringing.
In real life, we have a hundred stereotypes for the different peoples that make up the human race, and in our games we even call human beings varied and adaptable. But when it comes time to present other races, we have only one stereotype for each of a dozen fantasy species. We give them one culture and one identity and we hard code that culture into their game statistics.
There are cultural traits ("+4 AC vs. giants") and there are racial traits (Darkvision). The game avoids ever casting humans into a single culture. You can play them from any culture and their bonuses still make sense for that culture. But none of the other races allow this. You have to make a new version of the dwarf to have one without stonecunning. You have to make a new version of the gnome to have yours be from somewhere that doesn't have a cultural enmity against giants.
Please, can we get rid of the special traits that require a homogeneous culture for the races? The innate abilities based on physique and supernatural attachments (such as the dwarven stability and the gnome's bonus to illusions from their fey ancestry) are great, but the other stuff just makes the races too rigid and requires their cultures to be the same everywhere.
|
|
I just got the Alpha last night and started looking at it. I must say I jumped right to the race section eager to see what had changed. I did like the majority of what I saw, however Humans loosing their Skill points I think is bogus! Every other race gained something or a few things and it seems all humans got was an Ability Adjustment. Then they HAVE to pick a favored class...I prefer the 3rd edition rule where they do not have to pick one, all are considered a favored class for the human.
Now for the Half-Orc...gaining a +2 to Wisdom?? I just don't see this, Orc's are not inherently wise by nature, nor are humans (hence humans get the bonus to place where ever), Since the general description of the Half-Orc hasn't really changed I would suggest moving this adjustment to Con. Why? The reasoning I see behind it is the Orc is a warrior race, a violent race, they are used to living on the wilds and/or traversing difficult terrain? Orc's also love warfair, hence they will march for days in an organized fashion (of Orc sorts) to arrive at the conflict. Because of these normal factors in an Orcs life he does get a decent Con score and Str score. So why wouldn't this traverse over to the Half-Orc as well?
Just my opinion/thoughts.
Oz
I really like the racial changes, especially those pertaining to racial flavor.
However, I must state for the record that I want as much 3.5/Pathfinder transparency as possible so I can continue to use (without a lot of hassle) all the 3.5 stuff I spent so much of my cash on.
In regards to the half-orc: getting rid of the Charisma penalty and adding to Wisdom is a stroke of genius. Too many DMs and players confuse Charisma with a character's appearance. However, page through the MM and look over the Charisma scores therein. The mindflayer is far more repulsive in appearance than a half-orc and has a way higher Charisma. Why? Because Charisma is all about personality - not looks. Half-orcs have plenty of personality (after all, they practically exude an aura of intimidation). Wisdom, in part, represents strength of will and innate practicality. Again, things that a half-orc typifies.
Well done Jason!
I like the fact that the half-orc finally becomes playable again.
My fear is that the new races description allows for a 'power creep'. I let my players create their characters using a 75 point buy, where you get 1 point of ability score for every point spent, with the new ability modifiers I get a 77 point party.
This leads to another observation (slightly off-topic) what method for character generationa are you going to use and what happens to the effectiveness of the elite array?
Now for the Half-Orc...gaining a +2 to Wisdom?? I just don't see this, Orc's are not inherently wise by nature, nor are humans (hence humans get the bonus to place where ever), Since the general description of the Half-Orc hasn't really changed I would suggest moving this adjustment to Con. Why? The reasoning I see behind it is the Orc is a warrior race, a violent race, they are used to living on the wilds and/or traversing difficult terrain?
I kind of agree, however if I haven't missed my guess it seems the races get a bonus stat for a physical stat and a bonus for a mental stat. I can see the +2 Wis bonus a little. More than I could see a +2 Int bonus or a +2 Cha bonus. Honestly I think their negative stat should be Charisma and not Int but that's just me. I believe their reasoning for the Wisdom wasn't so much as Orcs being wise (a'la Dalai Lama sp?) but intuitive and alert seeing as Wisdom is the prime stat for the Awareness skill which governs such things. If I were to choose a mental stat for them to get their second bonus in that is the one I'd choose. If I were to choose a second stat period I'd say let them have a bit of human adaptability and choose where that second one goes maybe even going so far as to allow it to cancel out their negative. These are things I'm pretty sure I'd house rule once the playtesting was complete. I won't at present as the entire point of playtesting is to see how well the existing rules do and don't work so until I do that there will be no alterations.
I think its unnecessary to change racial ability adjustment. closely stick to srd. The only reason i see, is to make races more pathfinder like. so the general discussion about pathfinder rpg is boils down to:
is it 3.5 pathfinder-flavored rule or is it intended to be a "true" 3.5-fix using srd as closely as possible (which would not include the "fixes for races" because the races are not the "problem" of 3.5
as someone mentioned before dawnforge's approach is rather interesting.
My fear is that the new races description allows for a 'power creep'. I let my players create their characters using a 75 point buy, where you get 1 point of ability score for every point spent, with the new ability modifiers I get a 77 point party.
This may require a new thread as I had a very similar question; is it the intention to up the power level? Even at standard pts buy with 73 pts the racial bonus would add an across the board (all races) +2?
My STAP players are waiting...
I like the changes to half-orcs and half-elves. I think most people are in agreement with this. I think most of the other changes are slightly unnecessary, but still interesting.
I like favoured classes (and the advantage this gives half-elves and humans). I don't think it really impacts on play if the player is careful to balance his classes out.
I like the idea of racial feats. I've always liked racial paragon classes and this would be a less intrusive way of doing it. I think that the races should be able to pick from a variety of racial feats and gain bonus feats for this purpose (at 3rd, 6th, 9th, 12th, 15th, and 18th level). Everyone would then gain two feats at these levels.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Why not give humans a second bonus feat when the reach 11th level. All the benefits of choosing a race should not come at 1st level. To me this fits better than adding a weapon proficiency? Why must everyone learn how to fight with a weapon? Remember racial rules apply to npc classes as well.
Which sounds like a good way to explain how human commoners get a leg up on the other races in the wilderness "Darn goblins raiding again! Ma, go get me my crossbow!"
I can't help it, from what I have seen of Alpha 1 so far, I get the impression Jason is trying to give the characters enough reasons NOT to go the "need magical items" route from level 1. To me
- Increases in racial ability bonuses
- The Weapon Training/Armor Training abilities of the fighter
- The Domains and Schools abilities
all look like they are meant to make it easier to play Pathfinder/3.75 without the Christmas Tree effect setting in early.
I hope this is the case, and that it will be spelled out in the DM's Section clearly, so DM's won't accidentally heap their players with the standard amount of magical bling as well...that might indeed lead to power creep.
My guess is based on my current Lone Wolf D20 game, where magical items are a lot harder to come by, and where I've instated an ability increase every 2 levels, and a Defense Bonus to AC in order to make characters feel less dependent on magical gear to survive. Works nice so far, too. :)
What I think is not such a good idea are some other elven traits:
- Elves get a +2 racial bonus on checks to overcome spell resistance and to identify magical items. Though elves are said to be "naturally attuned" to magic, I think this gives them too much credit.
Other races have powerful stuff, too. Just take dwarves +2 to all saves vs. magic.
A professional wizard of 12th level or higher should be able to these things well, regardles of if he had picked up a few snippets as a child other people had not.
They didn't just pick up snippets. The snippets explain the magic items - just as dwarves greed explain the appraise.
Elves are also magical, so they are better at overcoming SR.
- Elves are so beautifull that "everyone" is much more helpful to them?
Not nearly everyone: Only those who are indifferent or better to begin with. And even not all of those, since the DM can rule otherwise all the time.
a) elves have a doubious reputation as they are. Adding actual "soo much better than thou" abilities won't really be helpful. b) I also think it's unrealistic.
It's not "soo much better than thou". It's pretty. It doesn't make them better fighters, or clerics.
I like it, since it's very classic. Elves have always been depicted as very beautiful.
No one complains about the dwarves' very powerful magic resistance. Some might call it overpowered, and it's a stereotype, too.
People might be enspelled by their appearance, but personally I would like elves to be somewhat feared because they look unnatural.
They don't look unnatural. They look unnaturally beauty.
You tell us we should be afraid of Pamela Anderson because of her implants? She's unnaturally busty ;-)
The name could use some work, I give you that.
I'm really an elf-lover like any other, but this has a severe touch of mary sue effect and would likely alienate more people than making them happy.
If we go that way, we get rid of all class abilities.
Elves who get a bonus to diplomacy because they're said to be beautiful: Mary sue.
Dwarves get a big bonus on almost all saving throws because they're "hearty": Mary sue.
Halflings are lucky and thus get a bonus on all saving throws because they're lucky: Mary sue.
If you think about it, a mere "people are a bit more friendly to you, unless they didn't like you before or wanted to kill you, so you won't get out of any fights with this" is pretty weak, at least in an action-heavy RPG like D&D.
The favorite class entry for the half-elf says: "Chose any one class at first level. This choice cannot be changed."
Is that really neccessary?
With the new favoured class rules, it is: Otherwise, things would get weird with multiclassing when your favoured class changes and you get bonus HP for a new class.
Also, what's the reason behind it? An elf has no problem being a rogue and no problem being a fighter, but when he does both, and therefore is allready worse at both, he also gets another ability? But when one class is wizard he doesn't? Why?
I'd say it's a holdover from 2e's racial class level limit, something to not make multiclassing too easy, and encourage the racial archetypes.
Just for the note, I got rid of it in my games.
I think the reasoning is that if you juggle two careers without giving each an equal amount of time, you get out of whack, unless one is something your race is good at. Moonlighting is hard.
What am I talking about? No, it makes no real sense, probably just to make it a bit like 2e's mess of a dual-class/multi-class system.
I don't like PF Alpha's take on it too much, but it's better than the old way. Still, I agree that getting rid of it would be the easiest thing.
And even if not, don't force the players to make the choice at first level. From my own experience it allways happens that you made initial mistakes you only realize later and most gms allow to "retcon" the character accordingly. I understand it that players shouldn't take one set of abilites early, allready with the intention of switching them later, because it's only a good choice at early levels, but forcing them to plan their character so much ahead isn't a good thing either.
I have no problem with the "choose at 1st level". I don't say you should plan your "built" in advance, so you know what feat you take at level 18 even before you put the pencil to the sheet for the first time, but I'd say that most people know at least in general what kind of character they're going to play - if you play a plain fighter, it's unlikely that you end up with a fighter/cleric/rogue combo.
And if the DM allows you to retcon the character's feats and so on, I'm sure he'll allow you to change that.