D&D 4E 4E Races, Post-Essentials: Flexibility, You Say?

[Stalker0]

To me, the stats for a race are a very important part of that race, but that's mainly for races with weak racial abilities.

Take the elf for example. Even if I was playing a class that did not use dex and wisdom, I would still consider them.

They get +2 perception (the most important skill for overall traveling), encounter attack reroll, +1 speed (always useful). So even without the stats, there's still good reasons to take them.

But the tiefling for example just has their "grudge" ability. Sure the +1 attack bonus against bloodied is nice, but it doesn't have the overall utility of the elves powers. I would play a tiefling mainly for the stats.

 

[Prestidigitalis]

You're assuming that being good at rolling the dice means being aware of everything that's going on, this is not the case. You simply need to be able to understand the basic conceptions of motion, rotation, and friction. And how it "feels" when you roll the die. You don't need to know the actual math.

This is why the best possible die has a '1' on 19 sides and a '20' on the other. By the homeopathic principle, the "dilute" 20 becomes so strong that it automatically comes up at least 100% of the time.

 

[Sunseeker]

To me, the stats for a race are a very important part of that race, but that's mainly for races with weak racial abilities.

Take the elf for example. Even if I was playing a class that did not use dex and wisdom, I would still consider them.

They get +2 perception (the most important skill for overall traveling), encounter attack reroll, +1 speed (always useful). So even without the stats, there's still good reasons to take them.

But the tiefling for example just has their "grudge" ability. Sure the +1 attack bonus against bloodied is nice, but it doesn't have the overall utility of the elves powers. I would play a tiefling mainly for the stats.

I agree with the concept of stats, certain races are stronger or weaker than others. 9/10 times, a Dragonborn or a Goliath will be stronger and tougher than an Eladrin or a Gith. So logically, their racial stats should be in "tough" stats while Eladrin and Gith should get "smart" stats such as wisdom, or con, with dex being a sort of "universal" stat that smaller/lighter races may be more likely to possess, dexterity is more of a trained ability than one that comes naturally. In the case of "small" races, it simply represents their difficulty to hit due to their small size.

This is what I really like about the flexibility they're adding to the PHB1 races, it's still representative of the race, but it's also indicative of their natural diversity.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

+2 Con has nothing to do with the flavour of the Tiefling race. And seeing as the Warpriest uses Wisdom as it's primary ability, the Warlock in Essentials is very likely going the route of Charisma only. And for reasons I stated before, Tieflings always had a thing for being Rogues, which is why Dex suits them a lot better than Con ever did, which is only ever justified for a mechanical reason that never had anything to do with their flavour as a race.

 

[nnms]

+2 Con has nothing to do with the flavour of the Tiefling race.

Infernal stuff is tougher than normal stuff?

And seeing as the Warpriest uses Wisdom as it's primary ability, the Warlock in Essentials is very likely going the route of Charisma only.

Excellent point. If the Essentials Warlock gives Tieflings the ability to be an effective wielder of infernal power, I'll be more than happy. It would be nice if they were the best suited to the PHB1 infernal pact, but that ship has likely sailed.

 

[knightofround]

Now I'm no professional min-maxer -- okay, fine I have a Dragonborn Fighter that misses on a 2 -- but what these new stat bonuses mean to me is that on the most basic level of stats, the differences between an Elf over a Gith is defined entirely by feats. Otherwise, it's woodland ninja vs. extraplanar ninja.

Interesting. I guess I'm totally opposite from you; I want there to be very little difference between the races at level 1, but I want strong racial feat support so each race grows differently. I'm all about complexity evolving over character life; its good for new players, and its good for experienced players.

Right now, there is *very* little difference between the races in 4E. Heck, some racial packages are as bad as a crappy paragon class' features. Most racial ability packages break down into 1 heroic-tier quality feat, 1 paragon-tier quality feat, and 1 epic-tier quality feat. Giving players an option to choose a 3rd initial stat bump isn't going to make a dent on that.

So what's the harm in doing it? Isn't it a little silly that Eladrin, a fey race, aren't optimized to become fey pact warlocks? Or that Dwarves aren't optimized to be warlords? Humans are a bit overpowered right now anyway, most players only need to keep a single attack stat high so the second +2 isn't terribly needed.

I think WotC should make racial feats be on par with class feats. Generic feats should be something you fall back on after you've plumbed both the class & race list. And feats that require both a particular class and race should be the most powerful of all. Unfortunately right now racial feats are pretty much bottom-of-the-barrel with only a few exceptions. Stuff like Dwarven Weapon Proficiency, and the Gith blademaster feat should be models for all other racial feats. (weapon finesse...yawn...weapon focus...yawn...weapon proficiency...yawn...paragon defenses...yawn...)

Strong racial feat support is the only way 4E races will ever truly "feel" different imo. A halfling (whatever) should intrinsically "feel" different from a human (whatever). But the way things are right now, they're just small humans....irregardless of whether or not this "third stat" thing happens.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Too strong racial feats means, that race class combinations will become too optimized.

I actually like race/class feats, as they are now. Many combinations are not too powerful in general, but allow nice options, which other races don´t have. (Twist the arcane fabric, to blast enemies and teleport an ally out of a bad situation sounds like avery powerful and flavourful option)

Githtzerai blademaster and dwarven weapon training are rather bland...

 

[tyrlaan]

I think WotC should make racial feats be on par with class feats. Generic feats should be something you fall back on after you've plumbed both the class & race list. And feats that require both a particular class and race should be the most powerful of all. Unfortunately right now racial feats are pretty much bottom-of-the-barrel with only a few exceptions. Stuff like Dwarven Weapon Proficiency, and the Gith blademaster feat should be models for all other racial feats. (weapon finesse...yawn...weapon focus...yawn...weapon proficiency...yawn...paragon defenses...yawn...)

Strong racial feat support is the only way 4E races will ever truly "feel" different imo. A halfling (whatever) should intrinsically "feel" different from a human (whatever). But the way things are right now, they're just small humans....irregardless of whether or not this "third stat" thing happens.

Going to agree with some of your sentiment here, but disagree with your end result.

I would very much like to see better feat support for the races. Dwarves for example get heaps of feat love. Really, all the races should be on par. I want to have real feat options to steep my character in his race should I be so inclined. And I want race/class paired feats to be at my disposal to give my character that "unique" twist a different race/class pairing just can't get.

On the other hand, I don't want to see race feats more powerful than other feats, and I certainly don't want to see race/class combo feats to be even more powerful than that. I want feats to be balanced with feats. Providing enticing options does not mean race feats need to be more powerful, it just means they need to be good enough to consider instead of another feat.

If feats are done right, every time I earn a new one I should have a list of feats that I must choose from and that choice should be challenging (and by challenging I mean "hmm, this would be sweet, but this would be cool too. argghhh! I wish I got more feats!"). I don't want to earn a new feat and go "I'll just pick the next racial feat because it's more powerful than my other options.

 

[BASHMAN]

Okay, so from reading this, I understand 3 things.

1. WotC swears up and down on a stack of bibles that this "isn't 4.5" and that we can keep using everything from PH1, 2, 3, etc "alongside" the Essentials stuff.

2. Humans in essentials have lost a major racial ability (their Defense bonuses) seemingly with no up-shot. They can choose to give up their extra at will for a racial encounter power.

3. All the other races get a choice of 3 stat boosts (one mandatory, the other is a choice of 2). So Dwarves get CON and STR/WIS for instance.

Does this mean that in a campaign I can choose to play the (mechanically superior) PH1 Human as an (easier to play) Essentials Fighter? Or does this mean that the PH1 humans are now extinct and replaced by the Essentials humans? If both are allowed in a campaign are they distinguished in some manner?

Can I only use PHB Feats w/ PHB classes & Races, and essentials classes & races are separate? For instance, can I take "Dwarven Weapon Training" with an Essentials dwarf w/ a STR bonus?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

2. Humans in essentials have lost a major racial ability (their Defense bonuses) seemingly with no up-shot. They can choose to give up their extra at will for a racial encounter power.

This is just wrong. Compare the essential dwarven fighter with the essential human fighter. You notice the human has a +1 bonus to all defenses taking different stats into account.