Post/Author/DateTime	Post
eagleye 11-04-05, 04:25 AM	I write this as a response to the Snow Elf in Frostburn. I really fail to see why there should be all these kinds of subtypes of elves. There's one for every class you'd like to take, giving an unfair advantage over the other races. You don't see a Snow Human or Snow Dwarf do you? As a DM I would never allow these subraces. Even in FR, I see no need for a Wild Elf, Wood Elf, etc. At least in FR, the Halflings and Dwarves get their own subtypes. Still, the Human stands all alone, without subtypes, and the only reason I can imagine for this, is because the Human does not have stat modifiers. So are the subtypes just a good excuse to have one for each class, giving the character an edge over other races with the same class?
20goingon1232 11-04-05, 04:45 AM	To tell you the truth, I have yet to see all those elf sub-types that people keep raving about. I have seen most of them, but I have never seen the pro-Cleric (ie.,+Wis) one.
Flushmaster 11-04-05, 05:42 AM	As to the lack of human subraces, I think that's because humans are supposed to be generalistic to begin with. That's why they get the extra feat and skill points. If you actually put some thought into it you can easily come up with several combinations of an extra skill and just that one extra feat to focus any given human toward a particular task. Even "generic" feats like Dodge, Track, Improved initiative, Great Fortitude, Lightning Reflexes, Iron Will, the various skill boosting feats (usually +2 to a pair of related skills), an Exotic Weapon Proficiency, Spell Focus, and so forth can give a PC an extra edge in certain environments and situations depending on what class they are. Also, getting at least two feats right away (three for human fighters) allows you to take feat combos that give you instant synergy. As to the skill boosting feats, most DMs I know would approve a feat that gives +2 bonuses on any two skills you want as long as you can justify them being related in a manner appropriate to justify their combination in said feat. You might argue that the extra feat only existing makes humans "front loaded" but many racial benefits (halfling +1 to saving throws, elf +2 to search, spot, and listen, dwarven stability or stonecunning, etc) are similarly so. If an elf isn't a rogue or ranger the just about any member of those classes will likely have better spot checks than them by third or fourth level, a CR 7 monster with abilities focused on brute force will still be able to push around most dwarves, an average dungeon delving rogue will be better at detecting odd stonework than most dwarves, and an average paladin or monk has better all around saving throws than an average halfling (unless it's a halfling monk/paladin, in which case few others of comparable level will have saving throws nearly as good, but that's obviously a special case). And humans always keep those extra skill points, so you can improve your chosen skill(s) as you level up and quickly surpass the +1 or +2 racial bonuses that other races tend to get on multiple skills. Basically, I'm saying that humans don't have subraces because they don't need them. Subraces are specifically adapted, and humans are specifically adaptable in the first place.
Nom 11-04-05, 08:56 AM	In a point buy environment, a +2/-2 essentially works out as 2 free buy points in the ability with the bonus. Compare 16/8 (10 points) with 14+2/10-2 (8 points). You get the same ability scores plus two extra points. It can be further milked to allow 18/8 (16 points) vs 16+2/10-2 (12 points) or even more, though this becomes quite expensive in a standard (25 point) environment. The effects on PH rolling are similar but harder to quantify. Of the PH races, the only races whose ability bonuses directly match their favoured class are the halfling (who gets Str penalties and reduced damage) and the half-orc (who gets a total -4 penalty for +2 bonus). Further, no PH race gets a bonus to a casting score. Elves get +Dex/-Con, dwarves get +Con/-Cha, halflings get +Dex/-Str, gnomes get +Con/-Str, and half-orcs get +Str/-Int,Cha. For humans and half-elves, their favoured class (Any) acts as partial compensation for the missing build points, since it makes it easier for them to level dip. In contrast, the munchkin grey elf gains all the standard elf benefits, plus +2 Int/-2 Str. That is, +2 on a score that he wants to boost in exchance for -2 to a score that he wasn't planning on making much above 10 anyway. Essentially, it's an elf wizard with (at least) 2 free points. Ultimately, the justification for subraces is somewhat shaky. If subraces merely represent cultural tendencies then these can be adequately represented by feat, skill and ability score selections. Occasionally, tweaks to the skill set may be appropriate (the half-elf is particularly stereotyped in this regard). Mucking around with ability scores and favoured classes risks turning significant cultural differences into "an elf for every situation". Elves cease to be "elvish", and instead become a template that can be tweaked to provide free bonuses for whatever you wish to do. I admit that the end of that paragraph exaggerates slightly, but the grey elf does take one of the more powerful races and give free bonuses.
MinusInnocence 11-04-05, 09:48 AM	I don't think the mechanical aspects of the argument are such a big deal; I fail to see how even a grey elf clearly outshines a human, all other things being equaled. Maybe I'm just naive but I don't think my game would come screeching to a halt if it suddenly became overrun with elves of every different type. However, I do take issue with a race of extreme longevity having such vast diversification. It's not like these different types of elves underwent a peculiar period of isolation; the only subrace of which that is true are the Drow, and their genetic differences have as much to do with boons from Lolth (and curses from Corellon) as the harrowing environment of the Underdark. A species for which the lifespan of each generation is relatively short must necessarily procreate more and more often. This allows for more genetic variability and evolution; there are simply more opportunities for mutation to arise because they are breeding at a faster rate. Goblins come to mind, which mature at a very early age and for any particular community, have noncombatants (defined as children or otherwise infirm) equal to 100% of the adult population. When all is said and done, though, goblins are remarkably uniform. Sure, the various environmental supplements have ideas for snow goblins and sand goblins and other sorts of variations but the entry in the Monster Manual says nothing about them, whereas the elven subraces make up a significant portion of that race's entry. This is true even though goblins are perpetually at war with basically everyone who isn't a goblin, which would seem to encourage adaptation to one's environment. Contrast this with elves. They can live to be over 700 years old and have children at a drastically slower rate; noncombatants in an elven community equal about 20% of the adult population. Strangely enough, though, all of these racial offshoots have sufficiently different genetic attributes to question just how long the grey elves have been isolated from the wood elves, and so on. I guess they could have simply found their niches and hunkered down for hundreds of thousands of years... the creation myth of the elves indicates they were the first sentient beings (except perhaps for the dragons). Then again, most races make the same claim. I just find it unlikely a race that takes so long to mature and has children so infrequently boasts such great cultural diversity. I do agree with the argument, however, that elves need all the help they can get because humans are simply more adaptable. They can flourish anywhere because their stat bonuses and racial traits don't pigeonhole them into any particular geographical region or way of life. A community of healthy and hardworking humans can be uprooted and planted somewhere else, even in a relatively extreme environment; and as long as they're given a fair shake, it's not unreasonable to assume their survival. The same is not true of elves, even with their supposed status as stewards of nature and supreme wizards.
olshanski_home 11-04-05, 10:31 AM	Perhaps, if you really want elves to be the wizards and guardians of nature, and also an old, wise rase, but physically fragile, you decide on something like: +2 Wis, +2 INT, -2 STR, -2 CON. Or, if you don't want to pigeonhole elves as much, then just drop modifiers all together. I agree that the subraces of elves have gone overboard. In fact, I'd say most subraces have gone overboard. Give them a different physical description, and that is all you need.
olshanski_home 11-04-05, 10:35 AM	I don't think the mechanical aspects of the argument are such a big deal; I fail to see how even a grey elf clearly outshines a human, all other things being equaled. Maybe I'm just naive but I don't think my game would come screeching to a halt if it suddenly became overrun with elves of every different type. A grey elf wizard vs human wizard will get a few weapon proficiencies, racial abiliites on a par with alertness, and immunities to some spells. This, in my mind, is equal to the one free feat that the human gets. Anything else the grey elf is gravy... what he gets above the human wizard is:a spell Save DC 1 higher, and have at least 1 extra bonus spell. If you are making a wizard, it is always better to make a grey elf than a human (or any other PC race, for that matter).
tennesseefats 11-04-05, 11:23 AM	As to the lack of human subraces, I think that's because humans are supposed to be generalistic to begin with. Plus, we are all humans. If WOTC made 'racial' or 'cultural' delineations, the groups who, in real life, feel they fall into those categories could be offended, which of course effects the bottom line. Humans are generalized so as to avoid any of the the 'x subset of humans are faster' or 'y subset of humans are smarter' - even if the x and y are fictional divisions; humans are the DnD race most indentifable to players. Now, to make racial distinctions to races that don't really exist, you eliminate any...complications to racial stat creation that could cross-over to the real world. By saying, "humans are adaptable and learn faster" you have a positive mechanic that doesn't alienate anyone. It is a game, but one that takes place in the real world (however much I try to avoid that via DnD). A side-note, yes, but one to think about. As for the OP: Yes, the elf subtypes could really be played out without a mechanical justification, but hey, more LA +0 races that give different bonuses allow the players more options and variations to create characters with. I, personally, think that it can be done with the player's imagination and without a +x to whatever, just as you can describe yourself as agile without taking the Agile feat.
UltimateReality 11-04-05, 12:09 PM	My DM had a minor seizure when he saw two new varieties of elf presented in the same product right next to each other: the River Elf and the Brook Elf. Once he regained sensibilities, he created a new feat and banned all elf subraces. Look, I'm An Elf Variant! Benefits: You gain a +2 to any one ability and a -2 to any other. These must be chosen when this feat is taken and may not be changed thereafter. Special: You may take this feat only once. You may take this feat at first level only. Doesn't give you any of the racial abilities, but most elf variants just have the ability mods anyway. (And sometimes a fav class.) Were I to use it myself, I might consider changing the bonus/penalty guidelines to match the suggested chart in the DMG under the section on creating new races. Other than that, it's worked admirably.
wrecan 11-04-05, 12:32 PM	Frankly, I thought Prestige Classes would have eliminated the Adjective Elf altogether. I mean one of the core Prestige Classes is Dwarven Defender. Why not have a Wood Elf Prestige Class. The Pre-Reqs can be a certain number of ranks in Survival (woodlands). I find the proliferation of elven subtypes to be very silly and it elicits from me the same sigh I emit when I see gaming supplements suffering from rampant katana-philia and undead du jour syndrome.
weasel fierce 11-04-05, 01:32 PM	And elf is an elf. Everything else is roleplaying.
NiQil 11-04-05, 02:00 PM	Frankly, I thought Prestige Classes would have eliminated the Adjective Elf altogether. I mean one of the core Prestige Classes is Dwarven Defender. Why not have a Wood Elf Prestige Class. The Pre-Reqs can be a certain number of ranks in Survival (woodlands). I find the proliferation of elven subtypes to be very silly and it elicits from me the same sigh I emit when I see gaming supplements suffering from rampant katana-philia and undead du jour syndrome. Actually, there is an elven core prestige class....the Arcane Archer.
wrecan 11-04-05, 02:20 PM	I fogot about that one. Good point!
Nom 11-04-05, 05:57 PM	I don't think the mechanical aspects of the argument are such a big deal; I fail to see how even a grey elf clearly outshines a human, all other things being equaled.The big problem is that a grey elf wizard clearly outshines a vanilla elf wizard, and elves are already supposed to make good wizards (and do). Not by a lot, but enough free "not by a lots" add up to "quite a bit". Maybe I'm just naive but I don't think my game would come screeching to a halt if it suddenly became overrun with elves of every different type.Screeching halt? No. But every silly rule like this adds a little bit to power inflation, and all of a sudden you (generic plural, not you specifically) wonder what happened to game balance. Once he regained sensibilities, he created a new feat and banned all elf subracesEven for the cost of a feat, gaining +2/-2 is powerful. Before going any further, I'd restrict it to ability scores that don't currently have racial modifiers, unless used to counter an existing modifier. I'd also use the DMG rule of thumb that a +2 to Str or Dex requires 2x -2 to counteract. Even with those caveats, it's still a very powerful feat. Spell Focus (for example) grants +1 to one school, and Weapon Focus grants +1 to one weapon. This feat could grant +1 to all schools (plus several other bonuses), or all weapons (plus damage and other bonuses). There is a cost, but the cost can be minimised or negated by careful ability score allocation.
BadCatMan 11-04-05, 11:05 PM	Well, there's Frost Dwarves (although they're planar, and duergar), Glacier Dwarves, and two or three Arctic Dwarves are available. Going back to the original elf, Tolkien had the wood elves (Legolas), high elves (Elrond), and even some sea elves, and maybe a few others. So we have the elf subraces back this far. Additionally, there are Christmas Elves, and elves who live under mushrooms (okay, I'm messing around on these). Then in Dragonlance, there were the Silvanesti, Qualinesti, and Kaganesti. I think everyone has different ideas on what elves should be. Some people want elves like Legolas, or elves like Elrond. Some people think that they should be naturally smarter, or faster, or wiser. Some people think they should be tree-hugging rangers, or wise noble wizards, or fun loving adventurers. I don't know what elves were like in 2E, but I guess that WotC, with its focus on more options for players, decided to head off the inevitable complaints and whining (either to them or to DMs), and make a few different elves available, and dumped in the MM. Of course, they could have just said that all elves have the same stats, and that any differences are social and left up to roleplaying, but this doesn't cut off arguments that they ought to be smarter or faster or whatever. So now there is an elf for every type of elf you want to play. Now, the subraces thing has gone overboard, and the issue has gone from 'Why have this subrace?' to 'Why not?'. So now elf subraces make good page fillers, and there is an elf for every type of expansion book. To a lesser extant this happened with dwarves and the other races. There are a few human subraces - FR's Deep Imaskari (with +2 Int), and the psionic one from XPH - Elans, Maenads and Xephs (well, I think these last two are party human). Tennesseefats had the right idea, I think. In game, humans are probably usually too adaptable and differing to make a +2, -2 generalisation. Regarding the evolution of these subraces, I think that the stats may be more socially based than racial. Those +2s and -2s might result from childhood upbringing, education, or environment. Perhaps PHB Elves are more into athletics (+2 Dex), whilst Grey Elves focus much more on education (+2 Int). But Wild Elves and Wood Elves have a poor education (-2 Int), but their training as hunters and warriors make them faster or stronger (+2 Dex, +2 Str).
Ni! 11-05-05, 12:40 AM	In a point buy environment, a +2/-2 essentially works out as 2 free buy points in the ability with the bonus. Compare 16/8 (10 points) with 14+2/10-2 (8 points). You get the same ability scores plus two extra points. It can be further milked to allow 18/8 (16 points) vs 16+2/10-2 (12 points) or even more, though this becomes quite expensive in a standard (25 point) environment. My inner powergamer applauds you. :clap: . @The OP: I agree with wrecan. Going back to the original elf, Tolkien had the wood elves (Legolas), high elves (Elrond), and even some sea elves, and maybe a few others. So we have the elf subraces back this far. However, we don't see anything to support the fact that Legolas would be born any faster, stronger, less smart, ect than Elrond. As weasel said, its just a difference in roleplaying. Now, while he may have been trained to be better at wilderness survival, etc, that would just be a difference in recomended skills from elves of his home region.
BadCatMan 11-05-05, 01:12 AM	However, we don't see anything to support the fact that Legolas would be born any faster, stronger, less smart, ect than Elrond. As weasel said, its just a difference in roleplaying. Now, while he may have been trained to be better at wilderness survival, etc, that would just be a difference in recomended skills from elves of his home region. And you're right. There is no evidence. But someone somewhere could and would argue that such-and-such elves are smarter, etc. Heck, maybe elves just kill off or eat their children if they don't reach a minimum score in their particular subrace's bonus stat.* That's why they have so few offspring. :D *: I think the Drow do this.
Nom 11-05-05, 08:28 AM	Off topic: Actually, Tolkein recognises 4 distinct categories of elf: - Silvan elves, who never left their orginal homes to migrate to Valinor. Legolas and all his kin are silvan. - Sindarin elves, who joined the migration but remained on the sea-shore. I'm pretty sure Cirdan is sindarin. - The Noldor, who went to Valinor but then left to seize the cuttings of the tree from Morgoth. Many of these remained in middle earth. The elves of Lothlorien are Noldor, as are many in Rivendell. - The elves who went to Valinor and remained there. I forget their name just now, and they obviously don't influence the later stories. Each is seen as different, due to the various magics influencing them. However, the more important point is that Tolkein is not attempting to create mechanical and balanced base races for a game, and thus the differences between the elven races never needs to be mechanically represented. In contrast, several of the subraces in the MM seem to be a bunch of gratuitous mechanical tweaks with a flimsy cover story wrapped around them.
MinusInnocence 11-05-05, 09:44 AM	Although earlier I played Devil's Advocate and tried to play down the dilemma here, I'd like to clarify by saying in my new homebrew the only playable race at 1st level is Human. There are no elves or dwarves or any other Tolkienesque races; in fact, these aren't even just "Prestige Races" to be encountered by the PCs and later chosen for future campaigns. They just don't exist. The various ethnicities in my world also don't have racial modifiers to stats; I thought that was a little too cheesy but I probably also wanted to avoid any mess like tennesseefats cautioned against (at least subconsciously). Having said that, I do offer regional feats depending on what sort of Human your character is; I always liked this idea the first time I saw it in the FRCS a few years ago. Finally, in the gameworld the average Keshite does not perceive himself to have any common race with Dorashans. There may be a few enlightened souls who emphasize the similarities among humans rather than their differences but these are an extreme minority. So, yes, I do agree with the OP; things have gotten out of hand. The ultimate cause of the subrace dilemma, elfphilia, has been nipped in the bud in my gaming group. I guess my solution was a little extreme though.
Arco Versipellis 11-05-05, 10:13 AM	You don't see a Snow Human or Snow Dwarf do you? As a DM I would never allow these subraces. Even in FR, I see no need for a Wild Elf, Wood Elf, etc. At least in FR, the Halflings and Dwarves get their own subtypes. Actually, there is an artic dwarf in the FR setting. Along with several other types of dwarves, just as there are various types of halflings and gnomes. Personally, I don't see a problem with the number of elven subraces. They aren't the only race with variants (despite popular complaint), and you can always just not use them. Throughout the years, I have considered using various elven subtypes as the principle and only existing type of elves in the world.