| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1myouMar 27, 2009 14:39:50 | I'm looking for help balancing the playable races in my campaign, and making sure I have all the major roles covered. The races are meant to all be a little more powerful than the D&D norm, and much simpler, since a large number of relatively useless bonuses isn't really worthwhile. The setting is a tropical ocean that spans the world's equator, dotted with islands of all sizes. Most settlements are of highly mixed race, but there are some areas where there is less variation and only a few races are common. I the past extraplanar travel and communication was common, but almost all contact with the gods and their servants and foes has since been cut off.
|
| #2eikreMar 28, 2009 23:59:17 | On one hand, you've got a lot going against convention... On the other hand, I think you're working with classic rules of character optimization in mind. I'd like to know the context of your setting, though. Are you doing anything peculiar to Casters to make their power-system more serviceable? How about warriors, are you using TOB? Are you encouraging Psionics/Pacts/Incarnum? The gnomes stand out, to me, as a race that I couldn't be entirely convinced to join. I'd shift the -2 CON to STR. Do the centaurs retain the capacity to act as though they were mounted, when it comes to lances and feats? I think I'll wait to see what other people think and discuss what they have to say. |
| #3vebrandssonMar 29, 2009 0:12:08 | Purely on balance the Aasimar, Centaurs, and Merfolk are Superior to the other non level adjusted races (elves, humans etc.) and for only a +1 level adjustment a +2 to all stats, that seems a little out there to me. If it were me I'd go back to Savage species for Aasimar, Centaurs, and Merfolk and use the actual racial data for them in there and then use the savage species guidelines for naga, but thats just me and I realize that it would throw off a lot of the numbers you have here. |
| #4myouMar 29, 2009 6:07:37 | Yay, replies! =DOn one hand, you've got a lot going against convention... On the other hand, I think you're working with classic rules of character optimization in mind. The classes are all basically unchanged, other than druids who use the shapeshift variant. The ToB is in but psionics are out. Yes, you're absolutely right about the gnomes, I've made a change to give them +2 int, which I feel fits them as a race, fills a gap in the distribution of abilities, and makes them much more playable. :3 That's an interesting point about centaurs, I didn't know that was something they had in the official rules. Would it be a big benefit? Purely on balance the Aasimar, Centaurs, and Merfolk are Superior to the other non level adjusted races (elves, humans etc.) and for only a +1 level adjustment a +2 to all stats, that seems a little out there to me. If it were me I'd go back to Savage species for Aasimar, Centaurs, and Merfolk and use the actual racial data for them in there and then use the savage species guidelines for naga, but thats just me and I realize that it would throw off a lot of the numbers you have here. Yes, I realised that the later races outshone the others, I've tried to remedy that, making the other races a little stronger and taking the +2 Str from naga, hopefully that will make the races more equal, and the +1 LA seem fairer for the naga. ^^ I'm trying to match the abilities more to how I'd like the races to be, but thanks for the suggestion about Savage species. ^^ More comments, suggestions and advice are very welcome! |
| #5eikreMar 29, 2009 19:50:43 | The classes are all basically unchanged, other than druids who use the shapeshift variant. Well, then, it's not like if someone tries to crack the system wide open, they're going to do it based on something you gave them with their race. That's an interesting point about centaurs, I didn't know that was something they had in the official rules. Would it be a big benefit? As big of a benefit as it is to mounted chargers in the first place, anyway. The lance becomes their best one-handed weapon; It has reach and deals 2x damage on a charge, that's pretty good. Compare them to a person just sitting on a horse. On one hand, they don't need to pay for a mount, and they don't have to worry about someone shooting their horse out from under them. On the other hand, they're already Large anyway and can't really buy a horse, Griffon, Sandworm, or any other decent mount that can fit them, so they're sort of paying the downsides already. I say just give it to them. As it stands, they're a grapple/monk race. Armor is drat expensive and being a Large creature with natural attacks means hugs will hurt. |
| #6myouMar 30, 2009 5:35:22 | Well, then, it's not like if someone tries to crack the system wide open, they're going to do it based on something you gave them with their race. Awesome, I shall do that! :3 And you made me giggle at the image of a centaur monk hugging people into submission. xD |
| #7myouMar 30, 2009 15:45:26 | I've added the races' fluff to my post and made a few changes that other have suggested, I'm still looking for feedback and comments or suggestions. :3 |
| #8eikreMar 31, 2009 22:22:21 | Humans... are one of the most recent races to emerge, and even after millions of years they retain a youthfulness that the older races lack. This is ludicrous. Real world humans haven't even existed for one million years. Scientific estimates place us as a species only several hundred thousand years old, and our written history only spans a few millenniums. Millions of years don't produce a young race, millions years produce illithids. If they emerged within the mythical memories of the other races, then I'd call it at a few tens of thousands. I think that puts their creation right in the timeframe where it happened long enough ago that even Naga history would have become obfuscated, and therefore, mysterious, but recently enough that the other races couldn't have given them magic and technology and enough of a headstart that they could have since populated the stars and downloaded their consciousnesses to 64-exabye computers. You can put the Merfolk ascent to land in a similar timeframe. Older races you can age more like real-world humans. Remember, it doesn't take many centuries or that many generations before people feel like things are really, really old. Some people would tell you, even today, that the earth has only existed for six thousand years. When people can feel intuitively that such a thing could be true, it should indicate that many more than a few hundred thousand years are wholly unnecessary for steeping the world in mystery. EDIT: Well, let me amend this. Real humans have existed for more than a million years, but only in the sense that the genus has. Still, use of fire as a tool is reasonably placed at around the -1.5 million mark, earliest. The jump between fire using fire and a decent oral or magical tradition is pretty spectacular. What I mentioned in the above paragraphs stands. |
| #9hochiuApr 01, 2009 11:33:30 | Eikre, while I agree with your statement (Given that Archaic H. sapiens have only been around for less than half a million years) at the same time, I think it is kind of ridiculous to rip into the human species in anyone's campaign setting when they have a lot older races at a similar technological/social development. I'm thinking of the "long lived" races, even, the ones that are like elves and dwarves, who have existed for tens of thousands of years longer than humans, but only have a comparable level of society. Why don't elves, as written in most 3.5 games, have a greater technological edge than humanity? They're almost always this isolated race that is in remission despite their apparent superiority in magical technique. They should at least have arcano-tech running around if you assume a nominal development of technology and culture (it doesn't even have to be the level of growth that humans have experienced over the course of their history, but regardless, their head start would be enough to outpace the standard setting technology). That is if you take a biological evoutionary point of view. We're not even talking about what could happen to a race that's so ingrained with natural magical aptitude. I think the whole of the racial evolution of D&D races is best left somewhat ambiguous. It seems that "But its fantasy" argument applies to everything but the human race itself. I don't know whether or not that's because its one of those major aspects of D&D that we have real detailed knowledge of as it would exist. |
| #10myouApr 01, 2009 13:37:09 | This is ludicrous. Real world humans haven't even existed for one million years. Scientific estimates place us as a species only several hundred thousand years old, and our written history only spans a few millenniums. Millions of years don't produce a young race, millions years produce illithids. If they emerged within the mythical memories of the other races, then I'd call it at a few tens of thousands. I think that puts their creation right in the timeframe where it happened long enough ago that even Naga history would have become obfuscated, and therefore, mysterious, but recently enough that the other races couldn't have given them magic and technology and enough of a headstart that they could have since populated the stars and downloaded their consciousnesses to 64-exabye computers. My mistake, I thought it was 2 million for some reason, I'll change that, good save! xD Thanks for your thoughts, they've been very helpful! I'll make humans about 30,000 (10 full naga lifespans, definitely long enough for the event to pass into myth and become blurred and uncertain) years old and place the merfolk's ascent shortly after, thanks! ^^ Of course I won't put any numbers in the actual fluff, the true ages of the races aren't something players should be able to read in the campaign notes. xD Thanks again for your comments and suggestions, you've got me thinking more about the timeline of my setting! :3 In my imagination I see naga as being far more ancient then suspected, at about 100 million years (placing their emergence during the end of the Albian period of the Cretaceous era), but just like the real world, my setting has had it's share of disasters, including a big one 100,000 years ago that cut off all interplanar travel, so that explains why they're not more advanced. ^^ |
| #11myouApr 01, 2009 16:19:12 | Eikre, while I agree with your statement (Given that Archaic H. sapiens have only been around for less than half a million years) at the same time, I think it is kind of ridiculous to rip into the human species in anyone's campaign setting when they have a lot older races at a similar technological/social development. Thanks for the defense. ^^ In a lot of settings it's just as you say, but in mine I'm trying to make things realistic where I can (given the existence of magic), so feedback of that type is welcome. :3 |
| #12eikreApr 01, 2009 19:41:17 | Eikre, while I agree with your statement (Given that Archaic H. sapiens have only been around for less than half a million years) at the same time, I think it is kind of ridiculous to rip into the human species in anyone's campaign setting when they have a lot older races at a similar technological/social development. No, the presence of other races is exactly what moves me to comment in the first place. If humans have been around for even two million years, and then other races have been around even longer, then you have a species that is even older than our (space-faring, computer-using, highly scientific) own, and not only are they older, but they would have been given a head-stat: all of the technological and social advancements that the other races would have bestowed upon them. You're running under the assumption that Humans, whatever their age, are at a roughly medieval or renaissance level of technology, and that the elves, because they are older, should logically have even more tech. That is not how it works. You ask me, why don't the elves have better tech? They did. They had herb-lore, fletching, and domestication of animals long ago. Since then, they have taught humans how to do those things, and the humans have spread it around. The dwarfs knew how to mix copper and tin to make a harder metal, and how to build architecturally sound stone structures for defense. The humans traded for their goods and services, and learned how to do those things as well. If the Elves have arcano-tech running around, then so do the humans. If there are still humans that don't, then those humans are either a long way away, or the arcano-tech is very, very new. Cultural exchange balances everyone. And this is exactly why you can't make a race that is millions of years old, and then make one that is older. If one race is four-million years old (and can remember as far back as the birth of another which is two million years old, which is a stint of oral and written history that we only became capable of a few thousand years ago), then they should be expected not only to have come up with arcano-tech, but normal tech. And spaceships. And cyborgs. Dimensional-folding capabilities. On the other hand, if you have one race that only emerged a few thousand years ago and woke up to find that there were already people around who could practice literacy and make metal tools, then they would have been uplifted fairly immediately... Or, at least, immediately enough that now, thousands of years later, everyone in the same region would be about equal. |
| #13myouApr 04, 2009 5:13:24 | Why does this forum seem to replace the word 'skin' with "GLEEMAX!GLEEMAX!GLEEMAX!GLEEMAX!"? Anyway, I'm still looking for feedback. :3 |
| #14myouApr 07, 2009 13:51:43 | Would anyone care to Bring Up More Points? :3 |