Races and design goals

Alternative title: Why does paizo hate melee so much?

So, simple question. Why is it, after two bestiaries, the only race printed so far other than Orc (which retained its net -2 to ability scores and light sensitivity from 3E, making unplayable in PF) that gets a strength bonus is Oread? Why?

I can find literally TONS of +wisdom and +charisma races, and quite a few +int ones, as well. Dex is common, though sadly almost always seems to be paired with -Con making in untenable, but...there's basically nothing for strength at all.

Why is it so unbalanced to have races good for melee classes, but a-ok to have a bazillion options for casters?

For reference, yanked from the Summoner's Handbook

[sblock]Aasimar: +2 Wis, +2 Cha
Changeling: +2 Wis, +2 Cha, -2 Con
Dhampir: +2 Dex, +2 Cha, -2 Con
Drow: +2 Dex, +2 Cha, -2 Con
Drow Noble: Same as Drow with the following changes; +4 Dex, +2 Int, +2 Wis, +2 Cha, –2 Con [These should not be allowed as a PC race, just to note]
Duergar: +2 Con, +2 Wis, -4 Cha
Fetchling: +2 Dex, +2 Cha, -2 Wis
Gillman: +2 Con, +2 Cha, -2 Wis
Goblin: +4 Dex, -2 Str, -2 Cha
Grippli: +2 Dex, +2 Wis, -2 Str
Hobgoblin: +2 Dex, +2 Con
Ifrit: +2 Dex, +2 Cha, -2 Wis
Kobold: +2 Dex, -4 Str, -2 Con
Merfolk: +2 Dex, +2 Con, +2 Cha
Orc: +4 Str, -2 all mentals.
Oread: +2 Str, +2 Wis, -2 Cha
Strix: +2 Dex, -2 Cha
Svirfneblin: +2 Dex, +2 Wis, -2 Str, -4 Cha
Sylph: +2 Dex, +2 Int, -2 Con
Tengu: +2 Dex, +2 Wis, -2 Con
Tiefling: +2 Dex, +2 Int, -2 Cha
Undine: +2 Dex, +2 Wis, -2 Str[/sblock]

All the following is just 'my opinion', but:

1. Does a melee class race require a + anything to strength? Sure it helps, but there's all kinds of ways to improve combat ability beyond strength, including traits, feats, special class features. I don't think the lack of a strength bonus inherently makes a race not optimal for melee combat (which is what you are stating above.)

2. There are many monster races that don't make ideal casters, so your assumption that due to different bonuses, most cater to caster types I disagree with. Some make good casters, some make possible casters, but not necessarily best casters. I think there are many monster races more ideally suited to melee combat over casting skills - and don't require a + strength to be more ideally suited.

I think your + strength requirement for being considered a necessary component to a melee based race is too small a consideration. I think its one of the considerations, but not the whole of it.

As an aside, I have the kappa as a PC race for Kaidan, and despite being a diminuitive race, it was built to be good at melee combat. The normal negative modifiers for being small is removed from the kappa as one of its race abilities. In addition some kappa (those taking the 'bone-breaker' paragon class) gain ki bonuses to strength for limited amount of time that grants a +4, then +8 to strength as ki powers. Also kappa have special combat maneuvers to allow it to 'break bones' (really Dex/Str/Con damage caused by successful bone-breaking maneuvers.)

Why I bring this up, is the Kaidan kappa, by its base race isn't getting a + strength bonus, rather it's race abilities provide it's combat effectiveness, not its base stats. So for this reason I don't see + strength as a requirement to make an ideal melee race - as you suggest.

Why the bestiaries don't include more Str bonus based monster races, I don't know, but the inference that this means Paizo hates melee combatants - is quite a stretch, IMO.

1. Stats are certainly the largest part of race choice, and a lack of a strength bonus definitely makes a race less than optimal as a fighter (unless said race has +8 Con, +8 Dex, +8 Will, and three 1d12 natural attacks).

2. There are more types of combatants than casters and melee. Archers, for example. Pretty much every race caters to archers or casters.



Using a homebrew/3rd party race does not really support your argument -- i.e. that Paizo doesn't hate melee. In fact, it's rather more supportive of SOTS's argument, in that you have to go so far afield to find a melee-capable race that doesn't include a strength bonus.

Systole said:

Using a homebrew/3rd party race does not really support your argument -- i.e. that Paizo doesn't hate melee. In fact, it's rather more supportive of SOTS's argument, in that you have to go so far afield to find a melee-capable race that doesn't include a strength bonus.

Click to expand...

I wasn't using my homebrew/3rd party race as an example of what Paizo may or may not intend - it wasn't meant to support nor counter the argument. Rather it was meant to point out that here's a 3rd party race meant to be strong in combat that didn't have a specific bonus to Str, to determine its effectiveness in combat, rather its other race/paragon class features. Just to point out there are other means of creating effective combat abilities that aren't necessarily based on a Str bonus.

I agree that Strength bonus IS the best character feature for fighting effectiveness. It's just not the only one.

When I designed the race, making it in opposition to Paizo's design goals was not the intention. I designed the race to match its known qualities in folklore having nothing to do as a comparison to Bestiary designed monster races. I didn't even look at the bestiary when I designed the kappa, or even consider it - beyond that monster race not being in the bestiaries.

I agree that it's possible to make non-Str races designed for melee, but the important point is that Paizo hasn't made any.

SOTS's OP said, "There are hardly any Str-based races. Paizo is clearly not paying attention to melee."

You replied, "Well maybe, but you can make melee-based races that don't have Str."

My response was: "True, but there are no official Paizo melee-based races that don't have Str." Between not making Str-based races, and not making melee-based races, Paizo does seem to be ignoring melee.

Systole said:

I agree that it's possible to make non-Str races designed for melee, but the important point is that Paizo hasn't made any.

SOTS's OP said, "There are hardly any Str-based races. Paizo is clearly not paying attention to melee."

You replied, "Well maybe, but you can make melee-based races that don't have Str."

My response was: "True, but there are no official Paizo melee-based races that don't have Str." Between not making Str-based races, and not making melee-based races, Paizo does seem to be ignoring melee.

Click to expand...

No, my reply only responded to "why does Paizo hate melee" - I don't agree that Paizo hate's melee, just because a str-bonus based monster races hasn't been created. I agree Paizo hasn't created one, I just don't agree that this equals Paizo hating melee combatants. That's all.

My example just suggests there are other means of building a melee race that isn't Str based.

...not to state the obvious and all but... humans? Kinda the main race normally, can have a strength bonus. Humans are probably the "best" race bar none anyway, at least out of the standard races.

Systole said:

My response was: "True, but there are no official Paizo melee-based races that don't have Str."

Click to expand...

You think that Hobgoblin, with the +2 Con and +2 Dex doesn't count as melee based?

Duergar, with a +2 to Con, immunities and spell resistances and spell-like abilities (enlarge!) also looks like it could be quite a melee combatant.

So, it may be that melee-focused races are underrepresented, I think "there are none" is inaccurate.

Umbran said:

You think that Hobgoblin, with the +2 Con and +2 Dex doesn't count as melee based?

Duergar, with a +2 to Con, immunities and spell resistances and spell-like abilities (enlarge!) also looks like it could be quite a melee combatant.

So, it may be that melee-focused races are underrepresented, I think "there are none" is inaccurate.

Click to expand...

Hobgoblin is still more archer than melee, in my opinion, but you've definitely got me on duergar. I stand corrected.

Dwarf is certainly a decent melee race just for all their goodies...they just happen to be even better clerics, druids, and inquisitors... You don't technically *need* strength for a melee race, just as you don't technically need +2 to a casting stat for a caster race. But it sure helps out a lot, and paizo hasn't had any problems providing ample choices for the latter.

I'm aware of Human/Half-Elf/Half-Orc, yes. But they're good for anything, they're purposely made that way. And, IMO, a caster (which tends to be more SAD) is better off with one of those races than a more-likely MAD melee class who really could use as many bonuses to the right spots as possible. In any case, on top of these 3, there's tons of stuff for wis and cha, and a fair amount for int, why no races for str?

The hates melee, while my personal belief, was a bit sensational for the OP and not the primary focus of this thread. Debate whether they hate melee, or whether this is a reason or example of it, somewhere else, please. I am mainly interested in discussing the dearth of +str races.