An alternative elf based on Norse legends

[Erekose]

Thanks for the ideas ARandomGod and Syndrome!

I like the lack of natural daylight idea but as you point out it could just cause endless delays - i.e. the group always wait for 8 hours before going into a dungeon. Many characters are night owls anyway!

I hadn't thought about cold iron - having it act as a bane weapon would fit in well!

 

[Erekose]

Suffering from specific weaknesses to justify greater power does not work well IMO. By that reasoning you can also argue for a race with -6 str&cha but +6 int. That's balanced or even weak right ? Yeah right, until the moment you make a weakling antisocial wizard with int 24.

More than +2 to any attribute should (again IMO) not be for +0 ECL races. The potential for abuse is to high.

Good points monboesen, but I think there are two issues I have with your argument.

1. Surely all of the LA+0 races are "balanced" by benefits and penalties that make them overall balanced to humans? Also, I'm not convinced an elf sorcerer (-2STR, +4CHA) is any more unbalanced than a neanderthal fighter (+2STR, +2CON, -2DEX, -2INT). Both races (and I could argue all races that have ability modifiers) highlight a particular class that they are "best" suited for (from an attribute point of view).

2. The idea of players abusing the rules is also a comment that comes up time and again which I have problems with. As the resident DM why would I play the game with players who abuse the rules? Players that want to disrupt a game will do so regardless of what the rules are.

 

[monboesen]

Ok then.

Could you go into more detail about why you think this race should get +4 cha. Even with +2 they will be more charming and of more forceful personality than any other standard race.

Just like a normal elf is more agile with its +2 dex than most other standard races.

I guess I just don't see the need or justification of higher attribute bonuses than +2 for +0 ECL.

About point 2. This is not even a case of players potentially abusing the rules, its becomes a case of simply aplying these rules to get to a result that IMO is slightly to good. If I was playing in your game and was considering a bard or sorcerer I would go light elf everytime. Sure I would find some compelling background and in general roleplay my ass off. But I would still play a light elf, +4 charisma for those two classes are that good.

I dont consider any of the other standard races that pigeonholed into specific classes (except possibly the half-orc that I don't like either).

 

[Erekose]

Ok then.

Could you go into more detail about why you think this race should get +4 cha. Even with +2 they will be more charming and of more forceful personality than any other standard race.

Just like a normal elf is more agile with its +2 dex than most other standard races.

I guess I just don't see the need or justification of higher attribute bonuses than +2 for +0 ECL.

About point 2. This is not even a case of players potentially abusing the rules, its becomes a case of simply aplying these rules to get to a result that IMO is slightly to good. If I was playing in your game and was considering a bard or sorcerer I would go light elf everytime. Sure I would find some compelling background and in general roleplay my ass off. But I would still play a light elf, +4 charisma for those two classes are that good.

I dont consider any of the other standard races that pigeonholed into specific classes (except possibly the half-orc that I don't like either).

At the end of the day I think we are going to have to agree to differ on the why +4 rather than +2 as this is a campaign specific choice for all non-human races rather than a something that will be solved with the rules (i.e. it is a choice where there is no right or wrong answer).

However, I would disagree with your point 2. Using your logic of all bards and sorcerers will be Norse Elves (and that attribute bonuses cannot be balanced by other disadvantages of the race) . . . then I would have though the following would be true for the following standard races:

Dwarf (+2 Constitution, –2 Charisma) - all barbarians are dwarves
Elf (+2 Dexterity, –2 Constitution) - all rogues are elves
Half-Orcs (+2 Strength, –2 Intelligence, –2 Charisma) - all fighters are half-orcs

Clearly this isn't the case and I wouldn't expect it to be the case with this version of the elf.

 

[monboesen]

My logic was not intended to state that all bards and sorcerers will be norse elves, but that most players choosing to be a norse elf wil also choose bard or sorcerer as their class. Sorry if that was not clear from what I wrote. Additionally I would expect that many bards and sorceres in a game with this race would be norse elves.

About the other races.

Dwarves will not only make great barbarians but also great fighters, rogues, wixards. druids, monks and rangers. All of these classes can use a con boost and don't really care about the charisma decrease. The are a less appealing choice for a sorcerer, bard and paladin.

Elves will do fine as any class but are not really an optimum choice for a melee fighter type. The +2 dex/-2 con leads to a natural preference to ranged combat and spells.

Half orcs I won't really comment on. I think they are badly designed and do not use them as written.

I think its the exact combination of affected stats that makes your race a bit different in this regard.

-2 str is bad news for any melee based class. Thats -1 to hit and damage every time you attack (except with ranged attacks but they still have -1 damage), and attack rolls are without doubt the most numerous in the game. It can also lead to problems carrying your armor&equipment.

+4 cha has very little effect in the game except for charisma based casters and paladins. That means that its not really that attractive for anyone else and thats the breaking point.

So the stat penalty to str is really annoying for many classes and the stat increase to cha is next to worthless for most classes except charisma based casters. Thats why I would expect most players of this race to play a charisma based caster.

Will this terribly unbalance a game. No of course not, you can use it as written without problems. I just don't think its entirely on level with the other races and a bit limited in good class choices as well.

I won't argue anymore on this point as I suspect we will continue to disagree

 

[Erekose]

My logic was not intended to state that all bards and sorcerers will be norse elves, but that most players choosing to be a norse elf wil also choose bard or sorcerer as their class. Sorry if that was not clear from what I wrote. Additionally I would expect that many bards and sorceres in a game with this race would be norse elves.

About the other races.

Dwarves will not only make great barbarians but also great fighters, rogues, wixards. druids, monks and rangers. All of these classes can use a con boost and don't really care about the charisma decrease. The are a less appealing choice for a sorcerer, bard and paladin.

Elves will do fine as any class but are not really an optimum choice for a melee fighter type. The +2 dex/-2 con leads to a natural preference to ranged combat and spells.

Half orcs I won't really comment on. I think they are badly designed and do not use them as written.

I think its the exact combination of affected stats that makes your race a bit different in this regard.

-2 str is bad news for any melee based class. Thats -1 to hit and damage every time you attack (except with ranged attacks but they still have -1 damage), and attack rolls are without doubt the most numerous in the game. It can also lead to problems carrying your armor&equipment.

+4 cha has very little effect in the game except for charisma based casters and paladins. That means that its not really that attractive for anyone else and thats the breaking point.

So the stat penalty to str is really annoying for many classes and the stat increase to cha is next to worthless for most classes except charisma based casters. Thats why I would expect most players of this race to play a charisma based caster.

Will this terribly unbalance a game. No of course not, you can use it as written without problems. I just don't think its entirely on level with the other races and a bit limited in good class choices as well.

I won't argue anymore on this point as I suspect we will continue to disagree

Thanks for the feedback monboesen. I can see exactly where you are coming from and your comments have made me think hard about the design of the race. It may be a real issue with other groups for exactly the reasons you've outlined. However, for my group I think it will be a much broader decision which will actually fit in well with the race, i.e. norse elves will be less agressive or physical combatants relying more on their verbal skills. As my player tend to play against type I can see the norse elf fighter (barbarian/ranger/paladin) being relatively common precisely because of the -2 Str and +4 Cha!

 

[Nyaricus]

hello everyone,

wow, i have to say that this Norse Elf is awesome!!!!! I personally never use the PHBs load of mush with races, if i can avoid it (my FRCS game being an exception) You have a very good (and fairly balanced) idea going here, and i will comment on it it a bit.

Firstly, concept. Norse Light elves were tricksters and sorcerers. you have that covered well here. The +4 Cha is good, -2 Str fits them well enough, and dropping the Int penalty was a good move. As for making futher ability changes, Wis isnt relevant, and Con . . .not sure, maybe -2 is nesisary to bring it back to being balanced . . .but i dunno)

as for the +2 one will saves vs magical affects, its okay because it wont work everytime, but it gives them a little more "other-worldliness" and a closer connection to their magical powers; and it isnt as good as the dwarves +2 vs all spells from the PHB.

the whole Luminescence thing is awesome!! As for the "blaze of inner glory ability" that you get at level 12, i say that once your ECL gets to level 6 (why 6 you may ask, well, that is when Sorcerers get the daylight spell) you may access this power, but the duration should be quartered (meaning 2.5 minutes per level, or 150 rounds at level 6 > still powerful, but not a free spell, and for a sorc, that will help)

all in all, it is balanced enough, although its one of those LA +0.5 things. maybe you should include soemthing like "if exposed to a darkness spell, you take damage as if being affected by a inflict light wounds of the same caster level" or something like that. anyways, GREAT JOB

 

[Nyaricus]

also (and i think this requires a whole new message) why would a creature who abhors darkness get low-light vision? a Light Elf would never be able to adapt to those conditions. drop it is my opinion.

 

[Arkhandus]

First off, I'm not opposed to mental ability score boosts, nor significant adjustments like +4 or -4 to something. However:

The reason core races don't get bonuses to any mental ability scores is because Wizards of the Coast didn't want to make spellcasters even more powerful than they already are. Although at low levels the spellcasting classes are more or less comparable (possibly even a bit weaker) to/than the mundane classes, they are definitely stronger at middle and upper levels.

A mental ability score boost would give at least some spellcasters more bonus spells per day, higher spell save DCs, easier access to higher-level spells and scrolls (especially in point-buy, where a good ability score for spellcasting can be overly expensive; a +4 Cha turns point-buy 14 Cha into 18 Cha for a little over one-third the normal cost). No core race gets +4 Str, Dex, or Con either, because it's a drastic boost especially in typical D&D games (with the assumption that point-buy or 4d6x6-take-highest-3-each-time is the ability score determination method). That doesn't mean it's wrong to use such stuff in homebrew, just that it's too drastic for the designers to try balancing it in the core rules (without leaving such a race horribly crippled or bland otherwise as a result).

In the case of your Norse Elf, the +4 Cha makes them potent sorcerers, good bards, good paladins, and decent clerics (if focused on fighting undead and taking Domains with Charisma-based granted powers). It more than makes up for -2 Strength or Constitution with these characters (although either could be an annoying hit to the character; Str for paladins and bards, Con for bards and sorcerers). If not using point-buy, then the character could put a 16, 17, or 18 base into Str or Con to lessen the impact of the penalty, and if they have another such high score, they could put it into Cha to have a really good spellcasting or special-ability-boosting stat. A Strength penalty does nothing to balance this with sorcerers, while even a Constitution penalty fails to do so (unless it is a -4 Con, which would be too harsh for anyone but sorcerers, and even they would become paper tigers as a result). A limited, specialized weakness also doesn't help balance it; the vast majority of enemies will not have Cold Iron weapons on-hand, for instance. -2 Strength combined with -2 Constitution might potentially balance it out, but would still leave Norse Elf sorcerers rather more potent than other sorcerers (yes, even half-orc or dwarf fighters and barbarians will not match them, IMO).

 

[ecliptic]

How about they get +2 Charisma and then a +2 to all Charisma checks and Charisma based skill checks?