[Character Creation] Helpful Symmetry

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

Thus far we've seen two distinct categrories of information on how race, class and abilities line up in 4E:

1.) The Stated Principles:

Classes use multiple stats.

Races that get stat bonuses get multiple positive stat bonuses.

Races also get feats that help to focus characters in that race's favored classes
-each class will have one race that's a clear good pick for that class.
-each race will have a few classes that will work well for that race.

2.) The Explicit Statements:

Elves make good Rangers, Rogues, and Clerics with a +2 to Dex and a +2 to Wisdom

Halflings make good Rogues, Rangers, and Warlocks with a +2 to Charisma and, one assumes, a +2 to Dex



Now building off those two data sets, it seems to me that despite the death of needless symetry in cosmology we are getting some helpful symmetry in character design. That the two attribute bonuses for a race are the clearest guides as to what classes that race will favor.

So what are your race - 3 classes - 2 or fewer attribute picks?

I'm guessing, and I'm assuming here that we are getting one physical and one mental bonus:

- Dragonborn - Warlord, Fighter, Wizard - Strength and Intelligence

- Dwarf - Fighter, Cleric, and Paladin - Constitution and Wisdom

- Eladrin - Wizard, Rogue, Warlord - Dexterity and Intelligence

- Half-Elf - No real idea - ??? and Charisma

- Human - Fighter, Wizard, and Cleric (per R&C) - ???

- Tiefling - Warlock, Fighter, and Rogue - Dex and Charisma

That scheme makes dexterity a big attribute, as well as making Rogues very common.

Anyone got any critiques or competing theores?

 

[Gort]

To be honest, if elves and halflings aren't getting a strength penalty, humans, dwarves and dragonborn better get a bonus.

 

[Steely Dan]

To be honest, if elves and halflings aren't getting a strength penalty, humans, dwarves and dragonborn better get a bonus.

Maybe dragonborn, but I doubt the others

Maybe humans will get +2 to any two ability scores of their choice; or none at all.

 

[jaer]

So what are your race - 3 classes - 2 or fewer attribute picks?

I'm guessing, and I'm assuming here that we are getting one physical and one mental bonus:

- Dragonborn - Warlord, Fighter, Wizard - Strength and Intelligence

- Dwarf - Fighter, Cleric, and Paladin - Constitution and Wisdom

- Eladrin - Wizard, Rogue, Warlord - Dexterity and Intelligence

- Half-Elf - No real idea - ??? and Charisma

- Human - Fighter, Wizard, and Cleric (per R&C) - ???

- Tiefling - Warlock, Fighter, and Rogue - Dex and Charisma

That scheme makes dexterity a big attribute, as well as making Rogues very common.

Anyone got any critiques or competing theores?

Not sure why I think this, but I feel like Dragonborns might be str and charisma, making them good fighters, paladins, and warlords.

Humans could then be Con and Intelligence (showing both their resilience and ingeniuty). After all, previous editions showed humans to be the most intelligent of all races (3e they had bonus skill points, and in all previous editions, it took them 20 years to become master mages, while it took the supposedly magical elves 200 years to do the same!) I really don't think they are leaving humans as "base line" like they did in previous editions.

Half-elves +2 con, +2 charisma? Being natural leaders, one would imagine they must have a charisma bonus, and if humans got the con anyway, makes sense the half-elves might too. This would make them good paladins, warlords, and warlocks, I would guess.

Just some ideas.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

You know I have no idea how they are going to handle humans and attribute bonuses.

Perhaps there's a sacred cow blocking my view, but giving humans attribute bonuses just seems wrong. I can't wrap my head around it.

But were I to guess con is the only attribute bonus I could see as being useful to that particular combination of classes

 

[jaer]

You know I have no idea how they are going to handle humans and attribute bonuses.

Perhaps there's a sacred cow blocking my view, but giving humans attribute bonuses just seems wrong. I can't wrap my head around it.

But were I to guess con is the only attribute bonus I could see as being useful to that particular combination of classes

I know what you mean. Humans have always been the baseline race, and all other races were modded from humans. But I can't imagine that they get nothing (they would be done 4 stats! What ability could they give humans in compensation for that!) and the idea of allowing humans to place stats anywhere doesn't make sense.

After all, the fact that stats are rolled or bought makes more the difference in individual potential. That one human has int 18 and another strength 18 shows the difference between someone born naturally smart and then worked to learn more and one who was born naturally strong and worked hard to become more so.

The only logical way to think of "floating" racial modifiers is if you believe each human is more unique from another human than one elf is from another elf. Which I don't like. Let the stat-generation show the difference between the individuals and let racial modifiers be the same.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

2 times dex + cha seems strange, but maybe size is enough to make a difference...

the idea for humans to place a +2 bonus anywhere does make sense in a point buy system... it can be a bigger bonus than 2 times +2 on skills you usually want somewhat lower...

 

[WyzardWhately]

(they would be done 4 stats! What ability could they give humans in compensation for that!)

Hopefully something awesome. I have no doubt that they've sat around and worked this one out, actually. I may not end up liking 4E, but I find it hard to believe that they'll screw up something this basic.

That said, look at Batman & Captain America. They manage to get along okay. So, I expect a lot of really screaming awesome human-only racial abilities, which essentially amount to extra win and script immunity. Humans never give up, and find ways to accomplish the impossible. That's more or less what they say about them in R&C, and I expect that their mechanics are going to reflect that.

 

[arscott]

I don't think we need to assume that halflings aren't getting a strength penalty. It's been stated that races will have 'net positive' modifiers, But I haven't seen any indication that no race will have negative modifiers.

And if any PHB race is taking a penalty to any stat, it'll be halflings with Strength.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I'd be pretty unsurprised if Tieflings were STR and CHA instead of DEX and CHA, or even CON and CHA. I would be very surprised if Tieflings and Halflings (linglinglingdingaling!) both had the same stat modifiers.

If Dragonblooded have CHA bonuses as well, I think we'll be seeing too many races with CHA bonuses, so I think INT or WIS makes a little more sense for them.

I have to admit that, whilst initially I though "Oh humans, +2 to any two will be fine", I'd actually much rather that they had some really cool/unfairly good racials (FROM LEVEL ONE!) to make people pick them instead.