Racial restri... I mean bonuses/traits!

[Lephys]

Forum search didn't turn up much specifically for this, so I thought I'd start my very first topic. (I got the idea from the Barbarian thread, 8P)

 

What kind of problems and qualities are there in various racial bonuses and traits (sometimes penalties, for balance) from previous games, and, naturally, how could this help determine how to handle them in P:E?

 

Personally, I'm not a fan of the "this race is basically meant to be these 2 classes, and that's it" "bonuses" that are sometimes seen in RPGs.

 

"Sand Elves -- Suffer an inherent -3 to STR, but get 150 bonus mana!"

 

That's basically saying "You want to make a Sand Elf Warrior? *snicker*... okay, you totally can... *snicker snicker*"

 

Really, I don't think the penalties are even necessary at all. I mean, if a Half-Giant gets +3 to STR, then everyone else automatically gives up a +3 STR bonus by picking something other than a half-giant. A Sand Elf with no STR penalty will still always be 3 STR weaker than a Half-Giant.

 

And bonuses shouldn't be quite so narrow, I don't think. Especially in a game based so heavily on souls being a common source of ability power, regardless of class, it's probably much less restrictive (yet still varietous) to grant our fictional, example Sand Elves +10% soul energy or something, which would apply to all classes (still hypothetically, as I have no idea how soul power will mechanically function.) I just mean that the lore would support something like that.

 

Racial bonuses should allow for some kind of benefit to almost any class, even if it's not the same for each one (Just like a common bonus to Soul Energy might allow a Rogue to maintain Stealth for longer, whereas it might allow a Wizard to cast more spells at once, or even target more enemies with the same spell at the cost of additional energy... the mechanics of soul energy could be different for each class.) Similarly, weapon proficiency bonuses should be decently varied, if they exist, so as to account for a variety of class choices. If you grant Sand Elves a bonus to effectiveness with wands, staves, and tomes, you're basically making any non-caster class choices pointless. I mean, even if it's possible, no one's gonna make a Barbarian who runs around dual-wielding wands...

 

So, just thought I'd strike up a communal brainstorm on the matter.

[TRX850]

Maybe if we could choose from a range of racial bonuses/trade-offs at character creation, that would alleviate some of the racial stereotyping. And then on top of that allow for some additional background feats/traits like in NWN2. I wouldn't mind seeing some "Profession" feats that you can tweak as you level up too, like Soldier, Hunter, Herbalist, Jeweller etc, but maybe those are for another thread.

[Ganrich]

This is one of those things I loved about Arcanum. Does your race have a negative to a stat necessary for the character you want to build? Well pick this background, and it can counteract said deficiencies. If Obsidian were to implement something like that... I don't think they need be too detailed as to still allow people who like to write backgrounds that option. Kind of like TRX850 suggested where they were professions or vague at best, but still could counteract the race selection. Something like Soldier could fit into many people's backgrounds.

 

I agree, though. I don't like the old school way of pigeonholing certain races into certain classes. Every race should have their exceptions, and our PCs should be that exception if we so choose.

[Lephys]

Yeah. I was kinda thinking, at the very least that... well, example time:

 

IF you were dealing with class-exclusive (or at least core-class-exclusive) resources like mana (only used by Wizards/Clerics, etc.) and stamina (only used by Warriors/Barbarians, etc.), then an Elf might get +10% total mana AND +15% stamina regen (classic, spendable stamina... not P:E's health-system stamina.). That way, if you made an Elf character who used stamina, you'd get THAT bonus, and the mana bonus would be moot. And vice versa. And some other race might get +15% mana regen, and +10% total stamina.

 

I know that's extremely simplistic, but I think it gets the idea across. Of course, simply having them as options would be awesome, too. Because, you'd think that if a Dwarf was supposed to be extra-hearty, that would translate differently depending on what he developed his heartiness in. If he trained as a Wizard this whole time, he might get a Concentration bonus, whereas as a Warrior, his heartiness might translate into a resistance to physical effects like knockdown/stun, etc. Or even -10% to damage from critical hits. *shrug*

 

Oh, and TRX's comment about profession traits you could improve over time made me think, I also would rather not have racial bonuses that diminish as you progress through the game. Like +50 mana, specifically. You get to the end of the game, and you've got 1550 mana, and you're like "Wow... sure am glad I got that racial bonus...". I mean, if it's a significant amount (you actually only have 400 mana by the end of the game), it's not so bad. But, I'd rather see something that improves more with every level than another race (which is why I switched to percentages in some of the examples above). A hard bonus to a skill wouldn't be so bad (+7 to Lore or something), since that's typically limited to a 1-100 point system.

Edited January 14, 2013 by Lephys

[Ganrich]

Yeah. I was kinda thinking, at the very least that... well, example time:

 

IF you were dealing with class-exclusive (or at least core-class-exclusive) resources like mana (only used by Wizards/Clerics, etc.) and stamina (only used by Warriors/Barbarians, etc.), then an Elf might get +10% total mana AND +15% stamina regen (classic, spendable stamina... not P:E's health-system stamina.). That way, if you made an Elf character who used stamina, you'd get THAT bonus, and the mana bonus would be moot. And vice versa. And some other race might get +15% mana regen, and +10% total stamina.

 

I know that's extremely simplistic, but I think it gets the idea across. Of course, simply having them as options would be awesome, too. Because, you'd think that if a Dwarf was supposed to be extra-hearty, that would translate differently depending on what he developed his heartiness in. If he trained as a Wizard this whole time, he might get a Concentration bonus, whereas as a Warrior, his heartiness might translate into a resistance to physical effects like knockdown/stun, etc. Or even -10% to damage from critical hits. *shrug*

 

Oh, and TRX's comment about profession traits you could improve over time made me think, I also would rather not have racial bonuses that diminish as you progress through the game. Like +50 mana, specifically. You get to the end of the game, and you've got 1550 mana, and you're like "Wow... sure am glad I got that racial bonus...". I mean, if it's a significant amount (you actually only have 400 mana by the end of the game), it's not so bad. But, I'd rather see something that improves more with every level than another race (which is why I switched to percentages in some of the examples above). A hard bonus to a skill wouldn't be so bad (+7 to Lore or something), since that's typically limited to a 1-100 point system.

 

Using your stamina/mana example - My fear with that example is that Elves could then be the best at a melee/caster hybrid, and be forced toward that. Increasing regen or total values on stamina/mana bars is a slippery slope IMHO. As you pointed out it can mean little toward the end, but is a great boon in the early levels. However, mage type classes are meant to be harder early on, and much more powerful later in the game. If you make them too powerful early on... I dunno if I would personally enjoy them as much. To each their own.

 

Using percentages is also kind of slippery. You could say that elves get +5% crit chance with long swords, and then the most powerful sword in the game is a Long Sword, and there you have it.... every person hence forth rolls elf swordsmen (Warrior, Pally, or Barbarian) to use said weapon. However, as long as damage amounts stay relatively low, and the HPs stay low... the difference should be negligible. When dealing with numbers lower than 50 I don't see a problem. So, as long as PE doesn't run in the direction of JRPGs and use numbers in the thousands for damage/HP... It should be fine.

 

Using flat bonuses like 50 mana is meant to alleviate the difficulty early on, but (as I stated previously) I really hate making a casters life easier in the early levels. I want a hard road to power for my caster, and by end game I hope to be the creme de la creme of Control/damage/etc. Though, I do agree that those bonuses should be useful throughout. I would like to hear from the devs on this one. It would be interesting.

[Lephys]

I see what you mean, but my mana/stamina bonus example was meant exclusively in the context of a system in which you could never use both (so, basically, no dual-classing.) But, again, it was just a bunch of example context to point out what I meant about covering various exclusive options (if you have exclusive options) with a handful of bonuses that would each only apply to one class (or type of class). But, like I said, TRX's suggestion of just having a handful that you can only pick one from would make a lot more sense in that regard.

 

And, while I know percentages can get tricky, usually if you get the number right (for something like a quantifiable bonus to something each level) you end up with a pretty solid, steady bonus. I just don't want my level 30 Elf Mage to be .0000001% different from my level 30 Human mage, ya know? Racial differences shouldn't really diminish as you progress, I don't think.

 

Also, that longsword problem is more of a balancing issue. You shouldn't have one weapon type that's significantly better than all other weapon types (at their highest "tier," or unique item instance, i.e. "the best (insert weapon type here) in the game"). Especially with P:E's armor/damage-type system, a longsword might be slashing, so it will be situationally better or worse depending upon the armor type of the enemy you're facing. That's just for what it's worth, as I know you weren't necessarily making a point specifically within the context of P:E's systems there. But, yeah, if some longsword is quantifiably more powerful than any other weapon in the game, then you've got a problem even if NO one gets a bonus with longswords.

 

To address the issues with my previous example, I realize giving bonus regen or total mana can be a problem later in the game, but imagine if each race got a different caster-related bonus. Now it's a trade-off. If Elves get +10% mana regen, then maybe Dwarves get +5% Spell Focus or something, and maybe Humans get 1 additional per-encounter spell per level (from the per-rest pool of spells). Something like that. That way, no one's inherently "the best" race to pick for a caster. Of course, some of that might be best left to class progression, still.

 

But, with the ability to pick from various racial bonuses like TRX suggested, your Elf COULD get a bonus to attack speed with slashing weapons, or something. Maybe Elves who train as Warrior-types (mainly honing martial weapon skills) develop faster muscle-movement, and Elves who train in the arcane (and don't use martial weapons nearly as often) develop a more pronounced attunement to mana. Something like that would explain the choice. And that way, you wouldn't have "Oh, Elves make good Mages but terrible Warriors." You'd just have "Elves make good mages if you're interested in faster mana recovery instead of other races' bonuses, and they make good Warriors if you're interested in slashing weapons."

 

Again, *le shrug*

[Faerunner]

But isn't the challenge part of the fun? Just because your character doesn't have skills suited to a class doesn't mean you can't build a character you like and role-play. Heck, you could probably incorporate your frustrations of said weaknesses into the character. For example, the said Sand Elf wanted to break the norm for whatever reason and is frustrated by the challenges of being naturally weaker than most humanoid adversaries, and has to work extra hard to make up for the lower strength. As you the player find ways to work around the strength penalty (like maybe take a more finesse route), you can imagine your character's journey in overcoming the obstacles too.

 

In DA:O, elves only had bonuses to mana and magic while both humans and dwarves had higher strength, dexterity, cunning for humans and magic resistance for dwarves. Most people only played elves as mages since it was their only racial benefit, but did I care? No Sir, says the elf lover, I'll take skill bonuses that my scrawny little stick figure has no use for and just dump as many physical stats (strength and con for warriors, cunning and dexterity for rogues) as possible to make up the difference.

 

Also, to be fair, I'm pretty sure there's a significant size and muscle difference to half-giants and sand elves. A difference in strength is to be expected.

 

With that said, I'm not a huge fan of most "racial bonuses" that amount to class-specific abilities. That's pretty much saying that certain races are genetically pre-disposed to being a certain way or having certain talents before even being able to learn them. For example, am I really supposed to believe that NWN2 Drow are born knowing how to cast spells like darkness and invisibility despite not being raised among other drow or having any magical training in their lives? To say nothing of knowing how to speak to spiders despite never getting a chance to learn the language? How about Deep Gnomes being naturally good against reptilians and goblinoids even if they've never seen one, or being naturally more gifted with alchemy or being born knowing more spells than most level 2 wizards and sorcerers. I can go on.

 

The so-called racial "favored class" of the NWN games never impressed me either. Am I supposed to believe that humans are the only race diverse enough to be good at all classes, but every other race is genetically designed to master one specific class but unable to be skilled enough to multiclass with others? Are all elves genetically pre-disposed to being meticulous, magic-studying wizards before they're born? Are gnomes all born with bardic music in their souls? Are halflings all sneaky, thieving little rogues? I don't know, it rubs me the wrong way.

 

I guess what I'm saying is I both agree and disagree with the OP. I personally am mostly all right with different stats since different body types do allow for different abilities. For example, dwarves are thicker and stockier than thin, scrawny elves, so of course I'll believe they can take more hits (higher con). Half orcs are built like mountain trolls while halflings are the size of human children, so of course the former is going to have more strength than the latter.

 

I'm personally not overly fond of racial bonuses for certain classes though. I also think that racial abilities should be able to benefit different classes when possible, as the OP said. It's hard to know where to draw the line because some skills naturally benefit some classes more than others. (Again, higher strength = better warrior.) However, I would also want to focus more on providing abilities that can benefit the race no matter the class (for example, partially going the DA:O route and give an elf a bonus to mana/stamina, so if they happen to be a spellcaster they get more mana, while non-mages can still have extra energy to fight, but either way having something useful) rather than just thinking, "This race is best as this class, so we'll give them skills that would only benefit them if they select this class." Again, are we really supposed to believe that elves are genetically pre-disposed to better handle wizard stuff like wands, staves and tomes, as the OP said? I really doubt it.

 

Wow, that was a long post. Sorry for the length. Anyway, that's my take on it. Everyone and anyone is free to disagree. ^^;

[TRX850]

Favoured Class really rubs me the wrong way too, because there are so many apparent contradictions in previous games and fantasy lore. If anything, that's where we've been railroaded in the past. Instead of penalties for non-favoured class combos, why not just let the player develop their own less-than-optimal character based on the stats they choose, the skills and feats, and ultimately their adventuring choices? If it's less-than-optimal, then there will be certain aspects of the game that penalize them through normal gameplay. If they're not as physically strong as they could be if they'd optimized their character, then they might hit less often and/or do less damage. And you could make equal points for all the other stats, skills etc. More than anything, I find character creation the most stressful part of an RPG campaign. I don't expect that to change too much in P:E, but for reasons where I'm spoilt for choice, rather than penalized for choice.

Edited January 14, 2013 by TRX850

[Ganrich]

I understand what you are saying, Faerunner, and I agree with most of it. I feel that the "abilities' like darkness for drow are dependent on the story, and in NWN2 they didn't quite fit. However, I always felt that those underdark races were there for persistent worlds, and mod content. They were there none the less though.

 

I also feel that the predisposition each race has had is a hold out from older schools of thought, and they feel very limiting. It is almost as if Tolkien's voice is still echoing deeply in games today, and perhaps it is time to move away from those models of races. Give them a bit of variety, if you will.

 

I had an idea on this topic. Perhaps, each race could get different bonuses depending on the class they select.

 

Example 1 (warrior class):

 

Elves get a bonus to hit (and perhaps damage) with long swords if they select the Fighter/Warrior class, Dwarves get the same bonus for Hammers for selecting the same, where Aumaua (being larger than humans) get that bonus to a 2 handed weapon type, etc.

 

Example 2 (Wizard):

 

This one is a bit easier IMHO. Give each race a bonus to a different school of magic. Perhaps, Humans are better at evocation and necromancy, where elves get a bonus to Divination/enchantment, and so on.

 

Example 3 (Rogue):

 

Perhaps, since the rogue has always been a non-combat skill monger, each race has a disposition to certain skills if they select rogue as a class. Where Orlans get a bonus to hide/sneak, Humans get a bonus to Bluff, Elves get a bonus to tumble etc.

 

Example 4 (Priest):

 

This one would be similar to mages, and you could go a step further (if priests are similar to clerics in being capable melee characters) by allowing each race to dictate how melee oriented the Priest would be (of course Deity would also be a factor). So a Dwarf or Aumaua Priest would be more melee oriented than an Elf or Orlan Priest.

 

So basically, you get a racial bonus toward the class of your choosing. I would still like Backgrounds to play a part to further allow for some customization, myself. Anyway, it was just an idea I had.

[SunBroSolaire]

Totally agree with the OP. If some races/class combinations synergize really well that's fine, but if races are only optimized for a couple different classes that kind of cuts a lot of choice and customization out of character builds.

 

Given what Josh Sawyer has said about weapon proficiencies, I think it's unlikely we'll see any races that will specialize in a specefic type of weapon. I'm too lazy to find the quote right now, but on SA he mentioned that if they implement proficiencies, it will probably be in themed groups like the cowboy and grunt specializations in New Vegas. If they were to give bonuses to Aumua Weapons to all Aumua, bonuses to Orlan weapons for Orlans, etc... that would avoid the trap of locking races into specific classes, since the weapon groups would likely cover a pretty wide range, but would still add a unique feature to each race. Plus it would Make Sense.

Edited January 14, 2013 by SunBroSolaire

[Alexjh]

I think we have to break this down I to the component parts of it to make sense see of it, as some of the components of racial bonuses make sense, while others are just weird.

 

For ability score modifiers you have to bear in mind that building a sub optimal character isn't the same as playing the game "wrong" and indeed may even be desirable for certain roleplayers. In 3e you can just about make and class/race combo work if you are willing to run with it, and I think the tendency to assume optimal class/race combo is the only way to go misses the point. There would for example be fighters of every race, but, clearly some races fighters would play different to others. Obvious choice would be half orc, as you get the str bonus, but on the other hand a 20 in con or dexterity isn't to be sniffed at either for some character designs. Even gnomes and halflings with their penalty to STR can be devastating front liners. Case to point - I've soloed Icewind dale 2 using just a gnome barbarian. ludicrously high hp from 1d12 + 5 hp per level from the get go meant the problems came from will saves rather than any physical threat, despite having sub optimal strength.

 

I'm also fine with low light vision and skill bonuses to things like hide, move silently, spot etc as those are physical functions, plus low light vision and it's ilk as they are all plausibly biology based.

 

Where it gets iffy is where race is confused with culture. An elf raised among dwarves is equally as good with a bow naturally relative to an elf raised with his own species? Ok.... The favoured class thing is also weird, not so much in that it exists but that it isn't fighter or rogue for every single race. I can see merit in having some favoured classes in plural, so an elf has a bonus at, say, fighter, ranger, wizard, druid or cleric as you could probably make an argument that physically and in the way they think they aren't naturally inclined towards being barbarians, but it's probably better to scrap the whole thing.

[JFSOCC]

the mechanics of soul energy could be different for each class.) Similarly, weapon proficiency bonuses should be decently varied, if they exist, so as to account for a variety of class choices.

Bonuses that for different classes have different meanings sounds like a good idea. plus x soul power, -y stamina regeneration. or "specialist" -x skillpoints per level +y max ranks for 1 skill of your choice (and one more skill at level 4 and every four levels afterwards)

It's hard to come up with examples without the actual stats-mechanic, but something along these lines.

[Adhin]

I can understand the want to remove attributes for 'more freedom' but that kind of kills the flavor. I mean if your looking at a halfling vs a half-orc, if there isn't some kinda innate strength difference somethings just wrong. So I wouldn't really like it if that part went away. That and a +1 (-2 or +2 to a stat) in 3E isn't a 'huge' difference, its enough to add flavor with out completely gimping you.

 

As for favored classes... yeah. It always felt a bit bizar, or like there should be a list of favored ones instead of a single. As far as bonus talents or skills or feats or whatever I like the stuff Sawyer has mentioned so far. Something about level requirements for talents that race and class could lower. Say 10 for weapon focus or mastery and fighter and elves would be able to obtain it at 4 or 5 to show there learning with it with out heavily impacting other setups. I like that way of thinking.

[Nixl]

This topic is always an interesting one.

 

Personally, I favor racial abilities over racial stats. By abilities, I mean certain spells/abilities that can help a character throughout the journey. Such abilities can add flavor without the min-maxing that racial stat bonuses produces.

 

For example, let's say Elves received an ability that restores fatigue so long as its during the day or in a forest. Dwarves have an ability that temporarily increases defense.

 

This system, of course, comes with its own issues, especially when it comes to the balance of such abilities. I do, however, believe that an ability can be useful for any class, while stats are far more limiting.

[ReyVagabond]

Personaly i hate racial stuff, they create a game inbalance. In 3.5 D&D is horrible.

 

What i want is a flavor system where you pic what ever race with their respective bonuses. and then a background that makes your race just as good as any other.

 

lets say an elf is has better dex that an orc.

and orc with the background shapshooter is just as good with dex as an elf.

an elf cant chose shapshotter as a background so he will not be able to have even better dex.

but he can chose something that an orc cant, like rased by bears, now the elf is as strong as an orc.

and so on with every race.

 

So with mix and match you have most of your races with bonus and penaties in their backgrounds to emulate any other race. so powergaming of choosing a race is not something as inportant and RPG takes the main stage.

 

bucause we know it, in games like NWN2 if you where going to play a Cleric most 80% of the time you choosed a race with +Wis and + Cha like Aasimar.

[rjshae]

Rather than just using vanilla ability score adjustments, I'd rather see modified point-cost schedules; the first one favorable, the second normal, and the third unfavorable. That's essentially what's happening with the ability score bonuses and penalties, so why not smooth out the point cost adjustments with a table?

[Sacred_Path]

Fallout style point-buy with racial mins and max'. This way, while it's possible to create an Auamaua who's stronger than any other character, it's not needlessly pushing you in that direction. You can still have Auamauas with mediocre strength, you just can't exploit it as a dump stat as much as, say, an Orlan could. This and racial traits for me, thanks.

[Alexjh]

Personaly i hate racial stuff, they create a game inbalance. In 3.5 D&D is horrible.

 

What i want is a flavor system where you pic what ever race with their respective bonuses. and then a background that makes your race just as good as any other.

 

lets say an elf is has better dex that an orc.

and orc with the background shapshooter is just as good with dex as an elf.

an elf cant chose shapshotter as a background so he will not be able to have even better dex.

but he can chose something that an orc cant, like rased by bears, now the elf is as strong as an orc.

and so on with every race.

 

So with mix and match you have most of your races with bonus and penaties in their backgrounds to emulate any other race. so powergaming of choosing a race is not something as inportant and RPG takes the main stage.

 

bucause we know it, in games like NWN2 if you where going to play a Cleric most 80% of the time you choosed a race with +Wis and + Cha like Aasimar.

 

The fact the cap only applies to level 1 kind of counters that though, if you take level 1 to represent a given amount of experience it does make sense.

 

For a real world example, say, a human and a gorrilla and compare them, for the sake of arguement lets say the gorrilla has +4 strength and -4 intelligence (would probably be way more than that, but this is just a demo). That means that a particularly vicious level 1 gorrilla might have 22 strength. This is clearly a lot stronger than a human can be, so that for an equally vicious level 1 human they'd only be able to get to 18 strength. If the human was capped at 18 that'd be an issue, but if you decide to concentrate that gorrilla in say countering his intelligence penalty, the human has a bit of a chance to catch up if they neglect their own training in other things. A gorrilla will always be stronger than an equivelantly healthy/trained human.

 

A really strong human might be stronger than a normal gorrilla or a normal gorrilla might be as intelligent as a stupid human, but they are different species and to make them interchangeable misses the point of why they are separate species in the first place.

[Somna]

@Lephys: From what you've described, are you looking for something like what Pathfinder did to races?

 

Basically, you have the default "vanilla" traits, but there's a listing of alternate traits you can swap in to customize the character. For example, an Elf character could have Woodcraft (+1/+2 bonus to Knowledge (Nature) and Survival), Silent Hunter (reduce Stealth penalty and can use Stealth while running) or Envoy (minor SLAs if your Int is 11 or above) instead of Elven Magic (+2 SR checks, +2 Spellcraft checks). It also gives Favored Classes an alternate option on level up besides the +1 HP or skill point.

 

You can't modify the stat changes like that though.

 

Edit: Adjusted link to jump to more appropriate section of that page.

Edited January 14, 2013 by Somna

[Adhin]

Yeah removing the attribute swaying from race to race because people think it pigeon holes them to much but want special powers? That doesn't make sense to me and, on top of that, if you want them to all be 100% equal point to point then why have races? It's like you just want to pick a base model and have what you are mean nothing more then clothing in a damn fable game.

 

There is a reason races have bonuses and negatives. With out that you remove all the flavor of playing that class. And I don't want 'special powers'. Don't need elves shooting laser beams out of there eyes (unless thats a cipher/mage ability or something).

[Heresiarch]

I really hate the kind of race bonuses that make for minmaxer heaven like "race A gets a bonus for being class X". This effectively makes all other races taking this class subpar. It might sound like rambling at first, since no one actually restricts the player from choosing, say, an orc spellcaster, even though orcs come with with -4 modifier to the primary spellcaster stat. But there is really no point to such fantasy racism other than making minmaxers happier. And it does so at the expense of making those people who want to play extraordinarily smart orc unhappy, because they simply can't do that. Same goes for all class-specific bonuses.

 

If elves come with a bonus to destruction spells and mana regen, what's the point in making them warriors? Or rogues? Or anything else other than spellcasters? If orcs come with a strength bonus, increased axe damage, low intelligence and high strength (that's devs practically screaming in your face, "make him a fighter/barbarian, goddammit!") would you choose him to be a chanter even if you really want to? Chances are you're going to regret it at some point, especially if your low intelligence locks you out of some highest-level abilities or makes you unable to effect enemies to the same extent a "class-specific" race would have.

 

So yeah, I'm all for versatile bonuses to all races. Maybe even add a special affect to a class for every race. For instance, human spellcasters get a chance to place a nasty dot with every attacking spell, elf casters have a chance to restore a bit of their mana, and so on.

[Sacred_Path]

I really hate the kind of race bonuses that make for minmaxer heaven like "race A gets a bonus for being class X". This effectively makes all other races taking this class subpar. It might sound like rambling at first, since no one actually restricts the player from choosing, say, an orc spellcaster, even though orcs come with with -4 modifier to the primary spellcaster stat. But there is really no point to such fantasy racism other than making minmaxers happier. And it does so at the expense of making those people who want to play extraordinarily smart orc unhappy, because they simply can't do that. Same goes for all class-specific bonuses.

 

That's mostly a question of how class-specific stats are. Would I want a D&D sorceror with low Cha and high Str? Hell no. In a different system that may still be very playable though.

[Umberlin]

Racial bonuses can cause issues like that, but, having 'background' traits can often fix such issues. Background traits allow one to realize, when making a character, statistically, that what may be 'general' for a race isn't not all encompassing. Many people do many things for many reasons and have vastly differing talents regardless of racial qualities - this is due to their background, be it their upbringing or training or just plain ol' anomalies on the mental, physical or overall genetic level.

[Alexjh]

I really hate the kind of race bonuses that make for minmaxer heaven like "race A gets a bonus for being class X". This effectively makes all other races taking this class subpar. It might sound like rambling at first, since no one actually restricts the player from choosing, say, an orc spellcaster, even though orcs come with with -4 modifier to the primary spellcaster stat. But there is really no point to such fantasy racism other than making minmaxers happier. And it does so at the expense of making those people who want to play extraordinarily smart orc unhappy, because they simply can't do that. Same goes for all class-specific bonuses.

 

If elves come with a bonus to destruction spells and mana regen, what's the point in making them warriors? Or rogues? Or anything else other than spellcasters? If orcs come with a strength bonus, increased axe damage, low intelligence and high strength (that's devs practically screaming in your face, "make him a fighter/barbarian, goddammit!") would you choose him to be a chanter even if you really want to? Chances are you're going to regret it at some point, especially if your low intelligence locks you out of some highest-level abilities or makes you unable to effect enemies to the same extent a "class-specific" race would have.

 

So yeah, I'm all for versatile bonuses to all races. Maybe even add a special affect to a class for every race. For instance, human spellcasters get a chance to place a nasty dot with every attacking spell, elf casters have a chance to restore a bit of their mana, and so on.

 

Well the answer to that is twofold:

 

1) Culturally you don't want all species to have the same balance of what classes they are suited to. To take your orc example, this is basically going to imply that Orc wizards are rarer than, say, human wizards, but that doesn't mean an Orc wizard is inherantly a bad wizard, just one that has to strive more to the higher spellcasting levels.

 

2) A system should be built so that different classes have multiple stats that benefit them. To take the Elf example of why would you build a wizard who wasn't an elf? In 3e you might want to build a gnome or dwarf wizard as you wanted a tough one, you might build a human one as you wanted that extra feat, you mgiht build a halfling one as you wanted that extra DEX and AC. The half-orc one is certainly the most challenging of the lot, but not impossible. Roleplaying shouldn't necessarily be about always takign the easiest choice, its abotu taking the choice you want to take.

[UpgrayeDD]

, no one's gonna make a Barbarian who runs around dual-wielding wands...

its been done