D&D 4E Are humans balanced in 4e?

[feuer_faust]

In my opinion, it's not so much that humans are weaker than the other races, but that the other races are more desirable than in third edition. No more stat penalties and some shiney new core races means humans will be put off to the side more often in favor of the demi-humans. This is the reverse of the trend I saw in my local area, were human characters were amazingly prevalent due to their ease of use (so to speak).

 

[Tarrl]

I also should have mentioned that I will be starting him at 11th level and I was thinking of multiclassing with rogue!!!
Any thoughts are truly appreciated.

 

[Eldorian]

I also should have mentioned that I will be starting him at 11th level and I was thinking of multiclassing with rogue!!!
Any thoughts are truly appreciated.

Do you want him to be a defender, that is, a guy who takes hits for the party, or a striker, that is, a guy who hits other guys for the party? A fighter was basically either in earlier editions of the game, but in the current game is for the taking hits part. He'll still hit people, but now a rogue is a considerably better hitter.

If he took hits, then you should be a fighter with rogue multiclass feat (if you have access to Marital Power, I'd go with tempest fighter and a pair of short swords). To make yourself more rogueish, you can take a rogue paragon path. I suggest against paragon multiclassing as rogue. There is little advantage to it. I suggest Master Infiltrator or Death Dealer from Martial Power. Being a human will not be a mechanically advantageous choice for this character.

If primarily you hit people with your fighter/rogue, then I suggest being a brutal rogue, and avoiding multiclassing. Rogues in 4e are much better at fighting than they have ever been before, so there is no need to multiclass fighter in order to be better at fighting. Only reason to mutliclass fighter is to make your enemies target you more often. This character will benefit from being human, and is actually one of human's better fits, mechanically. The new Martial Power at will, combined with piercing strike and riposte strike are pretty good. Deft strike isn't bad either, but I think it's better for ranged attacks. But maybe that's what you want to do. Rogues can be good crossbowmen or throwers.

Or, if thievery part of rogue is not important, be a ranger. No more druid crap.

 

[Doctor Proctor]

If primarily you hit people with your fighter/rogue, then I suggest being a brutal rogue, and avoiding multiclassing. Rogues in 4e are much better at fighting than they have ever been before, so there is no need to multiclass fighter in order to be better at fighting. Only reason to mutliclass fighter is to make your enemies target you more often. This character will benefit from being human, and is actually one of human's better fits, mechanically. The new Martial Power at will, combined with piercing strike and riposte strike are pretty good. Deft strike isn't bad either, but I think it's better for ranged attacks. But maybe that's what you want to do. Rogues can be good crossbowmen or throwers.

Or, if thievery part of rogue is not important, be a ranger. No more druid crap.

Yeah, don't get caught up in the names of classes. Some of the concepts in older editions are embodied in new classes now, and sometimes concepts that you had to multiclass or dual class for are now embodied in a single class. You need to look at what the classes are actually capable of, rather than just saying "Well, I played x before, so I'll play x again."

Also, consider the Ruthless Ruffian as well. You get proficiency with the Mace and Club, and you can add your STR mod to damage rolls on powers with the new Rattling keyword. Although this and the Brutal are both good for humans because you're not heavily dependant on that second stat. As long as you boost DEX with your +2, a 14 or 16 in the secondary stats should get you through just fine. Plus, with your extra bonuses to defenses, you'll make a tougher Rogue compared to some of the other races, which would be good if you want to play him as more of an up close and personal PC.

 

[James McMurray]

Fighters can output some pretty good damage as well, but those are the two-handers, which are a poor fit for multi-classing with rogue. Or in other words, I agree with the Doc and Eldorian.

 

[Webby140]

I don't think the unpopularity of Human PCs is because of balance, just out of player choice. As a group, not a single one of us so far has rolled a human, and I think I'd be the most likely to (I usually play a half-elf, probably playing a Shifter Longtooth for an Oriental backdrop - flavoured as a Rat man, like Splinter from Hero Turtles.)
It's just the attitude, "We're human IRL, so why play one in fantasy." I think there's a little bit of stigma attached to RPing a human - that they're for unimaginative folks who don't want to RP outside their comfort zone.

 

[Amphimir Míriel]

"We're human IRL, so why play one in fantasy."

Well, in my best buddy's homebrew world, there are no "humans" and a lot of people feel challenged by that...

 

[thecasualoblivion]

We've actually seen a fair number of Humans in our games. One of my players is a big fan of the +1 to all defenses, and plays a Human more than 50% of the time. Personally, I prefer Humans for many class concepts in a mechanical sense. Wizards, Barbarians, and Melee Clerics I prefer to use the Human race for, and the Druid and Invoker previews make me think I'll prefer Human for those as well since Controllers seem to want the extra At-Will more than anyone else.

 

[Asmor]

I view humans as the "exemplar" race, which is to say, there's no wizard more wizardy than a human wizard, nor any paladin more paladiny than a human paladin.

Humans get more at-will powers, restricted to their class, and get more skills, also restricted to their class.

Compare this to the half-elves, who get to dabble in another class's at-wills (albeit as encounter powers), or eladrin, who get a bonus skill not restricted to their class.

 

[Eldorian]

I view humans as the "exemplar" race, which is to say, there's no wizard more wizardy than a human wizard, nor any paladin more paladiny than a human paladin.

Humans get more at-will powers, restricted to their class, and get more skills, also restricted to their class.

Compare this to the half-elves, who get to dabble in another class's at-wills (albeit as encounter powers), or eladrin, who get a bonus skill not restricted to their class.

I see the same, which is why I wish humans had a +2 to one skill of their choice as a default racial power.