Balancing out Racial Abilities

[Quartz]

I dislike all the racial stat bumps. Give demi-humans their racial abilities, one racially appropriate feat and one skill, and give humans two feats (preferably from separate pillars) and two skills.

 

[WhosDaDungeonMaster]

Right, what I’m trying to get across is, Variant Humans do not get the short end of the stick, and the fact that your table seems to suggest that they do indicates a flaw in your system. At the very least, the ability to choose how to allocate your ASIs and/or Feat should be equivalent to +1 ASI/half a feat each. That would put Variant Human mathematically slightly above non-Variant human due to the extra skill, which more closely models what we see in actual play, which is that variant human is almost always the preferred choice over non-variant human.

I think in this we agree, due to the valuable nature of Feats, the Human Variant is (albeit slightly) preferred to the Human base.

But, that isn't what I am comparing. I am looking at the Human Variant to all the other races. In this instance, the ability to choose improves the value of the Human Variant's ASI, Feat, and Skill, but for some of the races I state those chooses do not outweigh the raw abilities of the other races.

Anyway, while I appreciate your input, this is precisely the sort of debate I didn't want to do. No offense intended, as we each have our opinions, and if you have anything to contribute towards leveling out the field, as I see it, I would love to hear it. If you don't think any leveling is needed, then please respect my view that I think it is instead of trying to convince me otherwise.

 

[Charlaquin]

I think in this we agree, due to the valuable nature of Feats, the Human Variant is (albeit slightly) preferred to the Human base.

But, that isn't what I am comparing. I am looking at the Human Variant to all the other races. In this instance, the ability to choose improves the value of the Human Variant's ASI, Feat, and Skill, but for some of the races I state those chooses do not outweigh the raw abilities of the other races.

Anyway, while I appreciate your input, this is precisely the sort of debate I didn't want to do. No offense intended, as we each have our opinions, and if you have anything to contribute towards leveling out the field, as I see it, I would love to hear it. If you don't think any leveling is needed, then please respect my view that I think it is instead of trying to convince me otherwise.

Fair enough, sorrry to have disrupted your thread.

 

[WhosDaDungeonMaster]

Fair enough, sorrry to have disrupted your thread.

No problem and thanks for understanding. As I said, if you have anything to add otherwise please join in again!

 

[Charlaquin]

No problem and thanks for understanding. As I said, if you have anything to add otherwise please join in again!

It’d be hard, cause I think most races could use even more of a boost compared to variant humans. I would say, Dragonborn are in the most need of help. I think they should definitely have Darkvision, considering dragons, half-dragons, and Kobolds all do.

 

[WhosDaDungeonMaster]

LOL I've already house-ruled Darkvision for Dragonborn. I also give them a Natural AC 11 instead of AC 10.

But, you're right, it is hard, which is why I want input from other on possible changes. I am meeting with my group Friday and would like to have something in place by then, even it ends up getting heavily vetoed or modified by the group.

I would rather see Dwarves, Elves, and even Half-Elves brought down a bit, bump the others slightly in new ways. I know it will never be completely level simply because it is subjective...

 

[WaterRabbit]

Well, balance does matter to me. If the designers go through the trouble of trying to balance out the classes, why not the races? I understand different classes have their strengths and weakness, but to me the races should be better balanced.

I love the idea of "lucky" for Halflings, but still no one has chosen to play one yet...

We've had two Dragonborn so fare, two Tieflings, a Duergar, a Drow, a Half-Orc, a Wood Elf, and a Human.

I have read through the races in Volo's guide, and doubt I will ever allow any of them as they are too unbalanced. So, you don't have to worry about me allowing anyone to play a Kenku.

I am not clear on what you think balance is. It seems to be just a personal prejudice in this case. The best way to determine balance is by seeing what races are the most and least played. In your game you pointed out that gnomes and halflings the players show no interest in. QED, these are the most disadvantaged races in your group.

From my experience, given the choice, the variant human is overwhelmingly chosen over the standard human -- even by players that don't like playing humans. The ability to chose a feat of choice at 1st level makes variant humans the best class right out of the gate, especially in a human-o-centric world that most D&D games are run in.

Without the variant human, half-elves are the most chosen. But more important to this is the setting the races are in and how they fit into that setting. In the game I run, Darkvision, would be worth 1/2 a feat at best since I apply the rules on it very strictly (i.e., disadvantage on Perception checks in total darkness). In a game in which the DM is more liberal with how the darkvision rules and if darkness plays a huge part of the game, then darkvision is worth a full feat. However, in most games there is almost always a character that needs a light source and eventually that person acquires something to put them on balance with Darkvision. At that point Darkvision becomes almost worthless.

To me, balance is about how much one aspect of the game dominates at the table. The only race that I see as "unbalanced" are the Yuan-Ti (and perhaps the Aasimaar). Otherwise I don't see anyone of them dominating play or having the other players resentful of them.

IMHO, if you are going to tinker with the races, it should be in the context of the setting you are going to run. So much of what is useful and not useful is very setting dependent that added as a variable, it will be difficult for us to suggest anything useful to "balance" the races in the manner you would like.

 

[WhosDaDungeonMaster]

I am not clear on what you think balance is.

I think the chart shows pretty well what balance is about, and of course it is subjective, but as I have also said, I do not want this thread to be about trying to dissuade me or argue that the races are balanced when I do not believe that to be the case. Are they completely out of whack? No, but enough that I feel a change is warranted.

IMHO, if you are going to tinker with the races, it should be in the context of the setting you are going to run. So much of what is useful and not useful is very setting dependent that added as a variable, it will be difficult for us to suggest anything useful to "balance" the races in the manner you would like.

We will have to disagree on this. Regardless of setting, class, etc., if you remove all the other variables, do the features for each race balance out? IMO the answer is clearly no. That is what I am trying to change.

 

[WaterRabbit]

I think the chart shows pretty well what balance is about, and of course it is subjective, but as I have also said, I do not want this thread to be about trying to dissuade me or argue that the races are balanced when I do not believe that to be the case. Are they completely out of whack? No, but enough that I feel a change is warranted.



We will have to disagree on this. Regardless of setting, class, etc., if you remove all the other variables, do the features for each race balance out? IMO the answer is clearly no. That is what I am trying to change.

All the chart shows is what you think of the balance. You still haven't addressed the basic question. Is one race dominating play so much more than the others?

If you are only playing arena battles then setting doesn't matter. To put this another way, most of what you are trying to balance are pennies in a budget of 100K. The difference between an elf/dwarf/human are all out in the decimal places and are overwhelmed by other factors like class, background, table interpretations of rules, and so forth. A +2 bonus here or there isn't really that significant.

Have you looked at this article? https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-your-dd-character-rare/

I think it throws many of your assumptions to the test. If nothing else, it is another data point for you to consider.

 

[WhosDaDungeonMaster]

All the chart shows is what you think of the balance. You still haven't addressed the basic question. Is one race dominating play so much more than the others?

That is your question, not mine. Of course the chart shows what I think is balance--it is subjective.

If you are only playing arena battles then setting doesn't matter. To put this another way, most of what you are trying to balance are pennies in a budget of 100K. The difference between an elf/dwarf/human are all out in the decimal places and are overwhelmed by other factors like class, background, table interpretations of rules, and so forth. A +2 bonus here or there isn't really that significant.

In a raw analysis, setting doesn't matter. If you can't accept this point, I am not going to waste my time trying to explain it.

Have you looked at this article? https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-your-dd-character-rare/

I think it throws many of your assumptions to the test. If nothing else, it is another data point for you to consider.

No, I haven't seen it, but after reading it, the article only emphasizes my points. Humans were chosen more than any other race. Why? Familiarity is a large part of that, although I am sure versatility and feats are also a factor. But look at the next most common races: Elf, Half-Elf, and Dwarf. All familiar as well, but also with the greatest number of racial abilities. Dragonborn and Tieflings are next most likely due to the "monster/freak" factor. They are the newer races, and equivalent in racial abilities to Human Variant. But bottom of the list is Halfling, Half-Orc, and Gnome. Hardly surprising there. Their abilities are either lack-luster or the race has a stigma against it.

HUMAN: 27%
ELF: 18%
HALF-ELF: 11%
DWARF: 10%
DRAGONBORN: 9%
TIEFLING: 8%
HALFLING: 6%
HALF-ORC: 5%
GNOME: 5%
*note: table adjusted to show percentages based only on the races shown and included in the PHB.

If that table had shown nearly each of these races as equal in percentage, that would have been a better point as to me being mistaken in my assumptions. At any rate, once again, you are trying to keep me in a debate about the merits of my OP. I will not discuss it further as I have stated my position and the intent of this thread before.

If you have anything to contribute towards balancing the racial abilities, as is my issue, please continue to comment.