Are skill bonuses on races considered racial bonuses?

[deleteme123456]

PH2, 185
Group Stealth (Gnome)
Allies within 10 squares of you gain a +2 racial bonus to Stealth

I think as Starfox pointed out, RAI is that your skill bonuses granted by your race are racial bonuses. Otherwise, what possible racial bonus to perception could every Elf have?

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

PH2, 185
Group Stealth (Gnome)
Allies within 10 squares of you gain a +2 racial bonus to Stealth

I think as Starfox pointed out, RAI is that your skill bonuses granted by your race are racial bonuses. Otherwise, what possible racial bonus to perception could every Elf have?

I don't follow you...

Here's an example: Halflings have a +2 bonus to Acrobatics. It is NOT a racial bonus, it does not say 'racial bonus', it is untyped. Assuming some other race was invented which gave a 'group acrobatics bonus' the two WOULD stack, since the halfling bonus is untyped.

It is quite easy to determine that the halfling (and all the other) bonuses to skills are untyped because if you look at the various bonuses halflings have, the 'Nimble' and 'Bold' bonuses specifically DO say 'racial bonus'.

Note that with skill bonuses for races there is a bit of a grey area, the text for each race says "Skill Bonuses: ...", so one might consider them to be typed 'skill bonus', but OTOH PHB 275 enumerates the types of bonuses, and 'skill bonus' is not one of them. I guess I would rule that they are typed, but it hardly matters since I do not know of any other bonus in the game currently that is typed as a 'skill bonus'.

The upshot is, bonus types ARE always explicitly specified in the text granting every bonus, else understood to be untyped. That is uniformly true in all other rules text, why should it be different in the Racial Traits box of each race? And if it was different, then why would they sometimes include the phrase 'racial bonus' there?

 

[deleteme123456]

Then tell me what racial bonus to Perception every 11th level Elf has that could increase to +4.

Edit: I also think that the other bonuses being racial is because there was any question at all. With the skill bonuses, they felt it was obvious. PH 275 says a bonus granted by your race is a racial bonus, ergo, all bonuses from your race are racial bonuses. PH2 29 tells us that every 11th level Elf has a racial bonus to perception, and yes, I'm aware that the Rules Lawyers out there will claim that yes, they do, it's a +0 bonus, but since there is absolutely no precedent for a +0 bonus existing, nor would they use that language. At best you could get "You gain a +4 racial bonus to perception. If you already have a racial bonus to perception, it increases by +4 instead," which has been used in various other places.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Then tell me what racial bonus to Perception every 11th level Elf has that could increase to +4.

Edit: I also think that the other bonuses being racial is because there was any question at all. With the skill bonuses, they felt it was obvious. PH 275 says a bonus granted by your race is a racial bonus, ergo, all bonuses from your race are racial bonuses. PH2 29 tells us that every 11th level Elf has a racial bonus to perception, and yes, I'm aware that the Rules Lawyers out there will claim that yes, they do, it's a +0 bonus, but since there is absolutely no precedent for a +0 bonus existing, nor would they use that language. At best you could get "You gain a +4 racial bonus to perception. If you already have a racial bonus to perception, it increases by +4 instead," which has been used in various other places.

I have no idea. PHB2 is not really relevant. I have not had a chance to read it yet, but all core mechanics are in PHB1, nothing in PHB2 is supposed to change them, except that one section at the very end where they apparently added some clarifications/errata. So I have no idea what PHB2 29 is talking about. All elves have a +2 SKILL bonus to perception. They also grant a +1 RACIAL bonus to perception for allies within 5 squares. The +2 skill bonus will stack with any other non-skill bonus, including a racial bonus. Thus 2 elves who are allies within 5 squares of each other get a +3 to perception. Level has nothing to do with it, and I don't know of anything in the PHB which indicates a paragon tier or other scaling perception bonus for elves.

Your ASSUMING that certain bonuses are typed is just plain unjustified. The Racial Traits box specifies a number of bonuses for each race. Some of them are listed as racial bonuses, and some of them are not. The box on page 275 says also "a feat bonus is granted by a feat", so am I to interpret from that that ALL bonuses due to feats are typed feat bonuses, even though some feats rules text does not use the term 'feat bonus'? We KNOW that such an interpretation would be wrong, thus I submit that the same exact situation exists with racial traits. Some provide racial bonuses, some provide untyped bonuses. Each one explicitly specifies which type it is.

The wording of rules text in 4e is very precise. It is intended to be interpreted to mean EXACTLY what it says. It isn't intended to be extrapolated. This is especially true of bonuses, the types are ALWAYS, without exception, carefully specified, or else they are untyped. English is an imperfectly precise language, and sometimes it admits of two interpretations, but the specific always overrules the general. The specific text of each racial trait overrules any other text that governs racial traits and their bonuses.

Talk to CS about it, I can almost guarantee you that if you point out PHB 275 to them and ask this question you'll get the same answer as I have. Once I have my PHB2 I will be in a position to comment on what PHB2 29 means, but I can already confidently say that it doesn't change anything because PHB2 extends PHB1, it doesn't override it.

 

[Bolongo]

I have no idea. PHB2 is not really relevant. I have not had a chance to read it yet, but all core mechanics are in PHB1, nothing in PHB2 is supposed to change them

Some furious rationalization going on there.

"Everything is core", remember? I don't think it's possible to say that rules in PH1 are more correct than anything published later. Your faith in the ability of D&D designers to choose the perfect wording for every rule is touching, but it doesn't seem to be justified by the evidence. There's plenty of errata that demonstrates their fallibility.

Anyway, plugging your ears and singing loudly whenever anyone mentions the PH2 isn't going to get you far.

many of the bonuses listed under racial traits for each race DO explicitly specify they are racial bonuses, while others do not

What bonuses given by race could be considered untyped? The only ones not called out as racial are: all personal skill bonuses (the "auras" are all specified as racial), defense bonuses for Humans and Deva, speed bonus for Half-Orcs. You might see some kind of pattern here, but unfortunately it breaks down because Goliaths get a defense bonus that is called racial.

Someone else mentioned feats that give racial bonuses - in fact there is only one singular instance of that so far: the Gnome feat quoted above. Basically, it just adds a new racial ability that for some reason not all Gnomes have. It isn't really relevant to the discussion.

The Twilight Guardian thing is very relevant, however. It strongly implies that bonuses given by race are considered racial bonuses.


In the end though, what does all this matter? The only time it comes into play is situations like when a Half-Elf is near another Half-Elf. It's a question of a +1, at the very most a +2, to a skill roll. As a DM I would rule that they don't stack, but if someone added it anyway in the heat of the moment I'd let it slide.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Some furious rationalization going on there.

"Everything is core", remember? I don't think it's possible to say that rules in PH1 are more correct than anything published later. Your faith in the ability of D&D designers to choose the perfect wording for every rule is touching, but it doesn't seem to be justified by the evidence. There's plenty of errata that demonstrates their fallibility.

Anyway, plugging your ears and singing loudly whenever anyone mentions the PH2 isn't going to get you far.

Whatever. It is pointless to debate what is 'core' and what is 'not core', it is irrelevant. PHB1 stands alone. One does not require PHB2 to be playing 4e by the official rules. That is ALL one needs to know to know that PHB2 does not override PHB1! If it did then you would HAVE to have a PHB2 to be playing 4e RAW. The two books stand equally as 4e rule books. Thus if there is a genuine conflict between what is in PHB1 and what is in PHB2 then it IS AN ERROR in the rules, just as it would be if either of them conflicted with the DMG! How that error should be dealt with would be up to the DM until such time as WotC issues an errata which fixes the conflict. Any such adjudication IS by definition then a house rule. There is no rationalization in that at all.

Even the final section of PHB2 is nothing more than a recapitulation of existing PHB1 errata, verbatim.

What bonuses given by race could be considered untyped? The only ones not called out as racial are: all personal skill bonuses (the "auras" are all specified as racial), defense bonuses for Humans and Deva, speed bonus for Half-Orcs. You might see some kind of pattern here, but unfortunately it breaks down because Goliaths get a defense bonus that is called racial.

What makes you so need to see a pattern? There need not BE any pattern. WotC made some bonuses typed and some untyped. They write the rules, they can do whatever they want. Skill bonuses are, AFAICT untyped bonuses. Perhaps they are 'skill bonuses', it is largely academic. Race defense bonuses likewise appear to be untyped, but again it is basically academic.

The Twilight Guardian thing is very relevant, however. It strongly implies that bonuses given by race are considered racial bonuses.

Implication is irrelevant. If it explicitly says something different from what is in PHB1 then 2 official rules conflict, and that is a rules error, any DM adjudication of which is not RAW. If it doesn't explicitly say something different from PHB1 then it is a specific instance of a rule overriding a general rule, and it has no bearing on other general rules. That is the way RAW works.

In the end though, what does all this matter? The only time it comes into play is situations like when a Half-Elf is near another Half-Elf. It's a question of a +1, at the very most a +2, to a skill roll. As a DM I would rule that they don't stack, but if someone added it anyway in the heat of the moment I'd let it slide.

I totally agree with that. I cannot so far think of any time it would matter. Now, if some feat gave a racial bonus of say +2 FORT to a human, I would have to rule that it stacks with the existing +1 FORT bonus humans get because that one is untyped. I would consider that RAW, but we are really arguing over basically nothing at this point I only bothered to post this really to clarify the relationship between PHB1 and 2, PHB2 does not override PHB1. They SHOULD never conflict.

 

[Bolongo]

What makes you so need to see a pattern? There need not BE any pattern. WotC made some bonuses typed and some untyped. They write the rules, they can do whatever they want.

...and what they want is always right, right?

I'm not looking for needless symmetry, it's just that I'm not a die-hard RAW-lawyer, and so when I notice a discrepancy I see that as interesting and perhaps an indication that the RAI are not always being clearly expressed. In this case: some race's defense bonuses are typed, some aren't. What does that mean? Here's a few options:
a) it's a typo in the Goliath description, their bonus should be untyped too.
b) the designers have some reason for differentiating races in this exceedingly minor fashion, but they're not telling us what it is.
c) it never crossed the designers' minds that anyone could interpret a bonus listed under "Racial Traits" as anything but a racial bonus.

Implication is irrelevant. If it explicitly says something different from what is in PHB1 then 2 official rules conflict, and that is a rules error, any DM adjudication of which is not RAW.

I only bothered to post this really to clarify the relationship between PHB1 and 2, PHB2 does not override PHB1. They SHOULD never conflict.

Bearer of bad news here: by your literal reading, you WILL find a conflict once you lay your hands on a copy of PH2. Please don't sit at your computer when your head explodes , it's hard to scrape brain matter off the forums.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

...and what they want is always right, right?

I'm not looking for needless symmetry, it's just that I'm not a die-hard RAW-lawyer, and so when I notice a discrepancy I see that as interesting and perhaps an indication that the RAI are not always being clearly expressed. In this case: some race's defense bonuses are typed, some aren't. What does that mean? Here's a few options:
a) it's a typo in the Goliath description, their bonus should be untyped too.
b) the designers have some reason for differentiating races in this exceedingly minor fashion, but they're not telling us what it is.
c) it never crossed the designers' minds that anyone could interpret a bonus listed under "Racial Traits" as anything but a racial bonus.



Bearer of bad news here: by your literal reading, you WILL find a conflict once you lay your hands on a copy of PH2. Please don't sit at your computer when your head explodes , it's hard to scrape brain matter off the forums.

No, what WotC writes is just the official rules, which I'm sure we all happily ignore as often as it pleases us In practical fact neither you nor I probably even really care what's official. I don't play LFR or in RPGA events etc, so it is really irrelevant to my life anyhow.

Nor does it surprise me one bit if PHB2 actually does conflict with PHB1. I'd be surprised if 2 complex rulebooks of 200+ pages each DIDN'T somehow conflict on some point or other. And I would tend to house rule in favor of the newer book too, I just don't consider PHB2 to be some kind of errata of PHB1 in an official (meaningless as that is) sense.

As for the racial bonuses. Eh, both PHBs are obviously unclear on that very minor point. Thankfully what they aren't unclear on is the bonus type for the 'aura' traits, which is all that practically matters, so I won't even think about it ever again in all probability.

 

[mlund]

Let's see, it is a bonus listed under "Racial Traits." That would indicate a high probability of it being a "Racial Bonus."

The Human Defense Bonus is listed in the same manner, without an explicit mention of "racial" on the bonus itself, yet on page 275 that same bonus is used in a detailed calculation of a sample character's defense scores and is explicitly called a "racial bonus."

Logically, we can conclude that bonuses listed under "Racial Traits" are implicitly Racial Bonuses unless otherwise explicitly stated - as the PHB itself handles them as Racial Bonuses.

The PHB2's text is in keeping with this interpretation.

- Marty Lund

 

[Smeelbo]

Indeed, the character sheet lists several boxes where the PHB lists a racial bonus, but in the underlying text, the bonus is not explictly called out as racial. I suppose they go under misc, with the racial boxes reserved for future expansions.

I am not terribly impressed by the attention to detail in the final product, even though a lot of fabulous work has gone in the fundamental design structure. I would expect a spate of near trivial errata in the next 90 days or so.

Smeelbo