New suggestion for Dwarven and Elven / Half-Elven racial traits

[S W]

I want to suggest the following changes to the racial traits lineup:

Dwarves should get "Dwarven Fortitude": Dwarves always get fort saves as a "good save" regardless of what class they choose.

Elves and Half-Elves should get "Elven Reflexes": Elves and Half-Elves always get reflex saves as a "good save" regardless of what class they choose.

It occurred to me that, while races do get corresponding attribute bonuses such as con for dwarves and dex for elves, it makes no sense for a dwarf to have a "bad" fort save. After all, they are the "toughest" of all the sentient races that a pc can play. Dwarven fortitude is the stuff of legends, right? The thing they are perhaps best known for, other than their surly attitudes and penchant for mining and treasure-hording?

Same thing with Elves (and half-elves, who were lacking in the traits department)... the agility of elven characters is one of their natural, genetic traits and the idea of an elven fighter with a "bad" ref save is just ludicrous. An adult elf is probably at least a hundred years old, fit, and well-practiced in using his legendary natural agility. He would NEVER have bad reflexes unless that elf was literally disabled in some way. (Come to think of it, why DO fighters only have one good save? Aren't they supposed to have great reflexes?)

These traits would certainly be competitive with the humans "free feat" racial feature, don't you think?

[Jason Bulmahn]

Hmm,

Interesting idea. Although I approve of the sentiment, I am worried that this requires a lot of checking and conversion for GMs attempting to use this rule with existing products. That is not to say that there is no room for a rule like this, I am just wondering if this might not fall into the realm of a "racial feat" of the type being discussed elsewhere on these boards.

Thoughts?

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

[S W]

Well, I certainly appreciate your consideration! I think it would be easy to implement, regardless of backward compatibility concerns - all one has to do is look at one's own character sheet (or at the pathfinder book) in the whatever your "good" save column is, and copy it into the "fort" or "reflex" save area as appropriate.

[Freesword]

S W, you have inspired me to an interesting (although admittedly less than backward compatible) concept. Instead of Saves being tied to class with a bonus from race, reverse that. Saves are tied to race with a bonus from class.

Your race would determine your save progressions, but your class would give bonuses to what are considered the good save for the class.

This would tie the save progressions more to character level than class level and eliminate some of the oddness of Prestige/Multi Classing. Again, I admit this is a big hit to backward compatibility and will not make it into the final release, but it does provide for some interesting possibilities for future consideration.

Back to more immediately relevant matters.

As for your proposal itself, I feel that while it is an excellent idea I agree with Jason that it may strain backward compatibility enough that the gain may not sufficiently exceed the cost. Remember, each change that affects backward compatibility isn't an isolated comparison of individual change to gain, but cumulative change to individual gain. More simply, the less backward compatible the system becomes over all, the less valuable the gains from individual changes become.

[S W]

It is assumed, however, that one is using the official Pathfinder RPG handbook. This is the new "Core Rules," so if you are porting things over from 3.5, 3.0, or non-WotC materials, you will have to do at least SOME conversion to make it compatible. As long as the basic elements of gameplay are there, it is backward-compatible.

The "saves" mechanics are still the same - you are just updating one of your saves to a "good value" instead of a "bad value." It is still backward compatible, even more so than changing a feat like "Combat Expertise" which is a complete rewrite, or even adding a new feat like "Backswing." This Racial save bonus giving you a "good save" is no different than any other "good save," whether it's from a core class, prestige class, or any other source.

That's my rationale for considering it fully "Backward compatible." We obviously can't take "Backward compatibility" to mean "works the same way as 3.5 or 3.0" because 1. things have already been changed rather significantly (rage powers and rage points, ki pool and ki points, mage powers etc.) to improve on 3.5 and 2. Some things simply need to be rewritten. The racial save feature, if anything, requires less change than any of the above - you simply change one of your saving throw values - and it fits the concept of racial abilities that MEAN something as well as adding "flavor," rather than a +2 to certain skills (for example) that are only really for "flavor."

Q: Why WOULD you ever make a dwarf wizard or rogue? A: Well, for one thing, they have great fort saves, something no other wizard or rogue has.

[ckafrica]

The problem with the idea to me is that it gives nothing to the dwarf or elf who has picked a class that has a good progression for the save already and it will allow you to do some multiclassing cheese where as a dawrf 1/1 thief mage I'm getting 4 fort bonus where I would otherwise have none.

It will actually make it better not to play a class that has a high progression for the race in question.

Give something to a race based on the class they take is bad in my books because it means you are penalized for making a choice that can not benefit from it. If you instituted this you would likely see less dwarven fighters and clerics when they are supposed to be the iconic classes for these races

[thefishcometh]

I love simplicity, so I think a flat little bonus would work just fine. Just throw them a +2 on their given save and call it a day.

[Jay Fisher - LSJ Coordinator]

Considering that the differences between Good and Poor save bonus is basically a +2, I'm inclined to the idea of a Racial Bonus as opposed to an additional feat or superimposing the Good save progression over established class info. Besides, this also allows the racial bonus to be applied to a class with a good progression as well.

[KaeYoss]

Jay Fisher - LSJ Coordinator wrote:

Considering that the differences between Good and Poor save bonus is basically a +2, I'm inclined to the idea of a Racial Bonus as opposed to an additional feat or superimposing the Good save progression over established class info. Besides, this also allows the racial bonus to be applied to a class with a good progression as well.

I agree, mostly.

It's more than +2. If you take the +2 away, you still have between +0 to +4 difference.

Still, it's not a huge difference, and I think that a flat bonus is better than messing with the charts like that.

And, come to think of it, those races already get part of that bonus, since elves get +2 dex and dwarves +2 con. Plus, dwarves already get a +2 bonus on most fort saves (spells and poisons - there's not that much more for an adventurer to fear in the fort save department).

Messing with the charts can get weird quick. Why stop with saves? So elves get always strong ref saves and dwarves strong fort. What then? Crafty halflings always get 8+ int skill points, and warlike half-orcs always strong BAB? Magical gnomes always get to cast sorcerer spells?

I know, the last couple examples are a bit extreme, but it gets the point across: Races and classes should be separate.

[Freesword]

S W, my concerns regarding the backward compatibility of your proposal are an opinion, and I admit that it may well be wrong.

My view is that this change would involve recalculating saves for certain races which is a more complex change than making a note of additional abilities or changes to how an existing ability works. The only other changes that really compare are the hit point boosts to some classes and the skills change. Each of those I feel made a more significant purely mechanical gain (fixing mechanical weaknesses in the system) to the game than the cost of their change to compatibility. Most of the gain from your suggestion is in flavor, which is why I see it balancing differently.

As I stated, I like your idea. Personally, I would be willing to implement it as a house rule and may well expand on it before doing so as the beginning of my previous post indicated. Backward compatibility is less narrowly defined and less essential for my own use. I just don't feel it will be as well received by those who consider backward compatibility (seen as being as much like 3.5 as possible) as a deal breaker and many of that mind take up the rallying cry "if it wasn't broke, don't change it".

[Asgetrion]

S W wrote:

Well, I certainly appreciate your consideration! I think it would be easy to implement, regardless of backward compatibility concerns - all one has to do is look at one's own character sheet (or at the pathfinder book) in the whatever your "good" save column is, and copy it into the "fort" or "reflex" save area as appropriate.

Hmmm, I think I suggested such Racial Feats (for dwarves and elves, respectively), and I personally think this sort of thing is elegantly governed by them...

[Asgetrion]

Jay Fisher - LSJ Coordinator wrote:

Considering that the differences between Good and Poor save bonus is basically a +2, I'm inclined to the idea of a Racial Bonus as opposed to an additional feat or superimposing the Good save progression over established class info. Besides, this also allows the racial bonus to be applied to a class with a good progression as well.

Hmmm... as halflings receive +1 to all saves, this might be another nice mechanical solution that enhances the "feel" of each race. :)

[S W]

Dwarven and elven characters already get plenty of diverse traits that benefit all classes, especially weapon familiarity, elven spell penetration, dwarven stability, hatred, defenses vs. giants, and they already get a +2 saving throw bonus versus poison and spells. Although you *could* change that to a +2 Fort save across the board, I really do think that the suggestion I made makes more sense thematically.

Anyone can take a feat to give them +2 to a save. Dwarven resillience isn't just good; it's Legendary. They are the TOUGHEST people in the PC's world. Same with elves and their grace and agility. Halflings may be fast, gnomes may be fast, but elves - their graceful movements are the stuff of legends. It's what they're best known for, besides magical skill. It goes beyond just getting a +2 Dex. Dwarves and elves in fantasy fare are set apart for their toughness and agility, respectively.

There is no such thing as a healthy dwarf with a "poor" fort save, or an able-bodied elf with a "poor" reflex save.

[Andrew Phillips]

I am also intrigued by the idea of the tough dwarves and graceful elves but as one those backward compatible(as close to 3.5 as possible )guys I beleive "messing with the charts" is very bad.

Now giving dwarves and elves some type of additional bonus could work but would be more of a discussion about again increasing the base power of the races, another topic entirely.

[S W]

Messing with the charts? In what way? You copy the good save number into the other space on your character sheet. Done. No math required. You don't even need anything other than your own character sheet.

The base power of the races is probably not even up to +1 ECL yet. They don't have daily spell-like abilities or Large size or energy immunities or anything that would even be considered +x ECL.

[ckafrica]

Remember that a good save progression is more than just a +2 at the beginning it is that improved progression as long as you follow that class. And when you multiclass you will get that +2 again if the new class doesn't normally have the good save progression.

Honestly I can see a lot of Dwarven thieves and elven cleric builds if this was instituted.

If you really want to give them bonuses you should find another mechanic. this one has abusable written all over it, sorry.

[S W]

It's no more abusable than Elven spell penetration and +2 Int. I can see Elven wizard builds all over that one, too.

[KaeYoss]

S W wrote:

It's no more abusable than Elven spell penetration and +2 Int.

Elven spell penetration grants a flat bonus. It doesn't say "for spell penetration, your caster level always equals your character level" or anything like that (and even that wouldn't be as bad)

[Andrew Phillips]

S W wrote:

Messing with the charts? In what way? You copy the good save number into the other space on your character sheet. Done. No math required. You don't even need anything other than your own character sheet.

Please remember that I have to modify every NPC of the affected races, and no I will not just wing it my, PCs are pains in the a** about asking "did you account for the change of so-n- so to so-n-so".

I will always say keep the changes simple as can be to get the desired effect.