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

[ourchair]

I understand that there're more than enough Essential threads right now weaving in and out of various topics, some scarcely remaining on-topic within one page, but I wanted to ask you guys what you think of the decision to create a floating attribute bonus for all races.

All races will now have +2 to a fixed stat and a choice of +2 from two stats. The attentive among you are probably aware that this is not without precedent. Long before PH3, which made all the new races have this choice, there was the Changeling from the Eberron Player's Guide (+2 CHA, +2 DEX/INT)

When they first started doing this I thought, "WOW! Flexibility!" Now changelings have synergy with the warlock and wizard class, making them less 'sneaks' and 'charmers' and encompass the trickster archetype in a more flexible fashion. But over time, I'm beginning to see otherwise.

It feels like the races aren't being so much pigeonholed -- as what seems to be the case with the dwarf having great feat support and now getting a STR and WIS/CON bonus spread -- as the differences between them are becoming less meaningful.

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.

Prior to 4E, I had absolutely no D&D experience at all (Eye of the Beholder and Forgotten Realms: Unlimited Adventures doesn't count.) When I opened the PHB, I had some familiarity with how the various components interacted in previous editions, and what I really liked in 4E was that the races didn't have as much mechanical and fluff overlap.

For me, the new floating stat bonuses change that.

Thoughts?

 

[Merlin the Tuna]

It feels like the races aren't being so much pigeonholed -- as what seems to be the case with the dwarf having great feat support and now getting a STR and WIS/CON bonus spread -- as the differences between them are becoming less meaningful.

I completely agree. I spoke with my DM earlier, and our conclusion was really that the initial 4E races did a great job of giving each race a distinct flavor while still offering some flexibility, but this really change detracts from the former to benefit the latter where it just doesn't seem necessary. To say that every race is uncommonly good at half of anything that a character can do just seems bland.

Also, the fact that Elves can now be +Dex +Int makes the Eladrins' existence seem even less necessary than it did before.

 

[Lord Ernie]

Eh. More flexibility = good. A race's identity should come from its fluff and feat support, not from the stat arrays it provides. Hell, that was partially true before; look at dwarven fighters: they used to be Con/Wis, which is okay but not great, but their feat support still made them great at the job.

Also, I know this is nitpicking, but:

It feels like the races aren't being so much pigeonholed -- as what seems to be the case with the dwarf having great feat support and now getting a STR and WIS/CON bonus spread -- as the differences between them are becoming less meaningful.

Dwarves supposedly get a Con + Wis/Str spread, not Str + Wis/Con. Now, the Str/Con spread is common enough amongst the other races (Goliath, Minotaur), but dwarves have enough flavor and mechanics (second wind as minor, Stand your Ground ...) to stand on their own, IMO.

Also, the fact that Elves can now be +Dex +Int makes the Eladrins' existence seem even less necessary than it did before.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this pure speculation? As far as I'm aware, the only adjusted race we know about is the dwarf, which was mentioned in the Essentials article.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

While I think an interesting character concepts should come first, I do think it does greatly benefit the different PC races if they do get more choices in ability score bonuses.

Like for example I hope that Tieflings are now +2 Cha, +2 Int/Dex because it fits better with the race's theme that they'd be good at being Rogues which also fits with history from before (they were always good at being Rogues), along with all the other classes they're already good at being.

 

[Merlin the Tuna]

Eh. More flexibility = good. A race's identity should come from its fluff and feat support, not from the stat arrays it provides. Hell, that was partially true before; look at dwarven fighters: they used to be Con/Wis, which is okay but not great, but their feat support still made them great at the job.

That's actually half of my point. Pre-essentials, a lot of making your character great at was he does involved sideways improvements in the form of feats, racial abilities, or strong secondary & tertiary stats. By moving to floating stats, you instead give players umpteen chances to go the boring route of "What gives me a bonus to my primary and secondary stat?" which is frankly boring. Rather than your Dwarven (or Elven or Shifter or whatever) relying on unique abilities to shore up a perceived weakness, he just boosts a different stat and calls it a day.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this pure speculation? As far as I'm aware, the only adjusted race we know about is the dwarf, which was mentioned in the Essentials article.

thalmin (a game store owner) confirmed it in his thread. It's frustrating because I really like the Eladrin in some respects, but we're now going to be at 6 different flavors of Elf in "core" D&D, and it's no small amount of doublespeak after WotC's big movement to separate Woodsy elves and Magical elves during 4E's launch.

Also, my understanding is that the Essentials classes don't replace the core classes, but do the races? It seems like they would have to... which I'm really not that pleased about. Might be time to stop updating my character builder soon.

 

[nnms]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this pure speculation? As far as I'm aware, the only adjusted race we know about is the dwarf, which was mentioned in the Essentials article.

Demo copies of the red box have arrived at select stores already. It's in there.

 

[AngryMojo]

As far as I can tell, you could give any race bonuses to whatever stat the player wants, and they'll still be unique thanks to the racial abilities. Dwarves are always tough thanks to second wind as a minor action, not a small bonus to Con. Eladrin will always feel magical because of Fey Step, not because of an Int bonus. Dragonborn? They breathe fire. Who else does that?

Really, when it gets down to it, if you're not playing the character, you don't notice a +5% to hit with class powers, but you sure as hell notice when someone uses a racial power.

 

[frankthedm]

By moving to floating stats, you instead give players umpteen chances to go the boring route of "What gives me a bonus to my primary and secondary stat?" which is frankly boring. Rather than your Dwarven (or Elven or Shifter or whatever) relying on unique abilities to shore up a perceived weakness, he just boosts a different stat and calls it a day.

Until races go back to being required stat minimums like in BD&D rather than stats bonuses, this will always be an issue.

 

[nnms]

By moving to floating stats, you instead give players umpteen chances to go the boring route of "What gives me a bonus to my primary and secondary stat?" which is frankly boring. Rather than your Dwarven (or Elven or Shifter or whatever) relying on unique abilities to shore up a perceived weakness, he just boosts a different stat and calls it a day.

I might be misunderstanding you here, but if a class has more stat choices that line up with more classes, doesn't that make it easier to pick one based off flavour or story reasons or whatever and still not be in any way negatively impacted by sub-optimal stats? I'm fine with 16 starting stats (14 even, if it's a leader) but some people are not. This just looks like more opportunity to not sacrifice effectiveness for the sake of theme for those who think along those lines.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Eh. More flexibility = good. A race's identity should come from its fluff and feat support, not from the stat arrays it provides. Hell, that was partially true before; look at dwarven fighters: they used to be Con/Wis, which is okay but not great, but their feat support still made them great at the job.

I think the OP may have a point. More flexibility is also less differentiation. Flexibility and differentiation are both good.

Note that flexibility was supposed to be the human's big selling point, so making everyone else more flexible makes the human less unique, too.

Dwarves supposedly get a Con + Wis/Str spread, not Str + Wis/Con.

So, Dwarves have really good Feat Support for the Fighter class, enough to more than make up for being CON/WIS. Now, they can be STR/WIS with the same feats. Hopefully a lot of those feats are heavily based on CON....

I guess it doesn't really matter. So dwarves are going to be straight up more powerful fighters. That's just another example of what looks to be a fairly dramatic surge of power inflation coming with Essentials. Players like getting a little boost to their favorite character, so some power inflation will probably help win acceptance for Essentials and the substantive updates needed to bring 4e into line with it.


I'm starting to get the feeling that, while Essentials might make the game arguably worse, mechanically - in terms of consistency, playability, balance, etc - it could still very well succeed in it's more pressing marketing goals: brining in some new and lapsed players without alienating too many existing fans. Sometimes in life, less is more, and sometimes in marketing, worse is better.