this is a race i made back in 3.5 now updated for pathfinder
the race is basically a humanoid bare race
+4 str
+2 con
-2 int
-2 cha
bite 1d6
claw 1d4
natural ac +2
powerful build
Scent
Low-light vision 60ft
+2 survival
+2 perception
i would like to know what you think of this race.
i want this race to be playable without any sort of level adjustment but i don't want to weaken the race too much just to make it in under the bar.
any help would be nice.
+2 Natural armor with no Dex or Size penalty is pretty powerful. Maybe make it +1? Also, 2 really good physical stats, with no weakened physical stats is really powerful for a tank-type. Especially since the minuses don't affect Will saves. Just skill points, harder access to the Combat Expertise feat chain, and social skills. Scent is pretty powerful, too. Maybe make it a feat or trait?
Maybe
+4 Str, +2 Con, -2 Dex, -2 Int.
Natural Armor +1
Powerful Build
+2 Perception and Survival
Low-light vision.
Claws and Bite
the ability adjustments seem to look good but i would really love to have scent
the ability adjustments seem to look good but i would really love to have scent
Yeah, you got no help at all in the race building guidelines. Here's my opinion: Strength is a really powerful stat. Out of the three physical ability scores, it adds the most to combat ability. That's the reason the half-orc no longer gets a +2 STR. +4 is bearable (Sorry...) provided you have two -2's in exchange.
Dex is a bad ability score to lose 2 points in, so it's perfect in this case, since Strength is decently powerful. Losing two points in Int works as well, and then since you're a PC race you can have another +2 to Con, since, well, you are a bear person.
Ability score adjustments:
+4 STR
-2 DEX
+2 CON
-2 INT
Now let's move on to racial abilities.
Powerful build... I usually disallow it, since it means you can use 1d8 light weapons in grapple, and thanks to that you used to have a +4, but for a PC race I think that would be really unbalanced at low level.
The +2 natural armor is fine due to the dex penalty. It gives a net +1 to AC, unlike the kobold who is the current king with a +3 to AC.
The d6 bite seems a bit much. Balance-wise, an extra 1d6 damage attack is pretty scary. If it's a secondary weapon then you're good to go. Fluff-wise, the bear's bite isn't all that bad, especially when compared to its claws. The Str bonus combined with having the claws be primary attacks should do an adequate job of making sure this race makes it known when it swats something.
Low light vision has no distance attached to it and is perfectly fine.
Scent is, unfortunately too good. I would hesitate to even give it to a kobold. Basically scent can let you find secret passages, detect ambushes and invisible people. Too good. We could instead give them high conditional bonuses to skills and allow them to track by scent, which is powerful but not ridiculous.
Special abilities:
+2 natural armor
Bite 1d6 (secondary)
2 Claws 1d4 (primary)
Low light vision
+4 on perception checks to notice something by scent
Sensitive Nose (ex): Can track by scent as though the creature possessed scent.
If you want to mimic powerful build, I would suggest giving the race a +1 to damage with all weapons. In some ways that is actually better, and they don't have to get custom-tailored items on adventures.
is scent to powerful in general or in addition to everything else the Ursa folk get.
what if i drop powerful build and instead give them a few bonuses like a +1 size bonus to cmb and cmd, then would they be balance enough for scent to be given
|
Powerful Build is something that breaks the floodgate... It's not an issue by itself, but it inspires players to try and get the biggest weapon they possibly can. Honestly, I would either give them the +4 str or +2 str and powerful build.
For the natural weapons, I would specify that you cannot use them in conjunction with weapon attacks. Hell, can you imagine what kind of havoc one of these would cause as a rogue at low levels? Oh, and why is the natural weapon damage so low, considering Powerful Build?
In my opinion... You're trying to make it too much. This is a powergamer's wet dream, as written. Even with the Dex hit, +2 natural armor puts you up one, in addition to have +1 HP/level and +2 attack, +3 damage (because let's face it, these guys will be wielding two-handed weapons). I think that in exchange for the ability to deal that much damage, it should take a hit to it's defense.
I'm with Hunterofthedusk. This race is broken good for melee combat.
If you really want to pile all those starting abilities on, they need some crippling handicap to go with - I'd recommend a -4 penalty on attacks with manufactured weapons, owing to the clumsiness of bear hands (heh).
They'll still come out as very powerful rogues (and, oddly, monks) but that's just going to happen with those ability scores and the natural attacks.
Otherwise, you should note that the only theoretically balanced race to get a +4 strength are orcs, who get it at the expense of -2 to *all* of their mental stats, and they get no constitution bonus from the deal.
As for scent... it really is just too crazy useful. Maybe you'll be fine using it in your own games, but it should definitely be off-limits as a base racial ability in standard games.
Yeah, I'd say scent is a bit too powerful. At Mid level when you have reliable location and invisibility purge, it's still very useful. Powerful build is pretty much the same way. Remember how after Races of Stone came out the only Barbarian that got played was the Goliath Barbarian? The Goliath with powerful build was why.
Weapon sizes in general are broken, which is why I suggest a +1 to damage with all weapons to represent the strength this race is known for. Hey, the greatsword went up a size. So 1d6 goes up to 1d8, that makes sense. By that same logic 2d6 goes up to 3d6! Wait...
Scent also lets you detect everything within 30 ft barring a windy day, and then "only" 15 feet. Let me tell you, my players HATE Bugbears since they can do this. Hate them. You use obscuring mist and hide? Bugbears know where you are. You walk into a crowd trying to hide from a bugbear? They know where you are. This eliminates all sorts of traps on the GM's end. The best I can say that is balanced is a big bonus to scent based perception and tracking by scent (DC 10). Otherwise you have not only a bruiser, but a bruiser who can't be ganked by assassins, invisible stalkers, really angry animated pillows, etc. because he can smell all of them coming. And nothing stops scent. NOTHING. Basically the ability is also broken to give to PCs.
How you run your races is your business, though. Hell, if it wasn't so broken, I'd give scent to my Gnolls. They have the heads of hyenas for crying out loud and they don't get scent or a bite attack. For +1 CR, either scent or powerful build would be fine and you could probably raise that natural armor bonus a bit.
the race is basically a humanoid bare race
Do they lose all racial abilities if they wear clothes?
Just thought I'd share my ideas for a bear race with you.
Do they lose all racial abilities if they wear clothes?
the race is basically a humanoid bare race
Butt of course! he he
Edit: couldn't resist!
Butt, back to the OP: Any Fluff? I have a number of Beastman races that are the result of Druids casting too many Awaken spells. Even thus far, I like this better than my 'bare' race.
I think both of the above "bear races" are terribly broken if they're intended to lack a level adjustment. What began as some advice on how to deal with races that have +4 to a stat, or that refuse to stick to the "one physical, one mental" bonus guideline, became a full fledged "simple race-making guide":
PF Race Building Guide (Simple)
By that guide you get the following:
+4 str, +2 con, -2 int, -2 cha
+4 str from +2 str (10 pts)
Swap bonus category +2 mental -> +2 con(4 pts)
-2 penalty to cat with penalty (-2 pts)
bite 1d6 (4 pts)
two claws 1d4 (4 pts)
natural ac +2 (8 pts)
powerful build (at LEAST 8 pts)
Scent (4 pts - similar to a feat)
Low-light vision (lowlight has no range btw. 1 pt)
+2 survival and +2 perception (2 pts)
Total --> ~45 pts ... so... more than 30 points more than a standard PF race that lacks a level adjustment, which would make that race a +3 or +4 ECL.
Why? You have category loading of both bonuses and penalties, powerful build ups your combat effectiveness and damage quite significantly. Two types of natural attacks equals 3 natural attacks total - you can feasibly make THREE attacks per round at level one, each which is enhanced by your +4 str... and so on.
lets try this
+4 str
-2 dex
+2 con
-2 int
-2 cha
+2 natural AC
Bite 1d6
Claw 1d4
+1 bonus to CMB and CMD
low light vision 30ft
scent
+2 perception
+2 survival
how about this, would this work better.
L1 human fighter (str 16 racial-> 18, dex 14, con 14, TWF, dodge, power attack, scale mail):
AC = 18 (2 dex, 5 armor, 1 dodge)
CMB = +5 (4 str, 1 BAB)
CMD = 18 (4 str, 2 dex, 1 BAB, 1 dodge)
HP = 13 (10 class, 2 con, 1 favored class)
Attack = long sword +2 (d8+6/19-20) and short sword +2 (d6+4/19-20)
Avg dmg (vs AC 11) = 12.54 per round
L1 bear fighter (str 16 racial-> 20, dex 14 racial->12, con 14 racial ->16, power attack, scale mail):
AC = 18 (1 dex, 5 armor, 2 natural)
CMB = +7 (5 str, 1 BAB, 1 racial)
CMD = 18 (5 str, 1 dex, 1 BAB, 1 racial)
HP = 14 (10 class, 3 con, 1 favored class)
Attack = 2 claws + 3 (d4+7) and bite +3 (d6+7)
Avg dmg (vs AC 11) = 20.13 per round
Even without the bite attack in there, the bear is at least as good as the human in every respect, and better at offense. He does more damage with only his claws, so when you add the bite, he outdamages the human by a mile. And hey, he can't be disarmed and doesn't have to pay for his weapons.
This completely disregards scent, incidentally.
No, that doesn't help in any significant way as far as achieving what you want (no level adjustment).
First.. or rather, again, low-light vision has no range specification. A creature simply has "low light vision". Not that it matters beyond indicating you didn't bother to read my reply.
The stats don't balance properly, and the racial abilities are over the top compared to existing PF races.
I'll break this up into stats and racial abilities so you can see what I'm talking about. All of this is covered in the guide I linked you to.
Step 1 - We start with standard +2 cat1, +2 cat2, -2 any... so lets say +2 Str, +2 Wis, -2 Dex
Step 2 - For 10 points we boost the +2 Str to +4 Str
Step 3 - For 4 points we move the +2 Wis to +2 Con
Step 4 - For -4 points we get -2 Int
Step 5 - For -2 points we get -2 Cha
Points from Stats Total = 8, which is nominally better than the 12 you had in the first build, but still huge considering that only leaves you 2 points to work with for racial abilities if you want to avoid a level adjustment.
Racial Abilities now..
Step 1 - +2 Natural Armor (4 per point, or 8 points)
Step 2 - One 1d6 Natural attack (4 pts)
Step 3 - Two 1d4 Natural attacks (4 pts)
Step 4 - +1 CMD and CMB (situational +1 attack and +1 AC) (4 pts)
Step 5 - Low Light Vision (1 pt)
Step 6 - Scent (4 pts - about equal to a feat)
Step 7 - +2 to two skills (2 pts)
Points from Racial Abilities = 27, which again is nominally better than the 31+ points you had going in, but nowhere near the point where you'd have no level adjustment.
No Level Adjustment = 10 pts
Your bear race = 39 pts
I'm afraid if you want this race to have a 0 level adjustment you're going to have to give until it hurts here. If the stats are what you're all about you could try this:
--
Bear Folk (10 pts = 0 level adjustment)
+4 Str, +2 Con, -2 Dex, -2 Int, -2 Cha (8 pts)
1d6 Bite (4 pts)
+1 Natural Armor (4 pts)
+2 racial bonus to Survival (1 pt)
Low-light Vision (1pt)
Primitive Stance (-8 pts)
Primitive Stance - Bear Folk are not fully bipedal, still retaining much of their animalistic heritage and requiring all four limbs to move properly. On any round in which a Bearfolk makes more than a 5-foot movement he or she cannot use his or her hands for attacks or spellcasting. If a bearfolk takes any action that involves the use of his or her hands (ie, attacking with a manufactured weapon, casting spells, drinking a potion) then until the end of his or her next turn any movement (including 5-foot steps) provoke attacks of opportunity.
Additionally, Bear Folk cannot run or charge while holding anything in their hands (including weapons or any shield but a buckler).
--
That is still a very combat-focused race, but it balances out its strengths with appropriate weaknesses that prevent it from being an overwhelming choice for characters of any specific class over other races. I tried to keep in as many features that you obviously wanted without getting a level adjustment.
so tell me how does the asimeir and the tiefling stack up to your guide because both of them have no level adjustment.
so tell me how does the asimeir and the tiefling stack up to your guide because both of them have no level adjustment.
Aasimar:
Negate penalty: 4 pointsSwitch phys to mental: 4 points
Resistance: ~2 points
Darkvision: 2 points
Skill bonuses: 2 points
Spell-like: 2 points
Total: 16 points.
And Aasimar are only playable with DM approval, many DM's not giving it due to Aasimars being overpowered. With about half the points of your class.
I say, drop powerful build, drop strength to +2, give it Imp. Unarmed Strike instead of natural attacks, and make the bite a secondary at 1d4.
On tiefling, remove the first 8 points since it has standard stat distribution, and bump the spell-like to 4 points since it's more useful. Tiefling has 10 points.
i don't think the energy resistance would be so cheap, i would say at least +4 for every +5 to energy resistance.
either way i would make the point that if the books say there is not level adjustment then that is what we should go off of not if your Dm thinks there too powerful.
Don't assume that any race detailed in the Bestiary has no PC level adjustment simply because it doesn't say so. Look at the CR of the creatures in question when trying to determine the power of the race. An adjustment 0 race will have a CR of 1/3. A weaker race (-1 adjust) will be 1/4, a stronger race (+1 adjust) will be 1/2 or beyond.
Aasimar
+2 Charisma, +2 Wisdom
Negate Racial Penalty (4 pts)
Swap Categories for bonus (4 pts)
Darkvision (2 pts)
Skilled (2 pts)
Daylight 1/day (4 pts)
Acid Resist 5 (1 pt)
Elec Resist 5 (1 pt)
Cold Resist 5 (2 pt)
Total points = 20 - The Aasimar should have a level adjustment of +1 which is consistent with its CR of 1/2
Tiefling
+2 Dex, +2 Int, -2 Cha
Darkvision (2 pts)
Skilled (2 pts)
Darkness 1/day (4 pts)
Cold Resist 5 (2 pts)
Elec Resist 5 (1 pt)
Fire Resist 5 (2 pts)
Fiendish Sorcery (2 pts) - half value of negating the CHA penalty since its situational
Total points = 15 - The Tiefling should have a level adjustment of +1 which is consistent with its CR of 1/2
---
If you honestly believe that any race given a set of character stats in the Bestiary without declaring a definitive level adjustment has NONE, then go take a look at the Drow Noble. Neither the base Drow nor the Drow Noble have any stated level adjustment which begs the question.. why would anyone choose Drow over Drow Noble?
As I understand it, the "Monster Characters" sections are for building full-fledged monster NPCs rather than giving blanket PC options. They tend to be on creatures that are humanoid or similar, that are likely to have class levels, and thus are being built as though they were PCs rather than always using the basic stats of that creature.
actually the drow has a cr of 1/3 and the drow noble has a cr of 3
there is the difference.
i cant quote where it ie written but the beastiary actually explains how to figure level adjustments for races to be used as player races and if i recall correctly the first thing you do is subtract 1 hd of the race to replace with class levels.
actually the drow has a cr of 1/3 and the drow noble has a cr of 3
there is the difference.
You seriously need to do more than skim things. The Drow Noble has 3 levels of cleric, hence the CR of 3. The straight Drow has 1 level of non-heroic class, hence no change in CR. Both Drow and Drow Noble's CR are determined entirely by class levels.
A Drow Cleric 3 is CR 3, a Drow Noble Cleric 3 is CR 3.
i cant quote where it ie written but the beastiary actually explains how to figure level adjustments for races to be used as player races and if i recall correctly the first thing you do is subtract 1 hd of the race to replace with class levels.
Appendix 4 is what you're looking for. It says that if you want to allow monsters as PCs, then let everybody play monsters as PC and use their CR as a level adjustment. In the case of allowing monsters in a group of non-monster PCs, it says use the CR as the racial adjustment and then do some funky math to compensate for racial hit dice over time. It also says the DM should be very, very careful about allowing monster PCs since some are simply inappropriate at any adjustment due to their abilities.
In the case of races with no racial HD, the DM arbitrates whether or not that race has a +1 level adjustment or not. Since the races with character information given are of CR 1/2 or lower, and races of CR 1/3 almost always come out to ~10 points, and CR 1/2 is always over 10 points it stands to reason that those are the races that deserve a level adjustment of +1.
The DM can decide ANYTHING. The DM can declare that you can play an ancient red dragon for 0 level adjustment. That said, when you're designing a race for mass consumption you're trying to make a race that 90% or more of DMs would agree is balanced against existing races, and have your reasoning ready to back up that claim. If you don't care about doing that then hell, give your bear people +10 to strength instead, and laser beams fired from their eyes!
i understand your point that being said my group follow the rule that if a race has less then 1 CR then it has no level adjustment, i also would like to say that i don't think energy resistance would calculate so low the way you have it in your guide, i would further say i don't think your guide work's for me or my group. i think that your guide doesn't quite calculate special abilities very well, some things seem like they would be more powerful than you have them and some things seem less powerful than you have them.
i want to convey that at no time have i felt any hostility from anyone posting on this thread nor have i given any hostility, this thread seems a little heated and i just wanted to put that out there.
i understand your point that being said my group follow the rule that if a race has less then 1 CR then it has no level adjustment, i also would like to say that i don't think energy resistance would calculate so low the way you have it in your guide, i would further say i don't think your guide work's for me or my group. i think that your guide doesn't quite calculate special abilities very well, some things seem like they would be more powerful than you have them and some things seem less powerful than you have them.
Energy resistance is situational, and energy type determines HOW situational. Fire and Cold are more prevalent energy types than the others - you'll be exposed to those damage types more often than the other three, and thus, resistance will be more useful when it is to those energy types.
That said, is 5 points of situational resistance worth a feat? If you know you're going to play a campaign that revolves around areas or creatures that make exposure to that energy type particularly likely (ie, a desert-based campaign and fire damage) then sure, a feat giving you 5 points of fire resistance might be worth it (and thus, you could say its ~ 4 points) but these races are not being created with that in mind, so I've valued energy resistance as situational, which halves the value... hence 2 points for fire and cold, 1 points for the others (4 pts divided by 2 for situational, divided again by 2 for not-quite feat worthy AND situational)
i want to convey that at no time have i felt any hostility from anyone posting on this thread nor have i given any hostility, this thread seems a little heated and i just wanted to put that out there.
The only thing that bothers me in this thread is that in several occasions it seems like you don't bother reading what people are saying, or reading the relevant parts of the books you're talking about. It just slows things down by requiring additional posting to convey information you already had access to. I'm not "hostile" to this, I'm just trying to suggest that you take advantage of the information you DO have.
Likewise, you're saying that the guidelines don't work, but being pretty vague as to HOW they don't work, other than the fact that the guidelines don't support your race as being balanced against core races. I'm totally open to the idea that the guidelines aren't perfect - that's why they're listed as rough guidelines - but they do work fairly well for all the existing pathfinder races.
As for not working for your group - that's fine too. Like I said, your DM can rule anything he or she wants. However, you've posted the race on the public pathfinder forum, meaning you're not asking the public if the race is acceptable to your gaming group - you're asking the public if the race is acceptable in general as a 0 level adjustment race. My answer is "No" and the guidelines are my reasoning why. My answer will continue to be "No" until the race is at, or at least close to, 10 points on that list. 10 points isn't an absolute - in fact, I'd be inclined to make the hobgoblin (12 points) a 0 level adjustment race as well. Tiefling (15 pts) is pretty close to it, but Aasimar is definitely a more powerful race than the core races, and so on.
You don't, of course, have to care what I say - its your game!
|
|
Back in 3.5, both of the planetouched were +0 LA when you took away the outsider type. Of course, that's also when Alter Self made any outsider PC's a god...
Buuuuuuut anyways, I think that they are more-or-less balanced as is. They haven't really changed much (the Tiefling gained one ability, the fiendish sorcery) while every other race has been powered up. Even if they are slightly more powerful, they are by only a small margin. Penalizing them by one whole level seems a bit harsh for such a measly difference. The Aasimar do make amazing clerics, but that really puts them into more of a support role.
lets try this
+4 str
-2 dex
+2 con
-2 int
-2 cha+2 natural AC
Bite 1d6
Claw 1d4+1 bonus to CMB and CMD
low light vision 30ft
scent+2 perception
+2 survivalhow about this, would this work better.
from my point of view i would say that the ability adjustments and the skills are balance and fair compared to other races.
that leaves the natural armor the natural attacks
the senses (lowlight/ scent)
and the +1 to cmb/cmd
i know how some of you feel about the ability scores but in my mind they are balanced, +6/-6 all together.
so the question is based on whats left behind what can we do to balance this race, take in mind that what i've given them should reflect what kind of abilities i want so i think i will stick with the +1 cmb/and cmd.
Back in 3.5, both of the planetouched were +0 LA when you took away the outsider type. Of course, that's also when Alter Self made any outsider PC's a god...
Buuuuuuut anyways, I think that they are more-or-less balanced as is. They haven't really changed much (the Tiefling gained one ability, the fiendish sorcery) while every other race has been powered up. Even if they are slightly more powerful, they are by only a small margin. Penalizing them by one whole level seems a bit harsh for such a measly difference. The Aasimar do make amazing clerics, but that really puts them into more of a support role.
Based on what, Savage Species guidelines? Where do you get the information related to your first statement - that they were 0 LA without the type? Savage Species tried to do too many things at once and in doing so tended to fail at all of them - it was also 3.0, not 3.5 - some of the templates and races in SS were reprinted in later 3.5 books (ie, half-ogre) with higher level adjustments. Other than introducing the idea of Monster Class Levels, very little good came out of that book, and its probably the only D&D logo splat book less likely to be allowed at a 3.x table than Tome of Battle.
I disagree that Aasimars, and to a lesser extent Tieflings, are balanced against existing 0 LA races. The Aasimar especially - it has two stat bonuses to mental stats, and no adjustments to physical (meaning it has a definite 'caster' orientation), can cast a 3rd level cleric spell once per day (that's a feat's worth - not an overpowering spell) has 3 different types of energy resistance (one primary, two secondary types), has Darkvision and has +2 racial to two very useful skills (diplomacy and perception). Better than normal stats + better than normal racial abilities - nothing = better than normal race.
It does come down to a judgement call - tieflings are much closer to being balanced against core races than aasimars. The iffiness goes away if you decide to start making "type" cost points as well, rather than applying points based on the specific abilities the type gives that specific creature (ie, the darkvision).
from my point of view i would say that the ability adjustments and the skills are balance and fair compared to other races.
Well, obviously... if you hadn't believed them to be balanced in your original posting you probably wouldn't have posted it.
I'll explain this a different way. To say that a race is balanced against core races, you have to be able to say that while some races are somewhat better at some professions than others, that no one race is the "you'd be stupid to be anything else" race for a given class. Elves make better wizards than Dwarves, on average, but not TONS better. Half-Orcs are somewhat better barbarians than Gnomes, but its not like a Gnome barbarian is out of the question... or that the gnome barbarian would absolutely SUCK compared to the half-orc.
Next, lets compare your bear race, as you've written it, with humans, half-orcs, and dwarves. We'll use fighter as the base class and we'll give all the races base stats of 10, and for sake of argument, we'll give our non-bear fighters TWF.
Human (Fighter 1)
Str 12 (all others 10)
HP 10
AC 16 (+6 from Breastplate)
Standard Attack: +3 Longsword (1d8+1)
Full Attack: +1 Longsword (1d8+1), +1 Shortsword (1d6)
Feats: Weapon Focus (longsword), Weapon Focus (shortsword), TWF
Half-Orc (Fighter 1)
Str 12 (all others 10)
HP 10
AC 16 (+6 from Breastplate)
Standard Attack: +3 Double Axe (1d8+1)
Full Attack: +1 Orcish Double Axe (1d8+1), +1 Orcish Double Axe (1d8)
Feats: Weapon Focus (Orcish Double Axe), TWF
Dwarf (Fighter 1)
Con 12, Wis 12, Cha 8 (all others 10)
HP 11
AC 16 (+6 from Breastplate)
Standard Attack: +3 Dwarven War Axe (1d10+1)
Full Attack: +1 Dwarven War Axe (1d10+1), +0 Hand Axe (1d6)
Feats: Weapon Focus (Dwarven War Axe), TWF
Bear Folk [Your Revision] (Fighter 1)
Str 14, Con 12, Dex 8, Int 8, Cha 8 (all others, meaning wisdom, 10)
HP 11
AC 17 (+6 from Breastplate, +2 Natural, -1 Dex)
Standard Attack: +4 Bite (1d6+3)
Full Attack: +4 Bite (1d6+2), +2 Claw (1d4+1), +2 Claw (1d4+1)
Feats: Multiattack, Weapon Focus (Claw)
So, assuming that each of these fighters hits with a standard attack or a full attack, the average damage dealt will be:
Human: 5.5 / 9
Half-Orc: 5.5 / 10
Dwarf: 6.5 / 10
BearFolk: 6.5 / 12.5
This differential is compounded if we let our archetypes dump full points into their strength stat, giving them a base stat of 18 before racial modifications... if we do that the average damage changes to:
Human: 8.5 / 14
Half-Orc: 8.5 / 15
Dwarf: 9.5 / 15
BearFolk: 12.5 / 20.5
Next, lets look at how likely the archetypes are to hit a standard goblin (AC 16), based on their stats at 10, with a standard attack, and then the chance of hitting with AT LEAST ONE attack using a full attack:
Human: 40% / 51%
Half-Orc: 40% / 51%
Dwarf: 40% / 47.5%
BearFolk: 45% / 76.8%
Because the bearfolk uses his natural weapons, he gets to make THREE attacks per round. Multiattack reduces the secondary attack penalties to -2, and the primary natural attack doesn't take ANY penalty.
So finally on the offensive end of things, lets multiply the average damage of each attack by the likelihood of that attack landing, and get the average DPR for each archetype against a goblin for both a standard and a full attack:
Human: 2.2 / 2.25
Half-Orc: 2.2 / 2.5
Dwarf: 2.6 / 2.325
BearFolk: 2.9 / 4.925
Your average Damage Per Round, as a totally average stat (10s) level 1 fighter, against a common level 1 enemy (goblin) is DOUBLE that of any other core race. The bearfolk does this without having to pay a single gp for weapons, can't be disarmed or have his or her weapons sundered, and can still make at least one more attack than any other character even if he or she decides to use a manufactured weapon and a shield.
That's just fighting. It is equally imbalanced with maneuvers (due to your giving yourself a +1 to both CMD and CMB, and having a higher strength), and the bearfolk have at least one higher AC due to having +2 natural armor. All in all, the bearfolk is superior to any other level adjustment 0 race, by far, when it comes to melee combat. IF you want to play a fighter or barbarian, and bearfolk is permitted, you'd be a fool not to be one and thus, the race is not what I'd consider balanced against core races.
can i ask you one thing please, lets say that in my group the ability adjustments are considered even for simplicity sake.
how can we look at the other elements that ive noted about the race.
+2 natural ac
+1 cmb/cmd
+2 survival, +2 perception
natural attacks (bite claw 1d6/1d4)
low light vision
scent
just for the sake of argument lets just say the ability adjustments are even with all other races, how big are the racial special abilities.
can i ask you one thing please, lets say that in my group the ability adjustments are considered even for simplicity sake.
how can we look at the other elements that ive noted about the race.
+2 natural ac
+1 cmb/cmd
+2 survival, +2 perception
natural attacks (bite claw 1d6/1d4)
low light vision
scentjust for the sake of argument lets just say the ability adjustments are even with all other races, how big are the racial special abilities.
I've scored them before, but we can go over WHY they're scored the way they are.
+2 natural AC (8 points)
Why? Because +1 to AC is equivalent to a feat, such as Dodge or Improved Natural Armor. We score feats as 4 points, so 2 points of additional AC is like two feats.
+1 cmb/cmd (4 pts)
4 pts is being generous, really. You can take Weapon Focus (grapple) to get a +1 to grapple checks alone and thats a feat. +1 CMB is a +1 to grapple, trip, bull rush, overrun, disarm, etc.. but we're going to treat it like half a feat (+1 to hit, situational) and the +1 to AC situational for the CMD bonus... 2 pts each, so 4 pts.
+2 to two skills (2 pts)
This one is a no-brainer. There are a slew of feats in the core book that do EXACTLY this and cost a feat to do so. The feats, however, double the bonus as of level 10, so we just apply this as a half-powered version of the feat.
Natural Attacks [1 bite, 2 claws] (8 pts)
These are huge - they're the main reason that the numbers get crazy for this race. You can't lump them together because they're really two entirely separate things... a primary bite attack, and two secondary claw attacks (unless you were thinking of having your bearfolk only have claws on one hand).
Natural weapons aren't something a creature uses instead of a weapon (though they can) it is something they can use IN ADDITION to a weapon. If the creature has a bit and two claws, it can attack with, say, a bastard sword for 1d10+Str, and then attack with a bite and a claw, all as part of the same full attack action. To top it off, these extra attacks, while normally made at -5, give no penalty to the initial attack, so the creature is just getting an extra one or two attacks for free - this is true at level 1.
Imagine a BearFolk rogue at level 5, doing a full attack while flanking someone. That's 3d6 sneak attack damage x3 attacks and the bearfolk rogue doesn't even need 15 dex or to spend a feat on TWF - a feat on Multiattack turns those -5's into -2's while still leaving the initial attack as full attack bonus.
A natural bite attack is a huge combat advantage, but I've put it in as a single feat equivalent (4 pts). The same is true of 2 secondary claw attacks (4 pts). Natural attacks are NOT fluff.
Low-light Vision (1 pt)
Only needs light in total darkness. This isn't a big deal, but humans wish they had it!
Scent (4 pts)
This is about a feat worth of ability. In fact, I believe there are feats in 3.5 that give someone Scent under certain conditions. Unconditional Scent is certainly a feat equivalent.
----
So, ignoring the stats altogether, thats 27 points of racial abilities, and an explanation as to why it sums to 27. Racial abilities for all core book races sum to approximately 10, so you're looking at nearly triple the value of the core races racial abilities.
In terms of feats, core races have 2.5 feats worth of "stuff" and your bear has 6.75 feats worth of stuff. This is ignoring stats, of course.
|
|
The adjustment to the planetouched was in the Player's Guide to Faerun (3.5), and it applied to all of the planetouched, Genasi included. Just make them Humanoid (Planetouched) rather than outsiders and they had no level adjustment. Oh, they also took the Daylight spell for the Aasimars down to just Light.
My argument is that they might look a little overpowered point-wise, but that all breaks down in actual gameplay. Energy resistance means near nothing by about 4th level and up, since energy damage usually comes in much larger chunks than weapon damage (The Tiefling won't be much less scorched by the Red Dragon's breath than any other member of the party). Darkvision is helpful, but nothing game-breaking. Two mental stats? My players usually go for physical, so they don't bat an eye at the Aasimar, but that's my group. The cleric is the only class I can think of that actually needs both charisma and wisdom, so everyone else will (from an optimization standpoint) be wasting a stat.
northbrb, part of the big problem with your race is the claw/bite. If you looked over my Saelvhik (yes they are only slightly more powerful than the PFCRB, but so are all the other rcaes available as Player friendly for Sarunia) you'd notice that I don't grant that. Instead I give them Improved Unarmed Strike and that they are Medium size, but are treated as size Large for some affects (including their Unarmed strikes).
Northbrb, look at what you're asking for versus what other races get.
Not one, but 2 different natural attacks.
A +2 bonus to AC, even though there's feats out there that only get you a +1.
STR and CON bonus, with only one mental penalty.
SCENT? I understand how the animal version would have it, but this is entirely too powerful for PCs, as has been explained, numerous times above.
And a +1 to CMB/CMD?
Wow. Your handing what's supposed to be a 0 lvl adjustment race at least 4 or 5 feats worth of bonuses right out the gate.
Here's what I would make it as, just as an estimate, something at least playable:
+2 STR
+2 CON
-2 WIS
-2 INT
Natural Claw attack
Low Light Vision
+2 Perception
+2 Survival
Seriously, lose scent. The bonus to Perception and Survival should cover whatever scent-like abilities the race would retain. If this was some kind of bear-race that became humanoid, it had to lose something to gain human-like sentience. Your build tries too hard to keep every advantage of a natural bear, and advantages of being a sentient humanoid. It's give and take, and your build just hasn't given enough.
@VoodooMike: Is there a guidline somewhere that paizo has set forth in regard to race creation or are you wingin it with the point values you have assigned to stats/abilities?
Paizo makes it up as they go along - they haven't published any guide to this sort of thing. The point value thing is just a system I put together that works for the existing paizo races. It works for the core book races, and more-or-less for the "maybe" races in the bestiary. I put in example calculations for a bunch of races in the guide.
My argument is that they might look a little overpowered point-wise, but that all breaks down in actual gameplay. Energy resistance means near nothing by about 4th level and up, since energy damage usually comes in much larger chunks than weapon damage (The Tiefling won't be much less scorched by the Red Dragon's breath than any other member of the party). Darkvision is helpful, but nothing game-breaking. Two mental stats? My players usually go for physical, so they don't bat an eye at the Aasimar, but that's my group. The cleric is the only class I can think of that actually needs both charisma and wisdom, so everyone else will (from an optimization standpoint) be wasting a stat.
Cleric and Paladin are both Wis/Cha assuming we're sticking to core classes - WIS for casting, CHA for channeling. Aasimars look a little overpowered on paper, totally ignoring the point system, because they have two bonuses, no penalties, a non-cantrip spell-like ability, darkvision, and three kinds of energy resistance. The tiefling will be 5 points less scorched than his teammates. Additionally, there are feats kicking around to improve existing energy resistance, but not many that give it where none existed before.
Combine, say, all the traits of the Elf with all the traits of the Half-Orc, and use the orc's +2 to any one stat to cancel out the penalty to constitution. Is the resulting "race" so much more powerful than the other core races that it deserves a level adjustment? Again, it'll be like the aasimar - its very literally TWICE as good as the other races on merit of being the combination of all abilities of two races, but mechanics wise its better than an elf or a half-orc, without any question. Is a "race worth" of ability equivalent to a character level?
What it comes down to, really, is that the point system lets you determine the approximate power level of a race as compared to core races. If your race is significantly better than core races but not deserving of a level adjustment (in your opinion) then you should tone it down until its in line with core races, or tone it up and accept the level adjustment. Of course, you should be working with your DM in this regard - trying to push the upper limit of "how much better can I make a race than core and still get away with having no LA" is just crappy powergaming.
|
|
Actually, Paladins are charisma based casters now. They only need wisdom as much as any other character that doesn't have a class feature attached to it.
Since the board ate my last post, I no longer have the will to argue on the side of the tiefling/aasimar. Like I said before though, take away the outsider type and you take away their main reason for giving it a LA+1 in the first place, and replace Daylight with Light... But then, that is LA 0 for 3.5. Look it up in the Forgotten Realms books
Actually, Paladins are charisma based casters now. They only need wisdom as much as any other character that doesn't have a class feature attached to it.
Since the board ate my last post, I no longer have the will to argue on the side of the tiefling/aasimar. Like I said before though, take away the outsider type and you take away their main reason for giving it a LA+1 in the first place, and replace Daylight with Light... But then, that is LA 0 for 3.5. Look it up in the Forgotten Realms books
We can continue this in the other thread anyway - we're drifting away from the bearfolk topic ;)
Seriously, lose scent. The bonus to Perception and Survival should cover whatever scent-like abilities the race would retain. If this was some kind of bear-race that became humanoid, it had to lose something to gain human-like sentience. Your build tries too hard to keep every advantage of a natural bear, and advantages of being a sentient humanoid. It's give and take, and your build just hasn't given enough.
That's a very good summary, Jandrem.
This is the kind of advice many people are looking for.Congrats.
I put in example calculations for a bunch of races in the guide.What guide?
Seriously, lose scent. The bonus to Perception and Survival should cover whatever scent-like abilities the race would retain. If this was some kind of bear-race that became humanoid, it had to lose something to gain human-like sentience. Your build tries too hard to keep every advantage of a natural bear, and advantages of being a sentient humanoid. It's give and take, and your build just hasn't given enough.That's a very good summary, Jandrem.
This is the kind of advice many people are looking for.
Congrats.
Thank you! I had a homebrew setting a long time ago that had a lot of anthropomorphic races, and I spent a lot of time statting them up to be balanced against core races. But, for the sake of game balance, I think they were dramatically underpowered; usually just a +2/-2 in the stats and the Track feat for the most part. I never ended up using any of them, since the other players I gamed with weren't interested in that kind of game. We never ran a serious game in that setting, so nothing really got playtested.
I really liked that Savage Species made an attempt at anthropomorphic races, but the racial HD and level adjustments made them less attractive for serious campaigns, IMO. That, and I felt like my other players were thinking I was a Furry or whatnot, which I'm not. Nothing wrong if someone else is, I just think animal heroes are neat, and that's it(TMNT FTW).
I was running a campaign for a while, and it eventually got to the big bad end of the world quest when the campaign petered out because of work, family, real life, etc.
Anyways, there was a crazy cult of wannabe lycanthropes that thought they would come back into their power if they crashed the moon into the earth. It was a collection of insane animal-headed humanoids, (minotaurs, gnolls, kenku/tengu, etc.), as well as critters with human-like intellect (worgs, etc.), working with shifters (animal-like humanoids from Eberron). Of course it was just yuan-ti trying to destroy the world, with rakshasa trying to stop them, but I think it would be neat to re-boot that idea with a new group of players in another campaign.
Anyways, I really liked the shifters because they made great low-level "wannabe" versions of higher power animal-like shapeshifters (rakshasa, yuan-ti, etc.). It made me want to make an Animalhead race, with lots of different variations, like the shifters, but more overtly animal-headed.
Why give them a option of taking scent as a feat? That seems to work from my experience.
Why give them a option of taking scent as a feat? That seems to work from my experience.
That's how a lot of races handle things that would be too powerful as just a toss-in with the race, but which tie into the flavour of the race in the long term. So yes, that's a good idea.
The other way to handle major racial abilities is to not only do the feat thing, but have a "1st level only" prerequisite on the feat, such as the Warforged's "adamantine body" feat. You can have your character with a powerful racial option, but only if you sacrifice your level 1 feat to do so, and so on.
I REALLY wish Pathfinder standardized racial advancement traits in their core rules. They would have fit in perfectly at levels 2, 6, 10, 14, and 18 (the non-class-based "dead" levels where you don't get a feat or ability score increase). They could have based them on the traits rules, and maybe organize them like the Talent Trees the d20 Modern classes got.
Then you could make the races a little bit more balanced against each other, as well as give them some more powerful abilities at higher levels. I'm thinking of the elves' free spell penetration, drow spell-like abilities, maybe a return of the halflings' +1 with thrown weapons, etc. etc.