--Humans are not that predominant: The reason humans rule the earth is our ”adaptability” (1), our control of language (2), our relatively long lifespan (3), and our humanlike intelligence (4).
(1) Humans do not adapt to the surroundings. We adapt the surroundings to better suit us, thus locking ourselves out from the world we cannot adapt. Elves are inherently chaotic. They adapt (see the vast number of different elven races in MM) to almost whatever.
(2) All the other intelligent races control a language of their own, except from humans, who use the common language. Of course, some DM’s may have changed this to better suit their own campaign, and i salute those of you who have done it.
(3) Humans are, except from half-orcs, the most short-lived core race. Any given human individual is less likely to gain a degree of life wisdom equal to your average elf. We are also incapable of studying the same subject for such a long time as an elf, not only because of our lack of age, but also for our lack of patience. Now you think ”But elves are chaotic, they can’t have that much patience either”. But they do. A century is an almost unimaginable time for you, but for an elf, who may even reach a millennium, it is simply about 20 years, not such a long time for a devoted human to focus on a subject. Elves have to be patient, because of their devotion to magic, which brings us to part 4.
(4) Humans are smart compared to almost every other creature that walks the earth. Elves –yes, I think they are superior to humans- master magic better than any other common race, and what is the main ability score of the wizard? We human males also have a foolish little thing called honor. I can’t understand how it has survived through the ages, considering the number of times the phrase ”I do not care if it is reckless! No one, even a tiger/mammoth/random prehistoric, lethal beast wounds me/ slays my family/ humiliates me and lives! It must die! Fetch my club, lad!” has been spoken. With the displacer beasts and the other monstrosities from MM, survival of pride seems even less likely, thus wiping out most humans with guts to establish a kingdom, especially since no mayor likes to have their town laid under some king.
Conclusion: Elves should rule.
--It is not always hard to hit in the dark. Imagine yourself, fighting a guy in dim torchlight. You can clearly see him, and hitting him is not really that much harder. But then he swings his longsword at you. How on the earth can you see a thin, swift-moving blade coming at you in the dark as good as in daylight? And to see where it’s headed is even more difficult. Therefore, I assume it would be appropriate to divide the regular miss chance due to dim lighting by 4, making this the new miss chance, and dividing the same number by 10, as a penalty to AC (count this as a dodge penalty). The regular 50% penalty when attacking in total darkness is still used for ranged attacks. Melee attacks have their miss chance divided as usual, making it 13%. This is because a sweeping blow (of course) covers more ground than an arrow. Attacks with most piercing weapons have a 25% miss chance. This is due to the fact that a piercing weapon has a single point of impact, like a ranseur or pick’s head, as opposed to a sword’s edge. Even a sweeping attack, like a short sword, has a great chance of not hitting.
--Bolas are simple/martial weapons. They are used in a way very similar to a sling, and should be usable by anyone who can use a sling, or if your DM says so, with martial weapon proficiency. I know the exotic part represents weapons not necessarily being harder to use, but less common to be trained in, but such a resemblance is completely illogical. That’s why all fighters can use a scythe or a sickle with deadly skill, but repeating crossbows, they are almost impossible to use! You use them like the simple heavy crossbow, but you don’t have to put the quarrel in yourself. That must be almost impossible and requiring the loss of an extra feat, using less time doing the same work. I think they are martial or simple as well. Hand crossbows are small and a bit unpractical to shoot and reload, so I am a bit in doubt on that one.
--Whips are monk weapons. They can’t be used for a flurry of blows, but I think some monastic orders would train their students in the use of whips, if only for the overwhelming coolness of a ki strike whip. Quivering palm with 15-foot reach? I think so.
--Sorcerers are boosted up. They manipulate pure magical energy, so they have eschew materials. Material components with a gp cost can be replaced with xp worth the number of gp/10. They also get 4 skill points/level, just as an average wizard gets (intelligence counted). This represents the fact that while wizards use years reading moldy old books, sorcs simply wake up thinking ”I feel like I can cast fireball today!” So, they obviously get more time to learn other trades, like simple weapon proficiency.
They should also have more charisma-based skills, like diplomacy, disguise, gather information, perform and use magic device. This also counts for the bards concerning the mentioned skills they don’t get. And sorcerers add all bard spells to their spell list. They manipulate arcane energy, as do bards, so why can a bard cast glibness, while a sorcerer cannot? A wizard also uses arcane energy, but they have not researched all spells, so until a PC finds a nice big library and starts working, glibness is sorcerer and bard only. If a spell is both bard and wiz/sorc, the sorcerer uses the wiz/sorc level. Most of this rule is ripped, but the part concerning bards and bard (now bard/sorcerer) spells is mine.
--You incur a penalty to some skills when aging. As the rules are stated now, a venerable character gains +1 or +2 to all wisdom, intelligence, and charisma based skills. So a 100 year old human could sit and talk about the time he was young and could barely hear and see. To preserve realism, you get –2 to spot, listen, search, appraise (for the purpose of noticing details), intimidate and spellcraft (only when identifying a spell with a somatic component) checks.
--Certain skills may use other abilities as their key ability. Intimidate uses strength, and instrumental performing uses dexterity when higher.
--Dexterity is not used to determine AC, reflex modifier is. Saves are used to avoid something, like many traps. Why not an incoming blow? I know I will get much flaming for this one, and even I am reluctant to use it, but it still makes some sense. Even so, it could make rogues, monks, bards and rangers overpowered in combat, and a ref/fort save for ¾ damage would be more likely to preserve balance. But you are free to try
._________
From studying history, we know that agriculture was a mixed blessing to humanity. Humanity gave up relative gender/class equality, free time, and health (relatively balanced diet) for the benefits of stable meals and the ability to support a large population base. With all the drawbacks, agriculture's strength was the large population base it supported -- whenever there was conflict, the larger population nearly always won.
Now we look at the D&D worlds. Humans have a shorter lifespan, but they also breed much much faster than any other of the "civilized" races. Among the "uncivilized" races, those that breed as fast or faster than humans are violent, usually stupider, and cannot organize as well as humans. Net result is that there are more humans than any other race.
Elves don't rule the D&D world because there aren't enough of them relative to everyone else TO rule the D&D world. Though the average elf should be better than the average human at most things given their much longer lifespan, the fact is that the average elf is not and cannot be better at most things than 100 humans together -- and that is what the ratio will start to look like given the simple fact that elves don't breed as fast...
The argument that elves should rule the world because they are the preeminent magic-users among the races is also flawed. Yes, they have a long lifespan and a strong history of using magic, and yes, magic is the most powerful thing in the D&D game. However, humans are the fastest-breeding population with no penalties to mental stats.
This brings us back to my argument of relative populations. To prove my point, let's ignore commoners altogether and look at PC-classes. Assume that 40% of elves are magic-users (an extremely high percentage but considering their love for magic it is possible). Then assume that 20% of humans are magic-users (given an even breakdown of the character classes this is wildly inaccurate but assume this for my example). What we come to is that out of our elven forest population of 200, there are 80 magic-users, and out of our 2000 human city-dwellers, there are 400. The humans magic-users outnumber the elves even though we have skewed the percentages beforehand in favor of the elves and against the humans.
__________________
So, long and short, elves are not and cannot be the preeminent fantasy race because of simple biology -- and the resulting numbers that causes.
In your world, elves are the most sophisticated race. Fair enough, but I completely fail to see why that should be, given the background information and rule mechanics D&D has for elves.
(My numeration does not relate to the previous post)
1) There is really nothing that makes elves better at magic. It is a common believe that elves should be better but absolutely nothing backs that up. No game mechanic and no background (flavor) information.
If you want elves to be better at magic than any other race, I think you should at least back that up with some kind of rules. Giving them some innate abilities or something like that. On top of that, elves (taking only the core-races into account) are no more intelligent than other races.
In fact, only Gnomes could be considered a highly magic race because they are the only core-races that possess innate magical abilities.
2) Elves are indeed a very long-lived race and at first glance one could come to the conclusion that they should be better at many things than any other race. Just because they have this immense amount of time to commit themselves to any given topic. BUT... as they are not superior in any given discipline than other races (I again refer to the complete lack of game mechanics and flavor texts backing this "believed superiority" up), one must come to the conclusion that elves must be, excuse the language, rather dumb if not being able to use their huge amount of time to more effect.
3) This point is largely dependant on the campaign setting a group uses but in most campaigns humans indeed have their very own language. Often divided into ethnic groups all having their own language. The "common" language in those campaigns is mostly a mix of all kind of "real" languages or some slang of the most widely spread language. Just enough to barter on the market or to order a meal in the tavern but far from being sophisticated enough to be able to talk about deeper aspects of philosophy or politics for example.
4) Being a dominant race does not necessarily mean that it has power over other races. Especially for humans in the D&D setting, dominance is more related to being the most numerous race than being the most powerful. The only power humans have, lies in their numbers.
That said, I believe that stating that any race is superior to any other should be backed up by game mechanics or at least "flavor" information. Adding game mechanics quickly leads to problems regarding balance and I can see some level adjustments coming that way. That often leads to a whole lot of work adjusting many things. The results are often not worth the effort.
Anyway, you might want to consider my arguments for a moment. In the end, play the game the way you like it best. As long as your rules give you and your party the most fun, they are the best rules there can be!
(1) Elves trump humans? Turn off the LoTR movies, and read the books. Humans trump elves. Why? Not in power, or longevity, but in balance.
Elves live a long time, but they are not mature for over 100 years. Since two parants can only afford to take care of X numbers of dependants, then elves can not have as many children (or at least not as many as quickly). Human babies can be feeding and having their own babies in 15 years. After 15 years, an Elf baby is still in diapers.
Thus, in a conflict, humans can recover from even apocalyptic catastrophe within a century or two, while Elves take an eon.
The question then, is why don't Goblins (or Kobalds) rule the world? The answer is simple. They are inferior races. Note that inferior does not mean statistically, but in their averege level.
Lets take three villages, Goblin, Human, and Elven, and put them in a three way war.
The Goblins breed very quickly, and launch continual attacks on the humans and the elves. They live very short lives in these wars of attrition, but with enough goblins they have some success. Since their survival rate in battle is near nil, they don't go on to gain experience, and so are strong in number, but weak individually. Without strong leadership, they seldom are capable of conquoring.
The Humans breed quickly, and launch attacks and build defences. They can deal with some risk, since their population can handle it, but never over extend themselves. Thus, many survive to gain experience, and become "vetran" soldiers. With luck, these vetrans can gain enough power to become conquorers.
The Elves breed slowly, and so can never risk offence. The loss of a single elven life is the loss of over a century's worth of training and resorces. Thus, the elves can only fight defensive wars. They can never conquor the world, because they can never risk it. Thus, while in their years of defense they reach higher levels (as a society), there is too much to risk in open war, where no matter how unbalanced 5% of attacks get through.
So, Humans are idealy situated in the posistion of power (though the same can be said of Orcs and Hobgoblins). Goblin society is going to be low level on avg 1-3. Human society is going to be mid level, varying widely in avg depending on circumstances (in this scenario, likely 5-8. Elven society is going to be lower numbered, but higher leveled, avg 11-14.
Goblin vs. Elf = Elf wins due to defences
Goblin vs. Human = 50/50 based on preparedness
Human vs. Elf = 50/50 based on numbers and skill
Human vs. Goblin = 50/50 based on numbers and skill
Elf vs. Goblin = Pyric victory for the Elves (win battle, but at a cost that is not worth it due to numbers)
Elf vs. Humans = Elves loose.
Reflex modifiers have to do with suddenly recognizing a danger, I've always felt. It fits in with:
"Dum dee dum dee dum... AH GIANT BLADE... I'm over here now... dum dee dum dee dum."
And NOT:
"Dodging and weaving... dodging and weaving... giant blade... keep dodging and weaving."
Do you see what I mean? You're keeping your eyes on that blade anyways. For sneak attacks maybe you could put a reflex save in, but then there'd be sticky issues such as if a crossbow bolt gets an equal save to a greatsword. As cool as it is to imitate Neo, it doesn't make much sense.
The aging deal seems accurate for NPCs. PCs, it's generally presumed, are the height of their race. I'd have the player choose from some geriatric traits at his or her own discretion. I trust in good roleplaying in my group.
Bard spells are bard spells (and not sorcerer spells) because they concern the bard's 'people-person' traits. You manipulate arcane and mysterious forces to blow stuff up, you sing and dance to mess with people's minds.
While it's been proven that you're wrong, I'm also going to tirade against your elf post because it seems like the right thing to do.
Elves are cooler, sure, so it would seem. But give two players the same number of levels, have them roll up characters, and it shouldn't matter who has the human and who has the elf.
Your argument seems to be that elves live longer, so they'll (generally) be of higher level. But how many adventurers die of natural causes anyway?
-B.
The whip thing, I think it stays. Ki focus is magic, and if magic can identify and slay orcs, it most probably can do anything. And it is fairly possible that some monasteries train their students in the use of them. After all, monks are proficient with saps.
And elves still rule the world if the "first people" thing is taken literally. All alone in the world, nobody would stop them from settling. And they are not lazy. Favored class wizard does not cope with laziness.
And sorcerers are charismatic, so they do have a grip on influencing people. And not all bard spells do that. I don't recall everything right now, but healing and control weather definitely are not mind-affecting. Unless you use the control weather to intimidate a noble, that is.
Any other comments? I really wonder what people think about the bola and darkness issues.