The Campaign Builder's Guild

My group has been playing for around 5 years now, having started at the end of 2001. Over these years, I've been devising my campaign setting, and recently I've been making large changes to races and classes to make the game fit my setting more (my setting having been devised for novels).

Currently, I intend there to be 6 primary humanoid races: Dwarves, Elves, Goblins, Halflings, Humans, and Orcs. Of these races, Humans and Halflings are "natural", having been "created by the world" (read: evolved; humans evolved from apes, halflings evolved from monkeys; the people of the world don't understand such processes, but none of the gods claim to have created humans or halflings). The other four races (dwarves, elves, goblins, and orcs) are elemental, having been created by the creator gods, the four elemental dragons.

Dwarves are tied to the earth, elves to the air, goblins to the water, and orcs to fire. I've been making tweeks to the races, rebalancing them with one another, but two issues came up.

First of all, many of the Dwarven bonuses do not make sense for my setting: the attack roll and armor class bonuses vs. specific creature types for one. Second of all, when quantifying the abilities, Dwarves come out much more ahead than the other races (especially considering the fact that my goblins are being made from the ground up; they aren't your standard goblin).

So, the first question is: Should I improve all of the races to match the dwarf, or should I decrease the dwarf's power to match the others? I'm more prone to increasing the power, so dwarf fans don't lose anything, but I'm worried this will start a trend of power creep in my games.

The second question that crops up is: Should I make these four races more unqiue so they stand out more? Currently, each of them has one ability which ties them to their elements. Dwarves have their stability bonus, Elves don't breath, Goblins have a swim speed, and Orcs have an "endure elements" effect constantly on (the dwarf, elf, and goblin abilities were taken from the Unearthed Arcana elemental race variants). But these are still a little plane.

One option is for me to reconsider my elemental touched races, my world's equivalent of Genasi. Dwarves become Gnomes, Elves become Sylphs, Goblins become Undines, and Orcs become Salamanders. The initial idea is to weigh these races with a +1 level adjustment, but I could conceivably add in some drawbacks (such as saving throw penalties vs. spells of their opposite element) and reduce their benefits to make them LA +0.

Then, the half-bloods would be the "standard" dwarf, elf, goblin, and orc (IE: Mix a salamander and a human and you get an orc). The dragon gods would have originally created their races as more pure elementals, but they would have grown dilute over the years.

So, I appologise if that was hard to follow. To reitterate, my two questions are:
1. Should I improve the races to meet the power of the most powerful, or should I decrease the power of the more powerful to match the others?
2. Should I make the dwarf, elf, goblin, and orc more unique, or should I religate those roles to the rare elemental touched members?

Thanks for your help.

1. Since the races in the PHB 3.5 are already balanced, I would just replace certain abilities. Like skill bonuses, etc. Maybe replace "vs. specific creatures" bit with bonuses to skills like climb, craft (stonework) etc. or tremorsense?

Dwarves have always been broken. It is established fact. If you want balanced dwarves, nerf them.

I personally find the idea of elemental races more compelling. Having elves be half-breeds in themselves is pretty cool too.

but would theystill be called elf half-breeds ( like aquatic elves)or just have their stats?

Quote from: So-Keher1. Since the races in the PHB 3.5 are already balanced, I would just replace certain abilities. Like skill bonuses, etc. Maybe replace "vs. specific creatures" bit with bonuses to skills like climb, craft (stonework) etc. or tremorsense?

I disagree that the Dwarf is balanced vs. the other races. Compare the Dwarf to the Human. At first level, a human gets 4 bonus skill points, a bonus feat, and favored class any. The human's bonus skill points are comparable to a feat (Open Minded, grants 5 skill points), or even Fey Kissed (Grants some save bonuses and 1 skill point per HD); one can make a comparison between Toughness and Improved Toughness to show that 1 skill point per HD+3 is a viable feat. Either way, the human's bonus feat is ... well ... worth a feat. Lastly, the Human's favored class any is worth a feat.

Now, I'll pull out a few dwarf abilities that are immediately worth feats on their own (to match the human's three): Darkvision (it's a 2nd level spell, isn't it?), +4 AC vs. Giants (a situational +4 bonus, like Improved Initiative, is generally worth a feat), and +2 saves vs. spells and spell-like abilities (which might be worth more than a single feat, but since it doesn't apply to every save that ever comes up, I'll be generous). Ontop of that, Dwarves get a host of other abilities (and their only real drawbacks, a Cha penalty and a speed reduction while wearing light armor, don't matter to the majority of the classes in the game).

So, while there is something to say for being able to choose what your abilities do, like a human can, in the end you still end up with less.

To make an analogy, imagine I'm a store that sells 10 different products. You can buy one product for 1 doller, 2 for 2 ... yada yada, or you can buy bundled products. The bundled product comes with 5 products and costs 2 dollers. But, there are several bundles, and you can see what are inside of each bundle, giving you a pretty good chance of finding a bundle that has the 2 things you want, and more. Would you pay 2 dollers for only two things, or 2 for 5 things (getting 3 more than what you would have gotten individually)?

That's what the races do. There are countless races around now, many of them are LA +0, so a player can find one that suits their taste. While humans are lacking power compared to the Dwarf, it's a mechanical lacking rather than a percieved lacking, but it's still there (In FR, there's a halfling that grants a bonus feat instead of it's +1 bonus to all saves; I took that race over humans for many of my choices).

--------

I've gotten several votes on this, and most have said to reduce the power of the dwarf.

More ideas on either question, especially on the uniqueness issue?

Quote from: So-Keherbut would theystill be called elf half-breeds ( like aquatic elves)or just have their stats?

"Elf" would be the name for a Human/Sylph half-breed. An Elf and a Human could breed still, but you'd just get an Elf or a Human. Elf would be replacing Half-Elf, and Sylph would be replacing Elf. The Elf stats would be very similar to the PHB Elf stats (with some changes for my setting of course).

QuoteI disagree that the Dwarf is balanced vs. the other races.

a lot[/i], and +2 to one skill (craft) isn't the same as +2 to another (spot). The dwarf gets a lot of abilities that are nice, and then a lot that are... kinda fluffy. Or just situational.

A dwarven fighter basically is affected by:

*+2 con/-2 cha
*20 ft. speed (penalty) no matter how much he's holding (about a wash?)
*darkvision
*weapon familiarity (+1 to damage, but only with a one-hander)
*stability
*+2 vs. spells
*+2 to craft/appraise (unless there's months of downtime, i refuse to believe craft bonuses matter)

This all makes him a pretty good tank and all, but i don't think it's overboard.

As for his other stuff, it's largely situational--if a dwarf fights giants once in the entire campaign, what % of a feat was that ability worth? Certainly not as much as  improved initiative. :)

I think the way to compare this to human is to pretend (correctly, imo) that the human buys the best possible feats for his class. He's not wasting time on skill focus (craft), he's starting out at 1st level with power attack, cleave, and weapon focus. He's gonna get to enemies before the dwarf, and he's either going to be more likely to hit or gain an extra attack. He's also 1 feat ahead in all his feat chains, which *matters*. If he's a skill based class, he's ignoring appraise and putting that extra skill point into spot or tumble, etc., ad infinitum. Humans have to specialize, other races get extra abilities that they can't benefit from.

QuoteThat's what the races do. There are countless races around now, many of them are LA +0, so a player can find one that suits their taste.

do[/i] start to suck if the setting explicity allows all races ever written, I'll concede that. :)

The Dwarf's 20 ft. speed does not matter in the dwarf's most common role; that of a tank. A human fighter wearing heavy armor, even mithril heavy armor, has their speed reduced to 20 feet, the same speed as the dwarf. Thus, the dwarf's speed reduction isn't that big of a penalty.

As for the other abilities of the dwarf, you mention three that I would easily price as a feat, and none of them are situational:

Darkvision, Weapon Familiarity, and +2 saves vs. spells and spell-like abilities.

Weapon Familiarity is two Exotic Weapon Proficiencies, as long as your class has martial weapon proficiencies (there is a separate arguement in here; the dwarf isn't strong in any role other than a warrior, which would guide my tweeking of the dwarf); many human fighters pick up an Exotic Weapon Proficiency. +2 saves vs. spells will benefit any character, and many characters do spend some feats on Iron Will or Lighning Reflexes. Darkvision, as well, will come up in the vast majority of campaigns. Toss in all of these other abilities, and I think comparing a human fighter to a dwarf fighter nets the human at a loss (especially when the human fighter's bonus skill points matter less, and their favored class doesn't matter at all until they multiclass).

Granted, all I've shown is that the Dwarf Fighter is more powerful than the Human Fighter, but this is possibly an error in race design. The Dwarf does not gain the full benefit of their race in many of the PHB classes, while the human gains their class benefits in concievably any class.

So, in a round about way, I think I've shown good evidence that the Dwarf's design should come into question (sorry, been playing too much Phoenix Wright lately ...).

QuoteWeapon Familiarity is two Exotic Weapon Proficiencies, as long as your class has martial weapon proficiencies (there is a separate arguement in here; the dwarf isn't strong in any role other than a warrior, which would guide my tweeking of the dwarf);

weird[/i].)

My point is really that the dwarf is getting "feats" that help it in lots of situations, but the human is getting feats that let it do this specific thing right here. Of course a human trying to be a dwarf is going to suck--if they take exotic weapon proficiency (dwarven waraxe), iron will, etc. If they go trip-monkey they're going to be a better tripmonkey than the dwarf, imo.

QuoteGranted, all I've shown is that the Dwarf Fighter is more powerful than the Human Fighter

undeniably[/i] more powerful than a human fighter trying to be a dwarf fighter. :)

QuoteThe Dwarf does not gain the full benefit of their race in many of the PHB classes, while the human gains their class benefits in concievably any class.

I think that's intentional, to a point. A dwarf ranger is going to miss out on the armor abilities, but get a good use out of stonecunning (they suddenly gain trap-finding while underground) and has probably taken favored enemies of orcs or giants. A dwarven rogue gets that +2 conditional bonus to search and has probably put some ranks into appraise, etc.

Let's look at the stat changes. A +2 con is advantageous to every character, ever. A -2 charisma is only really penalizing to the following classes:
Bards
Clerics
Some Rogues
Paladins
Sorcerers

Dwarven rogues will be dungeon crawlers, not street crawlers, so that doesn't really apply. Dwarven clerics do receive a slight hit to turning strength, but not a major one. Mostly, dwarves make bad bards and sorcerers, and make mediocre paladins. Now, for every other class, you've got a +2 to con with largely no mechanical penalty. Big bonus.

Dwarves are slower than other medium sized races, but this penalty is removed if they are encumbered. Let's look at what classes (Other than paladins, sorcerers and bards) are likely to not be encumbered:

Barbarian
Druid (No metal)
Monk
Ranger
Rogue
Wizard

So dwarves that aren't clerics or fighters have a moderate penalty.

Darkvision is a major bonus, but I'll pass it as a minor one due to so many races having it. (Humans are at a huge disadvantage here)

Stonecutting is a moderate bonus for dwarven rogues.

Weapon Familiarity is like giving exotic weapon proficiency in the bastard sword. This is a minor bonus for anyone with martial weapon proficiency.

Stability is a minor bonus to all characters.

I'd roll the bonuses on orcs, goblins and giants into a minor bonus for melee characters.

The +2 against all spells is a moderate bonus for all players. No getting around that.

Favored Class: Fighter is a minor bonus to fighters.

So for a fighter we have:
A major bonus (+2 Con)
A minor bonus (Darkvision)
A minor bonus (d10 damage die for 1-handed weapon)
A minor bonus (+4 against trip and bull rush)
A minor bonus (Bonuses against orcs, goblins and giants, all major fodder in a core setting)
A moderate bonus (+2 on saves against all spells)
A minor bonus (Favored Class)

Wheras any human fighter gets:
A moderate bonus (bonus feat)
A minor bonus (+1 skillpoints)
A minor bonus (Favored Class)

Tell me with a straight face that there's balance there.

QuoteTell me with a straight face that there's balance there.

*shrug*. I'm simply registering the bonus feat and skill points as a larger bonus than you are.

Again, the bonus feat and the skill points are a nice bonus before you make your choices.

It's like going to a restaurant and either choosing the special of the day, where you get several items for a low price, or choosing your favorite item for the same price but getting less.

In the end, the human's bonus feat choice is gone once that choice is made. If they ever pick up a standard exotic weapon and wear medium or heavy armor, the dwarf has won.

Here is my proposed dwarf alteration:

DWARVEN RACIAL TRAITS
+2 Constitution, -2 Dexterity
This change makes the dwarf's Constitution bonus have a more fair penalty associated with it. Almost every class takes a hit from the Dex penalty.
Medium: As Medium creatures, dwarves have no special bonuses or penalties due to their size.
Dwarf base land speed is 20 feet. However, dwarves can move at this speed even while wearing medium and heavy armor or while carrying a medium or heavy load.
Darkvision 60 ft.
+2 racial bonus on Appraise and Craft checks.
These bonuses were made across the board, rather than being limited to stone and metal, as a minor alteration to improve their wider use.
+2 racial bonus on saves vs. poison.
+4 stability bonus against bull rush and trip attacks.
Stonecunning: Dwarves have a +2 circumstance bonus on search and spot checks to notice unusual stonework. A dwarf who merely comes within 10 feet of unusual stonework can make a check as if he were actively searching. A dwarf can also intuit depth, sensing his approximate depth underground as naturally as a human can sense which way is up.
Weapon Familiarity: +1 cultural bonus on attack rolls with Clubs (club, quarterstaff, light mace, heavy mace, morning star, great club) and Axes (hand axe, throwing axe, battle axe, great axe, waraxe, urgosh, double axe).
I use weapon proficiency groups, so this was meant to be a bonus to the martial group Axes and the simple group Clubs (which axes is associated with in my games). Being a flat +1 attack bonus to a group of simple and martial weapons, every character can gain a benefit from this (the idea was modeled after the halfling bonus, which can apply to all characters, as opposed to the current Dwarf bonus that only applies to martial classes, or the elf bonus that only applies to non-martial classes). The large number of weapons it applies to really doesn't matter at that point, since players generally only use one weapon at a time, and even TWFers tend to pair weapons anyway.
Automatic Languages: Dwarven and Common.
Favored Class: Fighter

Yes, I removed their AC bonus vs. Giants, their attack bonus vs. Orcs and Goblins, and their +2 save bonus. But, the class is more comparable to the Elf:

ELVES
â,¬Â¢ +2 Dexterity, â,¬'2 Constitution.
Compare to Dwarf ability bonuses.
â,¬Â¢ Medium: As Medium creatures, elves have no special bonuses or penalties due to their size.
â,¬Â¢ Elf base land speed is 30 feet.
Elf has a slight advantage here, because elves who do not wear medium or heavy armor will be faster.
â,¬Â¢ Immunity to magic sleep effects, and a +2 racial saving throw bonus against enchantment spells or effects.
Compare to Dwarf's minor save bonus vs. poison.
â,¬Â¢ Low-Light Vision: An elf can see twice as far as a human in starlight, moonlight, torchlight, and similar conditions of poor illumination. She retains the ability to distinguish color and detail under these conditions.
Compare to Darkvision; darkvision is better, but the dwarf's minor lead here counters the elf's lead in the speed department.
â,¬Â¢ Weapon Proficiency: Elves receive the Martial Weapon Proficiency feats for the longsword, rapier, longbow (including composite longbow), and shortbow (including composite shortbow) as bonus feats.
Compare to Dwarf Weapon Familiarity: Either way, I'm changing the elf familiarity to grant an attack roll bonus with the bows, and I've made the shortbow a simple weapon.
â,¬Â¢ +2 racial bonus on Listen, Search, and Spot checks. An elf who merely passes within 5 feet of a secret or concealed door is entitled to a Search check to notice it as if she were actively looking for it.
Bonus to Listen and Spot compared to Appraise and Craft; granted, appraise and craft are more situational, but hopefully a dwarf player will intend to use them. Compare the search bonus and auto search to find secret doors to the dwarf's stonecunning.
â,¬Â¢ Automatic Languages: Common and Elven. Bonus Languages: Draconic, Gnoll, Gnome, Goblin, Orc, and Sylvan.
â,¬Â¢ Favored Class: Wizard. A multiclass elf â,¬,,¢s wizard class does not count when determining whether she takes an experience point penalty for multiclassing.

Even after that, the dwarf still has their stability bonus, perhaps countering the lesser strength of their save vs. poison and their skill bonuses.

Quote from: brainface

QuoteTell me with a straight face that there's balance there.

Okay. Let's do a "which is heavier" analysis:

Which do you think is better for a fighter?
+1 SkillPoints (Basically +2 Int as far as fighters care) or +2 Con?

A bonus feat or +2 on Saves agains spells, +4 against trips and bull rushes, +4 AC against giants, +1 to attack agains orcs and goblins, Darkvision, exotic weapon proficiency in the d10 one-hander (waraxe) and more?

EDIT: I just saw Xev's reply. I like the changes. Humans have always been the odd one out, in that they are able to do all classes fairly well, but are unable to compete against other races when it comes to min-maxing. I'm interested if you have any additions to humans, or if you'll leave them as-is. They certainly get played often enough. I myself have thought about giving them a +2 on Fort, Ref or Will (chosen at character creation).

Quote from: XevHere is my proposed dwarf alteration:

Stat bonuses:[/b] That's definitely more fair. it also encourages dwarf paladins, yay.
Appraise and Craft checks. sounds great to me. restricted bonuses on not-so-useful skills aren't that good.
Stonecunning: Are they losing the trap-finding ability dwarves have in stone?
Weapon Familiarity: This seems better than normal weapon familiarity. They've gone from a +1 damage to a stacking +1 to hit.
AC bonus vs. Giants Good riddance. Incredible bonuses that you may NEVER use just suck.

[edit:raelifin] that's what edits are for.

You forgot to comment on the biggest change. -2 Cha into -2 Dex. This is a huge hit to dwarven power.

What do people think about this?

In my setting, I've separated the stats into a total of 8: Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Agility, Intelligence, Wisdom, Perception, Charisma.

I'm considering changing the racial modifiers to this:

Dwarf: +2 Con, -2 Agi, -2 Per
Elf: +2 Agi, -2 Con, -2 Wis

This will pay for new abilities for these races, to have them stand out in my setting.

Then, half-dwarfs and half-elves will not have the mental ability score penalty, because their human blood tempers their mind, but they'll lose access to the more potent pure blood abilities.

Do you think this would be an interesting change?

QuoteIn my setting, I've separated the stats into a total of 8: Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Agility, Intelligence, Wisdom, Perception, Charisma.
Do you think this would be an interesting change?

Then, half-dwarfs and half-elves will not have the mental ability score penalty, because their human blood tempers their mind, but they'll lose access to the more potent pure blood abilities.[/quote]
eh, half races need their own abilities, imo. look at 3e half-elves, they were about human and elven taken together and averaged. and they... didn't really have anything going for them. Kinda worse than either human or elf. specialization is better than generalization, in dnd. Of course it's hard to say either way without more information. :)

I prefer to have fewer race options available to players per campaign.  While the setting itself might have a thousand options for the players, it's much better to have two or three, four at the most, for the players to choose from.  Having six different races in the same party makes it harder for the DM to craft a believable world, unless the entire setting is a mish-mash of races in every town, city, and village.  Otherise, only one member of the party would be of any use in most places at any time.

Quote from: GrrI prefer to have fewer race options available to players per campaign.  While the setting itself might have a thousand options for the players, it's much better to have two or three, four at the most, for the players to choose from.  Having six different races in the same party makes it harder for the DM to craft a believable world, unless the entire setting is a mish-mash of races in every town, city, and village.  Otherise, only one member of the party would be of any use in most places at any time.

Of any use? What prevents a party of humans from adventuring in a dwarven city? Why does having a selection for your players make the world any less believable?

It's not the selection available, it's the makeup of the party.  A diverse number of races within the party makes it harder on the DM.  Especially if their campaign setting has racial tension between various races.

I have no problem with there being a wide variety of possible races for the players to choose from, but they should choose from within a smaller subset based upon the type of campaign the dm wants to run.  It'd be pretty silly to play a bunch of elves, pixies, and half-dragons if the dm planned on an underground campaign centered around troubles, plaguing the dwarves in the mountains.

I kind of agree with Grr.  Having every member of the party be a radically different race is good for comic games, but can strain serious ones.  

Off-topic, that's a killer avatar, Grr.

I think we need a new thread on the nature of many races vs. few. I'll create in a bit if nobody beats me to the punch. I just don't want to derail Xev's thread.

Thanks Rael; I'm relatively set on my choices for racial stats right now, and I'm currently working on writing up their fluff (formatting is becoming an issue). Thanks for all the help guys.