|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Though this is as much asking for advice than it is promoting a suggestion, I feel this is the better Forum.
I want opinions on a dramatic redesign for PC Race, based completely on the Fluff and a Player's desire for character background first -- and crunch/ mechanics second. (long OP ahead)
Plenty of gamers have had an excellent concept for a PC design over the years that sound great, only to become nearly impossible in the actual build:
The redeemed Tiefling whose evil nature lies just beyond the surface, but who steadfastly clings to his Paladin code and LG alignment;...
The Catfolk Cleric of Calistria who gracefully dances as he stings with his whip;
The NE Fetchling Druid whose hatred for the Prime Material makes him want to use his Shadowy-Druidic abilities to consume Golarion.
But then you see that the Tiefling has a -2 to CHA and can't be a Paladin without being a useless crap-bag of a PC;... And the Catfolk has a -2 to WIS and can't be a viable Cleric;... And the Fetchling can't be a Druid and the Dwarf can't be a Paladin and the Undine can't be a Barbarian and the Ratfolk can't be a Fighter.
Ayup.
If you want to be a Paladin your best bet is Suli -- it doesn't matter if you don't want to play a Suli. While Elves and, heh, RATFOLK make the best Wizards. Seriously. Ratfolk Wizard.
Here's my Suggestion, and what I'm asking advice on:
What if all the Medium sized PC Races' +2/+2/-2 Ability Score adjustments were chosen by the Player -- the Player decides what +2/+2/-2 adjustments the Race gets -- obviously keeping to the +2 to a "mental" / +2 to a "physical" rule?
How would that change the game?
The first and most important additional-design need I see is that Humans, Half-Elves and Half-Orcs become slightly weaker. So give them each, for example, one extra Trait, I propose -- or something else equitable with the difference between a +2 to any one score and the +2/+2/-2 "new standard."
The second problem that requires additional thought, and I don't know that I have the answer yet, is that of the Aasimar and Hobgoblin, who both have two +2s (without a -2) AND both of their +2s are from the same "category" of Scores: Mental for Aasimar and "physical" for Hobgoblins. My gut tells me that if we just give them the "new standard" of +2/+2/-2 and leave the rest of their Racial traits alone they would still be balanced.
Third, how does this affect the Small Races, for whom I feel the current design model is still appropriate? Do Halflings & Gnomes become seriously, significantly weaker? How can we build them back up?
And finally, the hardest and most screamingly frustrating aspect of such a dramatic design change, what about how all the other Racial Traits mix with the new freedom of a Player choosing what +2/+2/-2 to do for each Race? (Hopefully we'll learn that they're all "relatively equally" "broken" and thus balance is maintained.
Comments & opinions?....
What if all the Medium sized PC Races' +2/+2/-2 Ability Score adjustments were chosen by the Player -- the Player decides what +2/+2/-2 adjustments the Race gets -- obviously keeping to the +2 to a "mental" / +2 to a "physical" rule?
How would that change the game?
The biggest change I could see is that it would make the classes more appealing to every race, so you wouldn't have a total lack of dwarven paladins even if you think that's completely normal. I don't think it would weaken humans at all, if anything it might the other races more appealing and the classes that normally enjoy a bonus to more than one stat more appealing to the races that only have a single +2. Great for if you want a variety of race/class combos, instead of forcing dwarves to never ever consider being an oracle for instance.
The thing that always gets me about small is that it isn't just the attributes, but the slow speed and weapon damage. You might want to look at that.
I actually already allow people to change their +/- 2's, or to take a single +2 if they really want. It makes the character more about their character's backstory, rather than the race itself. Which I happen to like! Bonus points if you ask them about how they got their bonuses?
And finally, the hardest and most screamingly frustrating aspect of such a dramatic design change, what about how all the other Racial Traits mix with the new freedom of a Player choosing what +2/+2/-2 to do for each Race? (Hopefully we'll learn that they're all "relatively equally" "broken" and thus balance is maintained.
That infers that traits are inherently capable of making someone OP, or that they were balanced around the race in question. Elves have a trait that gives them +2 to initiative, and another for +1 to fortitude. I never thought they were. I usually allow build your own traits if the players pass them by me, and things never go wrong(though a few ideas get rejected. More so because science experiment isn't a background the other players are comfortable with...)
For personalized racial redesigns, I think the easiest thing is to just have everyone roll as a human and make everything about their race be fluff. Think of Usagi Yojimbo. Why make races for every single kind of animal? "You're a rabbit samurai? Okay, you probably want to put the floating +2 into Dex. You're a rhino bounty hunter? Maybe +2 Str and take Toughness as the free feat?"
There is literally no reason not to do this with any race you want. For really funky ones, likes those with flight abilities, or non-Medium sized, you would have to tweak. Don't make too much work for yourself.
For personalized racial redesigns, I think the easiest thing is to just have everyone roll as a human and make everything about their race be fluff. Think of Usagi Yojimbo. Why make races for every single kind of animal? "You're a rabbit samurai? Okay, you probably want to put the floating +2 into Dex. You're a rhino bounty hunter? Maybe +2 Str and take Toughness as the free feat?"
There is literally no reason not to do this with any race you want. For really funky ones, likes those with flight abilities, or non-Medium sized, you would have to tweak. Don't make too much work for yourself.
That's actually an interesting idea.
That's actually an interesting idea.
I get one right every now and again. ;)
I want opinions on a dramatic redesign for PC Race, based completely on the Fluff and a Player's desire for character background first -- and crunch/ mechanics second.
In my humble opinion, the fixed-race concept of D&D/Pathfinder is coherent with the rest of the system. Removing the crunch (or having it play second fiddle) will remove a gamist element of the game; that of choosing where your pluses and minuses are purchased as racial packages. I think that the "select your race and class" is part of the attractions of D&D/Pathfinder (kind of a CHOOSE YOUR CAR! at the arcade)
That being said, the racial packages fall short of making a significant mechanical difference in gameplay, especially at higher levels. Even at lower levels, they create bigger "unoptimized characters" than optimized ones as you stated.
To answer your question as to "how it would change the game", I don't it would change it much except in perception (as some people are into the game for its choices of race and class etc). It would indeed unlock certain un-optimal concepts. Something should be made specifically for small races; either that or create them as medium-sized characters and fluff them as small creatures.
My take on the issue has been to remove all ability modifiers from race and give it to the class instead, and instead give the races a list of stat-independent racial abilities.
While we're at it, I think race should have less of an impact at lower level but scale as the character level-up...
|
I want opinions on a dramatic redesign for PC Race, based completely on the Fluff and a Player's desire for character background first -- and crunch/ mechanics second.To answer your question as to "how it would change the game", I don't it would change it much except in perception (as some people are into the game for its choices of race and class etc). It would indeed unlock certain un-optimal concepts. Something should be made specifically for small races; either that or create them as medium-sized characters and fluff them as small creatures.
My take on the issue has been to remove all ability modifiers from race and give it to the class instead, and instead give the races a list of stat-independent racial abilities.
While we're at it, I think race should have less of an impact at lower level but scale as the character level-up...
I think this is an excellent idea. By making the stat bonuses intrinsic to the class you can give more life to the flavor of the race without sacrificing mechanics. It suggest that all races are diverse enough, genetically, that any sort of "person" is feasible.
Its much more feasible that a paladin in inherently charismatic and strong than a dwarf is inherently hearty and unlikable.
Mechanics and fluff go hand in hand. It makes little sense to say that all dwarves are hardy if they have no abilities which actually make them hardier than any other race.
That isn't to say that this needs to be specifically represented through ability score modifiers. Moving ability score modifiers to classes can work, as long as the races still have different abilities. But if you make all of the races mechanically identical, you are subtracting from the fluff and depth of the world, not adding to it.
Though this is as much asking for advice than it is promoting a suggestion, I feel this is the better Forum.
I want opinions on a dramatic redesign for PC Race, based completely on the Fluff and a Player's desire for character background first -- and crunch/ mechanics second. (long OP ahead)
Plenty of gamers have had an excellent concept for a PC design over the years that sound great, only to become nearly impossible in the actual build:
The redeemed Tiefling whose evil nature lies just beyond the surface, but who steadfastly clings to his Paladin code and LG alignment;...
The Catfolk Cleric of Calistria who gracefully dances as he stings with his whip;
The NE Fetchling Druid whose hatred for the Prime Material makes him want to use his Shadowy-Druidic abilities to consume Golarion.But then you see that the Tiefling has a -2 to CHA and can't be a Paladin without being a useless crap-bag of a PC.
I agree, except the class wanted is Anti-Paladin for me. In any case . . .I agree with what you're saying. What about playing by the 2nd Edition Tiefling ( aka no -2 Cha )? Just for that aspect? If an Aasimar has no disadvantages why can't a Tiefling?
Sounds like the real issue here is the negative ability modifiers that many races have. Drop those and just keep the ability score bonuses of each race. That will still help differentiate races/class combos from one another without penalizing certain race/class combos.
If a certain race takes up a certain class, flavor/fluff-wise it make sense that they would learn to overcome the drawbacks of their race to better fulfill that class role. An elven fighter would naturally be more hardy than an elven wizard (represented by the class' normal ability score allocation), but an elven fighter wouldn't be as hardy as a dwarven fighter (represented by the race's ability score bonuses). Does this mean that an elven fighter's Constitution should be four points lower than the dwarf's though? I don't think so. The difference is already apparent enough with a two-point margin and a dwarf's other racial traits.
Alternatively, you could just make more than one version of a race or have alternate racial traits that swap out the ability scores.
On another note, it's really awkward when there's race-specific archetypes and the race in question has terrible ability scores for that class. For example, there's a suli magus archetype that makes creative usage of the suli's elemental arms racial ability. However, sulis have a -2 to Intelligence, a vital statistic for magi (not to mention magi are also MAD).
|
|
Sellsword,
I could almost go for that but I'd be really afraid to. The Human, Half-Orc and Half-Elf become weaker instead of stronger in regard to mechanical-build Ability Score adjustments and I'm not sure how I could ensure, as a DM, Race balance. (Keeping in mind that only the seven Core Races are, um, Core and the Races in chapters two and three of the ARG are more "optional" anyway -- thus Aasimar, Ch 2, and Hobgoblin, Ch 3, are considerably less Racial-Balance-intended than the seven Core Races.)
The balance against those races is that they have the ability to allocate their +2 bonus in any ability score.
Even with the current system of negative racial modifiers to ability scores, those same races are still getting two +2 bonuses. Even if you count the -2 modifier, that still equals out to one +2, like the human and half races, but unlike those races, the races with the penalty only get that one +2 to a specific stat. That +2 isn't flexible like the human's and half-races'.
This system of no negative ability modifiers worked for D&D 4E, where Humans had only the one +2 while other races had two +2s, and everything seemed balanced stat-wise.
Granted, though, you do bring up a good point about the advanced races... while this change does bring the core races and advanced races closer inline to each other, humans and the half-races still remain unchanged.
According to the Race Builder, making this change would award the non-human and non-half-races 2 extra RP (Going from Standard ability array to Flexible). So to balance that, you could always give the humans and half-races a 2 RP equivalent ability, perhaps chosen from their list of alternate racial traits.
Alternatively, you could just give humans and the half-races an additional flexible +2, but two flexible +2s is more powerful than two static +2s. One flexible +2, and one flexible +1 (each to different stats) would be balanced against two static +2s, but +1s are a little silly.