Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Changing Racial bonuses
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 7150245" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>Hmmmm, maybe you play with people that are more focused on math than some. My experience is that players have certain ideas about races, and they tend to build characters around those preconceptions. The the extent that 4e embodies those (Dwarves are strong and durable) there's a tendency to build characters with class and race aligned mathematically. OTOH I saw a couple of half-elf rangers (out of maybe 4 total in games I've run). Clearly those players were building to a character concept (and racial stereotype probably) and then worrying about bonuses later.</p><p></p><p>In any case, there's no drastic penalty for playing a class with a prime requisite you don't have a bonus on. You can still pull an 18 (or live with a 16, not ideal but perfectly playable). What you end up with are better strong secondary and tertiary stats, which lets you build a character with a bit wider set of abilities. Such characters aren't penalized by 4e, though you may have to think about what feat or item you use with that character a bit more, perhaps. Or you might be more prone to MC or something like that. </p><p></p><p>To take your Gnome Fighter example, its perfectly OK to be a 4e Gnome Fighter. Stick to sword and board, pick up social and knowledge skills, and build a highly mobile fighter that can strike effectively from the shadows and then tie up is opponents, force them into disadvantageous situations, etc. You could MC with Warlord quite profitably of course, use your ability to appear suddenly and push opponents around to create an ideal situation for a Commander's Strike on a now-flanked opponent. Seems like a pretty reasonable and effective character concept. </p><p></p><p>I don't think I really have anything against your idea here. I do sort of feel though like eroding away all mechanical differences between races, classes, etc. does attack their distinctiveness to some extent. Part of the 'build game' is having to make these trade-offs. Often a concept will emerge out of or be shaped by the need to combine certain elements in order to achieve your goal. That can add to the game rather than subtracting from it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 7150245, member: 82106"] Hmmmm, maybe you play with people that are more focused on math than some. My experience is that players have certain ideas about races, and they tend to build characters around those preconceptions. The the extent that 4e embodies those (Dwarves are strong and durable) there's a tendency to build characters with class and race aligned mathematically. OTOH I saw a couple of half-elf rangers (out of maybe 4 total in games I've run). Clearly those players were building to a character concept (and racial stereotype probably) and then worrying about bonuses later. In any case, there's no drastic penalty for playing a class with a prime requisite you don't have a bonus on. You can still pull an 18 (or live with a 16, not ideal but perfectly playable). What you end up with are better strong secondary and tertiary stats, which lets you build a character with a bit wider set of abilities. Such characters aren't penalized by 4e, though you may have to think about what feat or item you use with that character a bit more, perhaps. Or you might be more prone to MC or something like that. To take your Gnome Fighter example, its perfectly OK to be a 4e Gnome Fighter. Stick to sword and board, pick up social and knowledge skills, and build a highly mobile fighter that can strike effectively from the shadows and then tie up is opponents, force them into disadvantageous situations, etc. You could MC with Warlord quite profitably of course, use your ability to appear suddenly and push opponents around to create an ideal situation for a Commander's Strike on a now-flanked opponent. Seems like a pretty reasonable and effective character concept. I don't think I really have anything against your idea here. I do sort of feel though like eroding away all mechanical differences between races, classes, etc. does attack their distinctiveness to some extent. Part of the 'build game' is having to make these trade-offs. Often a concept will emerge out of or be shaped by the need to combine certain elements in order to achieve your goal. That can add to the game rather than subtracting from it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Changing Racial bonuses
Top