does anyone else think half-orcs get gypped?

[RigaMortus2]

Actually, what gets me about dwarves is that they get both "+2 racial bonus on saving throws against poison" and "+2 racial bonus on saving throws against spells and spell-like effects" -- which translates into effectively "+2 on all saving throws except for pitfalls and rat bites".

And +4 vs spells and spell-like abilities that are poison based

 

[DevoutlyApathetic]

My single main beef with the half-orc?

As written, a half-orc is LESS intimidating than a halfling, due to the Cha hit.

At the very least, half-orcs should get +2 to Intimidate and to resist Intimidation, offsetting the Cha penalty.

The above is only true if you ignore the intimidate rules. I'm all for ignoring the intimidate rules because size as a penalty to intimidate is rather silly.

I'd rather have bonus's/penalties depending upon the amount of perceived power the threatener has. (Be it physical or something else.)

 

[Darklone]

Whoops! It's been so long since I used the half-orc as written that I forgot

And I personally dislike giving Cha penalties to races, since so much of the description of Cha is based on force of personality. So half-orcs in my game get -2 to Int and +2 to Str, and dwarves get a -2 to Dex and a +2 to Con.

*hi5 shilsen!*

 

[shilsen]

*hi5 shilsen!*

Okay!

*hi5 Darklone*

 

[KarinsDad]

That's powerful. Way powerful. Way more powerful than any bonus feat or +2 stat.

Not really.

It means that 90% of the time, the saves will be the same. 10% of the time, the Dwarf will save versus a spell whereas another race would have failed the save. Affecting 10% of saves is more or less affecting one combat in ten (or less) since most combats do not have saves versus spells (or SLAs) and the ones that do, it is rarely more than two saves versus spells per PC (if a PC is making more than 2 saves per spell combat and not doing something about it, he's on the losing end anyway).

I believe there's a reason a 15 is the high stat for 25 point buy. That's the lowest spellcasting stat you can have and still get 9th-level spells fast enough without a magic stat-boosting item.

...

It comes pretty close here. If the spellcaster wasn't always boosting their primary stat, they'd be unable to cast their spells without a magical crutch item.

Basically, that matters little.

For NPCs, it doesn't matter too much if one has or does not have a magical item. If the DM wants the NPC to cast x level spells, he will either give him the stats or the magical items to get him there, or he will not.

For PCs, it is extremely rare that a PC will not have a stat boosting item. Hence, nearly all 17th level PC casters will have a 19 stat one way or the other if the player wants that to happen. The game really is designed for PCs to have stat boosting items, especially for their primary stats.

 

[Klaus]

The above is only true if you ignore the intimidate rules. I'm all for ignoring the intimidate rules because size as a penalty to intimidate is rather silly.

I'd rather have bonus's/penalties depending upon the amount of perceived power the threatener has. (Be it physical or something else.)

Okay, so a half-orc is less intimidating than an enlarged halfling. Or, heck, less intimidating than an elf.

 

[Deset Gled]

Not really.

It means that 90% of the time, the saves will be the same.

...

Basically, that matters little.

For PCs, it is extremely rare that a PC will not have a stat boosting item.

So you're saying that a difference of only +1 or +2 doesn't make a difference, and that stat bonuses can be worked around by magic items?

Wow, the half-orc must be very suboptimal, then. After all, the +2 to Strength that they get only give a +1 to hit and +1 to damage, and can be matched by a simple magic item.

Edit:

 

[AbeTheGnome]

Just because the Irish can also be called s doesn't make that word any less offensive, or validate its usage, or able to live up to whatever pointless explanation you're attempting to make. There can be no acceptable defense for the painfully ignorant title of this thread.

point taken. i won't try to defend it.

Half-orcs are fine. My half-orc barbarian has no problem coping with his fantastic brawn, awesome speed, or fancy darkvision. Also, dwarves are just kinda lame.

i think this kind of statement is representative of what i'm talking about. "my half-orc barbarian is fine with his stats." well, of course he is. he's a barbarian. he's got a good STR score that will be an asset when he rages. what if i don't want to play my half-orc as a barbarian, and, heaven forbid, sidestep a cliche? i don't think half-orcs should be unduy pigeonholed.

and, as one poster stated, yes, they lack the flavor that other races have reflected in their stats. gnomes get illusion, elves don't sleep, etc. orcs are feral, bestial beings. the scent ability makes sense, and it isn't overpowered. orcs are big and brutish. an intimidate bonus makes sense. orcs traditionally spend a lot of time away from civilization. a bonus to survival makes sense. any and all of these perks would add flavor to the race without overpowering the others.

 

[Umbran]

....doesn't make that word any less offensive, or validate its usage, or able to live up to whatever pointless explanation you're attempting to make. There can be no acceptable defense for the painfully ignorant title of this thread.

If you have a problem with language use, please report it (using the little exclamation point icon at the bottom of each post), and the moderators will handle it as best we can within our policies.

If you have a problem with language use, please do not deliberately try to avoid our language filters to make things worse. Cheesing off even more people to make your point is not constructive. We would prefer to not see any more discussion of this in the thread, as it is quite off the topic. As always, if you've got any further questions or comments, please e-mail a moderator with your concerns. Our addresses are available in a thread stickied to the top of the Meta forum. Thank you.

 

[KarinsDad]

So you're saying that a difference of only +1 or +2 doesn't make a difference, and that stat bonuses can be worked around by magic items?

I'm saying that -2 to a stat does not prevent any classes.

If you want to read something else into that, feel free.