Basically, I haven't really seen a situation or class guide, where a human hasn't been the ideal choice. Feats don't exactly grow on trees, and one extra can get you through those first levels. And extra skills are always welcome, especially on combat based classes. So, why shouldn't you be human? Is it purely just to add spice to the role playing, or is there a rules based reason? I don't want to be a human every time, but they just seem to be the most functional.
Sometimes there are race options that kinda blow the others out of the water. Elves make extremely good wizards. Aasimar are easily the best oracles or bards. Other than that, pretty much Humans rock. I like Dwarves for the huge save boost against spells/spelllike abilities. +5 is massive.
Seems quite conditional. I don't want humans ending up as the runt race, as is the case in many other medieval fantasy themes, and the fluff around their abilities makes sense, it's just they pretty much dominate the other races.
|
There are few classes/builds for which humans can't work - they are by far the most versatile race. That being said, there are plenty of situations for which other races are superior. For example:
1. Natural Attack melee - not having any NAs puts humans at a big disadvantage here
2. Point Buy Disadvantage - if you're building, say, a stealthy sorcerer, the Halfling's bonuses to Dex AND Cha (and penalty to Str) are better than a human's +2 to one or the other.
3. Stealth builds - the +4 from being small amounts to a free skill focus for stealthy builds. +1 to AC and to-hit ain't shabby either.
4. Senses - if your game is taking place primarily at night or underground, having Darkvision or Low-Light Vision is pretty darn sweet.
5. Exotic Builds - frequently another race has a feature that Humans would have to take a feat for. For example, if you want to use an exotic weapon, well, Half Elves get that for free. So now it's 1 extra skill rank per level vs immunity to sleep, +2 vs enchantments, +2 to Perception, knowledge of the Elven language, and Multitalented or one of its substitutes.
So you see, just because a human CAN do it, doesn't mean a human is BEST for it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think pathfinder has done a great job of making humans a good race to pick. Back in the old days, everyone often wanted to pick the exotic and strange races to get any sort of unique flavour. I'm seeing a lot more human characters now.
Yes, I believe Paizo designed humans to be an excellent choice in all circumstances. They may not the very best, but they're always a strong choice. And this was on purpose. Golarion is dominated by humans, and its supposed to be. The abilities of humans reflects their strength over other races.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've always thought humans were always the best choice (for my tastes), but think of it this way - a racial trait that other races get, that the human doesn't get, is effectively the equivalent of a feat.
For example, "Darkvision" makes for a pretty good "bonus feat".
I've always thought humans were always the best choice (for my tastes), but think of it this way - a racial trait that other races get, that the human doesn't get, is effectively the equivalent of a feat.
For example, "Darkvision" makes for a pretty good "bonus feat".
A feat is worth a lot more than 12,000 gp in the long run though.
Goggles of Night
Price 12,000 gp; Aura faint transmutation; CL 3rd; Weight —
The lenses of this item are made of violet crystal. Even though the lenses are opaque, when placed over the eyes of the wearer, they enable him to see normally and also grant him 60-foot darkvision. Both lenses must be worn for the magic to be effective.
Construction Requirements
Cost 6,000 gp
Craft Wondrous Item, darkvision
|
Humans are a good "default" race. If there isn't something specific, either mechanically or role play-wise, that I want from another race, I can't really go wrong by picking a human. They're pretty much hands down the best Fighters, they make good battle clerics, they're solid in pretty much any other class... They may not spike quite as high in a particular class or role as another race, but they're generally not bad at anything.
Yes, I believe Paizo designed humans to be an excellent choice in all circumstances. They may not the very best, but they're always a strong choice. And this was on purpose. Golarion is dominated by humans, and its supposed to be. The abilities of humans reflects their strength over other races.
Except Golarion is not Pathfinder, Pathfinder is not Golarion. Golarion is a setting that happens to use the Pathfinder rules.
When not? When you can chose a dwarf that when!
I think pathfinder has done a great job of making humans a good race to pick. Back in the old days, everyone often wanted to pick the exotic and strange races to get any sort of unique flavour. I'm seeing a lot more human characters now.
They were gods in 3.0 too actually.
Anyways, never a bad choice to pick human. Means everyone else should be more versatile imo. The attribute selection in particular always bothers me.
|
|
Humans are rather powerful in their flexibility of playing every class well. A halfling isn't the optimal choice for a barbarian, nor is a dwarf optimal for an oracle or an elf optimal for a fighter, but humans are optimal for pretty much every class. However, some races exceed others in certain classes. Elven Magi and Evokers are great because of the SR boost, meanwhile Dwarves make great tanky fighters due to their Steel Soul line of feats and Slow&Steady, and Halflings are great sorcerers for the charisma boost and the AC boosts, and the penalty applying to a dump stat. Its just that humans are one of the most basic and flexible races that makes them great in every single class.
5. Exotic Builds - frequently another race has a feature that Humans would have to take a feat for. For example, if you want to use an exotic weapon, well, Half Elves get that for free. So now it's 1 extra skill rank per level vs immunity to sleep, +2 vs enchantments, +2 to Perception, knowledge of the Elven language, and Multitalented or one of its substitutes.
while this may seem like "pft why not just pick up this feat with a human?", remember that exotic weapon proficiency requires a +1 bab to get. This means if your playing a non-full bab class that half elves get a feat that humans couldn't get.
in addition, half elves work better for multi-classed characters, and get other small bonuses
I think pathfinder has done a great job of making humans a good race to pick. Back in the old days, everyone often wanted to pick the exotic and strange races to get any sort of unique flavour. I'm seeing a lot more human characters now.They were gods in 3.0 too actually.
By old days I meant 2nd Edition. 3rd was still very good for humans with the bonus feat, but the attribute bonus in pathfinder really just rounds them out into one of the best races available.
Yes, I believe Paizo designed humans to be an excellent choice in all circumstances. They may not the very best, but they're always a strong choice. And this was on purpose. Golarion is dominated by humans, and its supposed to be. The abilities of humans reflects their strength over other races.Except Golarion is not Pathfinder, Pathfinder is not Golarion. Golarion is a setting that happens to use the Pathfinder rules.
And your point? The setting is reflected and supported by the general mechanics.
I would say all races have their niches. I've been building theoretical builds for the fun of it lately and there are a LOT of cases where humans just dont have what it takes; though they are always a good choice, they arent always the best choice. People have given plenty of examples.
On of my favorites is the tengu; they get a buttload of exotic wepon proficiencies if they want...
But I will agree with Claxon that it's nice to see an RPG system where the dominance of humans actually makes mechanical sense.
And your point? The setting is reflected and supported by the general mechanics.Yes, I believe Paizo designed humans to be an excellent choice in all circumstances. They may not the very best, but they're always a strong choice. And this was on purpose. Golarion is dominated by humans, and its supposed to be. The abilities of humans reflects their strength over other races.Except Golarion is not Pathfinder, Pathfinder is not Golarion. Golarion is a setting that happens to use the Pathfinder rules.
Actually that's a pretty horrible way to build your game. "Hey dudes, this one race totally dominates everything and should be your go to, but I guess you can play one of those lesser races... I guess... I mean it won't be as good, but you know, you'll get to be a midget with hair problems."
I don't think that's how it was built. Has a lot to do with the way 3rd edition is. Humans being built for versatility really makes them a strong choice for everything, and the lack of flexibility and versatility in other races makes them not so hot choices.
Actually that's a pretty horrible way to build your game. "Hey dudes, this one race totally dominates everything and should be your go to, but I guess you can play one of those lesser races... I guess... I mean it won't be as good, but you know, you'll get to be a midget with hair problems."
I think the idea is that humans (plural) can dominate elves (plural) without a human necessarily being able to dominate an elf. The way humans are designed in 3rd and pathfinder does this well. You can see how an adaptive human society would have an edge in expanding their civilization without a person being disadvantaged by playing an elf/whatever.
Also I lolled at midget with hair problems.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
In my home group, my hatred of 3.0/3.5/pathfinder/4e humans is a well documented fact. I understand the desire of a flexible race, I understand many people prefer humans. I just feel that humans have been designed to be a tad to flexible. Floating stat adjustment, bonus feat, bonus skill point. They can be pretty much whatever a person wants. Also the most hated statement in all RPGs for me is "Guess I'll go human for that bonus feat."
People have their preferences, and that's fine. But as a GM I'm far more lenient with the non-human races when it comes to making rules modifications to try something, including moving stat bonuses around to accommodate a player. I'd rather have a party of a Tiefling, Elf, Dwarf, Gnome and Catfolk then Four humans and the token demihuman.
Of course I've long since learned that seems to be the minority (from my experiences at least) and generally don't bring it up unless asked. Or threads like this.
Humans are supposed to be "The Best" and "The most flexible"
This doesn't have much to do with the actual considered power of the race as a whole, but more or less an intentional manipulation of the community for the purpose of creating a standard tone and theme to the game.
Humans are by-and-by the largest and most common species in your average DnD setting.
Encouraging mechanically-oriented players to be "Born as a special, rare exception" in any case tends to be a damaging for theme in a vast majority of standard settings.
In my home group, my hatred of 3.0/3.5/pathfinder/4e humans is a well documented fact. I understand the desire of a flexible race, I understand many people prefer humans. I just feel that humans have been designed to be a tad to flexible. Floating stat adjustment, bonus feat, bonus skill point. They can be pretty much whatever a person wants. Also the most hated statement in all RPGs for me is "Guess I'll go human for that bonus feat."
People have their preferences, and that's fine. But as a GM I'm far more lenient with the non-human races when it comes to making rules modifications to try something, including moving stat bonuses around to accommodate a player. I'd rather have a party of a Tiefling, Elf, Dwarf, Gnome and Catfolk then Four humans and the token demihuman.
Of course I've long since learned that seems to be the minority (from my experiences at least) and generally don't bring it up unless asked. Or threads like this.
Yes, but wouldn't it be even worse if they made "Half-Shadow, Half-Lich, Flawlessly Beautiful Godling" the most mechanically powerful and flexible class?
You'd see groups composed of four "Half-Shadow, Half-Lich, Flawlessly Beautiful Godlings" and the one token "I just want to be normal" human.
And that'd outright obliterate the theme of 66% of most commonly used settings.
Mechanically-oriented players are going to remain as such. Why not use them to your advantage to boost the majority of settings as much as possible?
I have similar theories about Monks, but I digress.
there are a number of very good reasons for playing a non-human, many of them mentioned already. aasimars and tieflings have resistances and SLAs, plus a lot of stat adjustment options. elves get +2 to overcome spell resistance and free longsword/longbow proficiency. dwarves can get a monster save bonus and treat a handful of good exotic weapons as martial weapons; plus a dwarven barbarian has the same movement as humans no matter what armor he wears. i could go on but i think that illustrates the point- demihumans usually aren't a good choice for every class, but they're often a great choice for some classes (which is also why some racial civilizations favor certain classes/elements while human cultures are very diverse).
|
|
Yes, but wouldn't it be even worse if they made "Half-Shadow, Half-Lich, Flawlessly Beautiful Godling" the most mechanically powerful and flexible class?
You'd see groups composed of four "Half-Shadow, Half-Lich, Flawlessly Beautiful Godlings" and the one token "I just want to be normal" human.
And that'd outright obliterate the theme of 66% of most commonly used settings.
Mechanically-oriented players are going to remain as such. Why not use them to your advantage to boost the majority of settings as much as possible?
I have similar theories about Monks, but I digress.
The discussion between class and race is quite different in my mind (though judging from example I think you meant race?).
I suppose if the Half-Shadow, Half-Lich, Flawlessly Beautiful Godling was the most powerful race I would indeed have issues with it. Thought to be truthful after 18 years of gaming I'd probably be fine with that group for a campaign as long as the stories are good! My preference is to remove the universal flexibility aspect out of the equation entirely. That way people tend towards the race they want to play, the character they want to play and not simply the most mechanically sound.
Paizo's decision to make Golarion human-centric is their decision, and one they're entitled to make. But I'm also free to change that aspect of things. My home group knows when I run the game to play what they want, and I'm more than willing to make changes to help accommodate what they want. I'll swap out stat bonuses, trade out racials for feats, or whatever else working with them just to avoid it.
Of course in the end this is all opinion anyway. I know of at least one player I've gamed with over the years that thinks all the non-humans should be kicked out as monsters (elves and dwarves included in that).
I think the problem of humans having too much versatility compared to the other classes is, to some extent, addressed by the advanced race guide. The advanced race guide gives a vast swath of races several customizable racial abilities and racial bonuses, allowing players who are willing to invest the time and energy a number of options to make each race useful for multiple different concepts. It doesn't solve the problem entirely, because nothing is going to take away the utility of that floating +2 to any stat, but it does make it so that you can swap out undesirable racial traits (such as weapon proficiencies when you want to play a caster) for more useful ones.
I've always thought humans were always the best choice (for my tastes), but think of it this way - a racial trait that other races get, that the human doesn't get, is effectively the equivalent of a feat.
For example, "Darkvision" makes for a pretty good "bonus feat".
A feat is worth a lot more than 12,000 gp in the long run though.
Goggles of Night
Price 12,000 gp; Aura faint transmutation; CL 3rd; Weight —
The lenses of this item are made of violet crystal. Even though the lenses are opaque, when placed over the eyes of the wearer, they enable him to see normally and also grant him 60-foot darkvision. Both lenses must be worn for the magic to be effective.
Construction Requirements
Cost 6,000 gp
Craft Wondrous Item, darkvision
Yes, but GMs usually do not take your eyes when you get caught.
....hopefully your GM doesn't do this. Because that is a bit too metal for my blood.
Anyway, my point is that, if you are a subterrainian culture of mole people, and you capture a human (who your know can't see in the dark) without a torch but with crystal lenses on his eyes, it would not take much to put two and two together. And why wouldn't you take the nice, simple, easy, and clean step of taking the goggles to limit their visibility in case of escape?
Plus, you actually have to get to the point where you could buy the goggles. If you are not investing a huge part of the average wealth of your level, you might have to wait until mid levels to consistently have darkvision. Other traces can give it to you at level 1.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the problem of humans having too much versatility compared to the other classes is, to some extent, addressed by the advanced race guide. The advanced race guide gives a vast swath of races several customizable racial abilities and racial bonuses, allowing players who are willing to invest the time and energy a number of options to make each race useful for multiple different concepts. It doesn't solve the problem entirely, because nothing is going to take away the utility of that floating +2 to any stat, but it does make it so that you can swap out undesirable racial traits (such as weapon proficiencies when you want to play a caster) for more useful ones.
I let people pick their ability scores. Makes it so you see more variety and more people get what they want. I like to encourage backstories about the bonuses too.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I let people pick their ability scores. Makes it so you see more variety and more people get what they want. I like to encourage backstories about the bonuses too.
I like this approach.
If you don't want to go this far, a good compromise is to give each race multiple options for racial ability modifiers. +2 Dex, +2 Cha, -2 Str makes as much (if not more) sense for an elf than the standard modifiers. If every race has multiple options, you'll see fewer instances of "I want to play a sorcerer so I won't play an elf as they don't get a bonus to charisma." I'm rather a fan of the alternate ability modifiers for tieflings, dhampirs, and aasimars. It makes you less locked in to a few specific classes if you want to play one of those races.
Another way to make non-human races a more attractive option is to start at a higher level. An extra feat is much bigger advantage at 1st level when it means the difference between having 1 and having 2 feats. At 7th level, it means the difference between 4 feats and 5 feats (not counting any bonus feats). Still useful, but the relative difference is smaller. Along those lines, removing feat taxes makes the human bonus feat less necessary.
Kitsunes also make better enchanters than humans. Their bonuses to compulsion spells is just too good to pass.
Yes, I believe Paizo designed humans to be an excellent choice in all circumstances. They may not the very best, but they're always a strong choice. And this was on purpose. Golarion is dominated by humans, and its supposed to be. The abilities of humans reflects their strength over other races.Except Golarion is not Pathfinder, Pathfinder is not Golarion. Golarion is a setting that happens to use the Pathfinder rules.
Well, Pathfinder is not Golarion, but officially, Golarion is Pathfinder. You can adapt Golarion to other rule sets, but it's written for Pathfinder. And it doesn't "happen to" use the Pathfinder rules. It's written by the same company and in some cases the same people, or at least by people who operate under similar principles and ideas of design.
You make it sound like any similarity between the two is a coincidence.
For my group, I need to house rule in order to make humans more powerful, otherwise no one will play them, and even then, it is rare for them to be selected.
When using point buy, +2/+2/-2 for stats is much better than a single +2, especially if the two +2 bonuses go into your primary stats. Having Darkvision is extremely helpful in a lot of situations, and 12000gp is pretty hard to come by and would be better spent on other items. Humans lack good saves and have no immunities, the halfling luck bonus of +1 to all saves is easily worth more than a feat.
Humans are also perceived as boring, as the players 'play' a human in real life.
For me, my stigma against playing a Human is based on earlier editions (both editions of AD&D). I like that the Humans finally have a reason to be so common. I had never understood why they were supposed to be the majority when they were, mechanically speaking, inferior to all other races. I still find myself smirking when a fellow PC is a Human, but I do understand the appeal. A bonus feat at level 1 is nice, but the other races offer far more to make that an issue. I like the style and feel of the other races as well, but maybe it is because I do not truly understand the Human cultures in Golarion. What I do understand does not really appeal to me as a player. Maybe after playing longer I will open up to the idea of playing a human.
The other reason for playing a non-human, that hasn't been brought up yet, is getting a better favored class bonus. Many times, the right favored class bonus can turn a so-so race into a great one, or, conversely, turn a great race choice into a meh choice in comparison with better bonuses.
Look at Gnome or Aasimar Summoners vs Half elf. A half elf doesn't get as much out of racial features or ability bonuses, but the favored class bonus boosting evolution points is huge.
The other reason for playing a non-human, that hasn't been brought up yet, is getting a better favored class bonus. Many times, the right favored class bonus can turn a so-so race into a great one, or, conversely, turn a great race choice into a meh choice in comparison with better bonuses.
Look at Gnome or Aasimar Summoners vs Half elf. A half elf doesn't get as much out of racial features or ability bonuses, but the favored class bonus boosting evolution points is huge.
Humans have some great ones too. Human and Oracle sorcerer is pretty awesome! I house rule people can take the favored class bonus of any race myself.
Humans have some great ones too. Human and Oracle sorcerer is pretty awesome! I house rule people can take the favored class bonus of any race myself.The other reason for playing a non-human, that hasn't been brought up yet, is getting a better favored class bonus. Many times, the right favored class bonus can turn a so-so race into a great one, or, conversely, turn a great race choice into a meh choice in comparison with better bonuses.
Look at Gnome or Aasimar Summoners vs Half elf. A half elf doesn't get as much out of racial features or ability bonuses, but the favored class bonus boosting evolution points is huge.
I would love to play in your games. I might adopt that houserule myself.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also the most hated statement in all RPGs for me is "Guess I'll go human for that bonus feat."
My most hated statement is "Guess I'll go Aasimar for that (whatever mechanical bonus they get)". This means that they're willing to make presumptions about the interactions between heaven and earth, including the divine powers themselves in their backstory and making huge adjustments to the story of the campaign... just for mechanical reasons.
I will literally move heaven and earth as a GM to let a player play an Aasimar if they're interested in exploring aspects of the cosmology and involving themselves in the millennial struggles of the outer planes. It bothers me if they're doing it for a +2 though.
At least if someone plays a human for a stupid reason, then they're not going to mess up a campaign by doing so and will fit in with 90% of the surrounding people in the setting.
(This isn't necessarily targeted just at Aasimar, they're just an obvious target).
Remove spellcasting prerequisites from prestige classes and certain feats, and adopt the "use any race's favored class bonus" house rule mentioned above, and I'd wager you'd see a lot fewer aasimar.
Remove spellcasting prerequisites from prestige classes and certain feats, and adopt the "use any race's favored class bonus" house rule mentioned above, and I'd wager you'd see a lot fewer aasimar.
That doesn't sound unreasonable. I might just do that next game.
plus a dwarven barbarian has the same movement as humans no matter what armor he wears.
Care to explain that one? Is this something from a non-core source? If not, I suspect you're misreading the fast movement ability.
plus a dwarven barbarian has the same movement as humans no matter what armor he wears.Care to explain that one? Is this something from a non-core source? If not, I suspect you're misreading the fast movement ability.
Probably they just forgot it doesn't work in heavy armor. Although one with the armored hulk archetype does move how ever it likes (except with heavy load). It does delay the +10 speed boost until level 5 though.
I've always thought humans were always the best choice (for my tastes), but think of it this way - a racial trait that other races get, that the human doesn't get, is effectively the equivalent of a feat.
For example, "Darkvision" makes for a pretty good "bonus feat".
A feat is worth a lot more than 12,000 gp in the long run though.
Yeah, but the *vast* majority of games take place at levels where 12.000 gp is not something you spend on a "miscellaneous" like this.
|
|
And your point? The setting is reflected and supported by the general mechanics.Yes, I believe Paizo designed humans to be an excellent choice in all circumstances. They may not the very best, but they're always a strong choice. And this was on purpose. Golarion is dominated by humans, and its supposed to be. The abilities of humans reflects their strength over other races.Except Golarion is not Pathfinder, Pathfinder is not Golarion. Golarion is a setting that happens to use the Pathfinder rules.Actually that's a pretty horrible way to build your game. "Hey dudes, this one race totally dominates everything and should be your go to, but I guess you can play one of those lesser races... I guess... I mean it won't be as good, but you know, you'll get to be a midget with hair problems."
I don't think that's how it was built. Has a lot to do with the way 3rd edition is. Humans being built for versatility really makes them a strong choice for everything, and the lack of flexibility and versatility in other races makes them not so hot choices.
Gary Gygax actually stated in the Player's Handbook for AD&D that the human was hands down the best race. So, basically its been that way since the begining.
|
Usually I've found Aasimar; 2 stat bonuses + energy resistance + good stat levels that cover MOST things I want. 1 feat isn't worth all of that; and 1 skill point is worth almost nothing.
I do Humans only if I am playing a freakishly feat-intesive character; rarely
Dwarves are better fighters/barbians; you can overcome the minor strength difference, but their saves and HP are the best come mid-level.
Tieflings cover what Aasimar do not cover; and come with natural attacks.
I play 1 Tengu, mostly because they can have 3 natural attacks, which lend well to manuevers.
Of my 3 current characters, I have Tengu/Aasimar/Human. Sadly I believe Halflings/Gnomes were always overshadowed, and elves have been replaced by Tieflings.
But in our area, the world is being overshadowed by the babies of Celestials.
plus a dwarven barbarian has the same movement as humans no matter what armor he wears.Care to explain that one? Is this something from a non-core source? If not, I suspect you're misreading the fast movement ability.
that's my bad- i forgot that fast movement doesn't work in heavy armor (my last dwarven barbarian used longhammer/combat reflexes so he had enough dex to merit mithril fullplate, and the last one i saw someone else play was, in fact, that armored hulk archetype).
Dwarves are better fighters/barbians; you can overcome the minor strength difference, but their saves and HP are the best come mid-level.
I just have to respond to this because it's not true.
Human Barbarian with Superstition and the favored class bonus will outstrip the Dwarf on Saves against everything that actually matters.