Aberzanzorax
Hero
Spock had the vulcan mind meld and also that neck pinch.
A design goal: making different races FEEL different.
Glade Riven
Adventurer
I like what Dawnforge did with the bonus racial talent trees for the first 10 levels, but a DM really has to scale up the encounters to deal with the extra power. It's a little too potent. I find Pathfinder's Alternative Racial Trait system a good idea to allow different racial arctypes.
One thing I would like to see is an "occupational" talent tree - basically, a non-combat talent tree and skill set that would replace the standard skills for a class. You could put racial paragons as talent trees, so someone can play a better elf or something.
Now, for my Ironbound: Chains of Phaetos setting (PF Compatable), I am really focusing on ethnicities in the fluff, with optional alternative racial traits. An outright new mechanic I'm introducing are "Bloodline Feats." These feats can only be taken at first level, and (if a campaign uses traits) are worth two traits. Some are spell-like abilities that increase with character level - for instance, Troll-Blooded has Fast Healing equal to 1/2 character level, minimum one, but you take an extra point of damage from fire equil to your fast healing rate (getting hit with fire also ruins your fast healing until the next day).
One thing I would like to see is an "occupational" talent tree - basically, a non-combat talent tree and skill set that would replace the standard skills for a class. You could put racial paragons as talent trees, so someone can play a better elf or something.
Now, for my Ironbound: Chains of Phaetos setting (PF Compatable), I am really focusing on ethnicities in the fluff, with optional alternative racial traits. An outright new mechanic I'm introducing are "Bloodline Feats." These feats can only be taken at first level, and (if a campaign uses traits) are worth two traits. Some are spell-like abilities that increase with character level - for instance, Troll-Blooded has Fast Healing equal to 1/2 character level, minimum one, but you take an extra point of damage from fire equil to your fast healing rate (getting hit with fire also ruins your fast healing until the next day).
Fanaelialae
Legend
I agree that good fluff is great, but what really helps to drive home the difference is when there's also solid crunch to back it up.
The 4e Dwarf's resistance to forced movement and tripping is a good example of this. It really stresses both the low center of gravity and density that all dwarves share. If I saw this feature on an elf, I'd be a bit perplexed. I wouldn't mind seeing a higher level dwarf better able to utilize those benefits, gaining more resistance to forced movement or some such, or mastering other special dwarven features such as their fighting styles reflected in the classic bonus against giants.
I mean, really, you could make the same argument for class design. You could make the fighter and mage mechanically identical, then tell the players to differentiate their characters through role play. We both roll 1d20 to attack and 1d6 for damage, but your attack is with a sword while mine is a shocking grasp spell. At it's best it's simplistic, at it's worst it's lazy design. Even if you wrote volumes of lore on both the fighter's and the mage's guilds, I expect that some would still find the above rather lacking.
Barastrondo
First Post
I have to admit I'm personally leery of mechanics that work to make different races feel different than other races, but that simultaneously work to make individual members of a race feel near-identical to one another. It's one of the reasons I'm not thrilled about race-as-class: yes, an elf is clearly not a human, but now elves are closer to a monoculture, and I have a difficult time suspending my disbelief when confronted with monocultures. Fanaelialae's citing of the dwarven mechanical density/low center of gravity is a great example of a difference that is clearly dwarven, but still allows dwarves to be traditional mini-Vikings with axes and hammers or neo-Assyrian charioteers and beastmasters with elaborate stone cities and highways.
I like a lot of cultures to play with: I'm not happy limiting myself to Western European pastiche. If you want to differentiate races from one another mechanically, optimally those bonuses aren't tied to culture: if I'm running an Al-Qadim-style game where there are no forests, I would hope the mechanics that say "elf" aren't reliant on building a woodsy Legolas-alike.
I like a lot of cultures to play with: I'm not happy limiting myself to Western European pastiche. If you want to differentiate races from one another mechanically, optimally those bonuses aren't tied to culture: if I'm running an Al-Qadim-style game where there are no forests, I would hope the mechanics that say "elf" aren't reliant on building a woodsy Legolas-alike.
i don't think racial levels or classes is the answer (they tend to cause the illusion of choice and choice overload, but in the end people tend to prefer to specialize in their class).
HOWEVER, I think the idea of racial utility powers is a good idea. Maybe you get a utility power from your class and then a racial utility power (type thing) so it isn't a class utility choice vs a racial utility choice. but instead you get one of each -- but at different levels
Another option is that each race gets a special class feature for each class if you pick that class. Obviously, this isn't a perfect solution since there is multiclassing and such to complicate this. But basically if your a cleric elf you'd get one additional class feature (maybe you use bows as implements and weapons) whereas if you are a cleric human you get something else (like an extra channel divinity or something). and so on, with a different racially-dependant class feature per race. Of course, this could lead to a very large list since it has to account for each race-class combination (and stay up to date with each race and class that is released).
HOWEVER, I think the idea of racial utility powers is a good idea. Maybe you get a utility power from your class and then a racial utility power (type thing) so it isn't a class utility choice vs a racial utility choice. but instead you get one of each -- but at different levels
Another option is that each race gets a special class feature for each class if you pick that class. Obviously, this isn't a perfect solution since there is multiclassing and such to complicate this. But basically if your a cleric elf you'd get one additional class feature (maybe you use bows as implements and weapons) whereas if you are a cleric human you get something else (like an extra channel divinity or something). and so on, with a different racially-dependant class feature per race. Of course, this could lead to a very large list since it has to account for each race-class combination (and stay up to date with each race and class that is released).
the Jester
Legend
This is why I like things like racial prestige classes/paragon paths. They are options you can choose to emphasize racial elements if you choose. The new racial utility power options for 4e are a cool touch, but late in the game and unrepresented in older races.
If you look at 2Ed, you could play non-PHB races and they typically were front-loaded, meaning were (usually) more powerful at low levels until their party ages caught up. Then, in certain races, you'd get additional abilities as you leveled.
It made for some interesting dynamics. One of my favorite 2Ed PCs was a Minotaur Ftr/Mu who was simply brutal to foes at low levels...though he had to take damage as a size L creature. As time passed, his compadres caught up to him, and he didn't stand out quite so much.
Enjoyable? Yes, thoroughly! However, others might complain about how that unique experience became diluted over time.
Contrast with Monte's racial classes in his 3.X game: the unique aspects of playing a non-standard race never go away.
In 4Ed, I think we have a mixed bag, depending on which race (and class) you play.
Going forward...well it really depends on the overall shape of the system. One of the things I disliked about 4Ed's approach is that racial perks are tradeoffs...and that they don't necessarily do you any good if you're not in a select few classes. So, if 5Ed strongly resembles 4Ed, I'd rather racial abilities simply accrued rather than existed as tradeoffs. With more variety, of course.
Other than that, though, I really favor Monte's racial class system.
It made for some interesting dynamics. One of my favorite 2Ed PCs was a Minotaur Ftr/Mu who was simply brutal to foes at low levels...though he had to take damage as a size L creature. As time passed, his compadres caught up to him, and he didn't stand out quite so much.
Enjoyable? Yes, thoroughly! However, others might complain about how that unique experience became diluted over time.
Contrast with Monte's racial classes in his 3.X game: the unique aspects of playing a non-standard race never go away.
In 4Ed, I think we have a mixed bag, depending on which race (and class) you play.
Going forward...well it really depends on the overall shape of the system. One of the things I disliked about 4Ed's approach is that racial perks are tradeoffs...and that they don't necessarily do you any good if you're not in a select few classes. So, if 5Ed strongly resembles 4Ed, I'd rather racial abilities simply accrued rather than existed as tradeoffs. With more variety, of course.
Other than that, though, I really favor Monte's racial class system.
Crazy Jerome
First Post
For me, my liking of that model depends on what those trades consist of. But that's just another way that I would prefer to see the "racial" stuff divided into at least two categories. There are things that can make an elf or dwarf better in combat. Picking these should involve trades in other combat abilities. That is, they should come from the same lists. OTOH, other things are secondary, and should likewise come from a secondary list of some sort. They certainly shouldn't cost a wizard a level of spells every time chosen.
If that means that some things are "feats" and others are "talents", or that the real combat power is rolled into "racial levels" or what not, I'd be ok with that. (Wouldn't be my first preference, but it would work well enough.) That is, I think the mechanical problem with racial abilities is that they are pigeonholed as racial abilities, instead of by function. Break them out by function properly, and most of these issues simply melt away.
howandwhy99
Adventurer
I see racial abilities as bodily differences from humans and then multiple cultures can be extrapolated from them. This allows them to be unique, but capable of being just as unique individually and culturally as humans.
Race as class changes the game from focusing on class leveling to improving their species traits, something I see as a different kind of game.
Instead of simply stronger or more able to hit or cast spells think 4 armed, cold blooded, blindsighted, water breathing, natural flyer, hovering, even twin psychic connection races. These define the race of the character and exploration of their populations and cultures without making the racial abilities the point of the game.
Playing combat, magic exploration, clericism and thieving are pretty much D&D core. The game could be about shepherding or leather working, but I doubt it holds the excitement the previous do. Making the game about dwarfing or elfing isn't the focus in my experience.
Race as class changes the game from focusing on class leveling to improving their species traits, something I see as a different kind of game.
Instead of simply stronger or more able to hit or cast spells think 4 armed, cold blooded, blindsighted, water breathing, natural flyer, hovering, even twin psychic connection races. These define the race of the character and exploration of their populations and cultures without making the racial abilities the point of the game.
Playing combat, magic exploration, clericism and thieving are pretty much D&D core. The game could be about shepherding or leather working, but I doubt it holds the excitement the previous do. Making the game about dwarfing or elfing isn't the focus in my experience.
Similar Threads
