Fixing the Half Orc ('cause they're broken)

[Aus_Snow]

Giving half-orcs (and/or orcs) the ability to use Str for Intimidate checks - how strong an advantage could this really be?

I'm toying with the idea of adding it to one or both, but - particularly in the case of orcs - it might be too much, I'm thinking.

 

[babomb]

And you have a race that gives +1 STR and -1 INT

You put your 15 into STR and your 13 into INT.

You have now managed your stats so that your race gains you a +1 to your STR bonus, but nothing happens to your INT bonus. You have recieved a bonus without incurring a penalty. That is why WotC avoids +1/-1 ability mods, and I agree with them on this score.

As long as you weren't planning on taking Expertise.

Not that that completely balances it (or affects anything at all for any other value of INT).

 

[Nyaricus]

Giving half-orcs (and/or orcs) the ability to use Str for Intimidate checks - how strong an advantage could this really be?

I'm toying with the idea of adding it to one or both, but - particularly in the case of orcs - it might be too much, I'm thinking.

in 3.0 sword and fist, barbarians had a varient rule (in that Masters of the Wild splat book from WotC) that you could use str instead of cha for intimidate checks. Orcs in 3.0 had barbarians as favoured class > orcs could use str for intimidate chacks.

This is no different that the rogue with a high cha using cha for intimidate > it is merely what the chararcter's good at. Comments? (thus far, no-one has really said anyhting against it (strictly speaking) Aus_snow is just asking opinions)

 

[Thia Halmades]

I had originally posted for the STR score to count towards Intimidate checks, and I stand by that. Also, fair call on the Dwarf/Elf difference, but it's a matter of opinion. Elves are an 11 point race, albeit Dwarves were fixed from their 3.0 rendition, I still only have one shorty in either of my games, and brotherman is a Halfling. Go fig.

So let's get a consensus of what's going on here:

Everyone agrees that Half-Orcs don't work, and they haven't offered up a decent solution yet. Good then!

LCpt. Thia Halmades

 

[Felix]

Everyone agrees that Half-Orcs don't work

They work just fine.

They just arn't optimal.

 

[Nyaricus]

So let's get a consensus of what's going on here:

Everyone agrees that Half-Orcs don't work, and they haven't offered up a decent solution yet. Good then!

I think there have been some (satisfactory, at best) solutions to the half-orc dilemma, but with your flaming people (basically saying all fixes to this point are basically redundant) isnt going to get many favourable responses.

Next time, use a bit of tact; we are trying here!

 

[Felix]

Since ability increases with level come as +1s, not +2s, the benefit is not without penalty. True, the penalty may be delayed, but it is still there.
There is no penalty associated with +1 ability power-ups. It is all a benefit. It is designed this way... Everyone gets them, and so it is balanced.

What is not balanced is when you mete out benefits and penalties based on wether a score at character generation was odd or even. Which you can do if you give +1/-1 ability mods. You cannot do this with +2/-2.

I am not saying that +1/-1 necessarily creates benefits without penalties, only that it can. And when one player can gain a benefit when another cannot based on his race's ability mods, then you have a situation that is not balanced.

That is why they don't exist in core DnD. People say they don't get the logic, so I'll keep repeating it.

If I had a +1 adjustment to my most important ability , and my best roll were even

This has nothing to do with the problem I have with +1/-1 adjustments. Nothing at all.

The problem (as in, there are no others), comes when the abilities to be adjusted are both odd, and the player gains a +1 and loses nothing.

This holds if the score increased were 7 and the score reduced were 17... He has shored up a weakness and lost nothing.

Sure, your minimaxer gets a +1 to some unimportant ability mod through levels 1 to 3, but I [eventually--at fourth level] get a +1 to my most important ability, and I'm going to use that a lot more.

Please do not call him a min-maxer for using the system the way you would wish to alter it to. That moves the responsibility for the system abuse to him from you.

But even here your example only covers the case where the highest ability score is even... when you say the "min-maxer" won't put the +1 into that stat, and you would. How does this logic change when the highest score is odd? Does it change? Darned right it does.

But it does not change either way, even ability score or odd, when you have a +2/-2 system.

And under point-buy systems, there is a benefit-without-penalty anyway. -2 to a low ability is worth -2 ability points, and +2 to a high stat is worth at least +6 ability points. That's good for +1 to each of two ability modifiers of secondary importance. That is, under a point-buy system an elf with 18, 16, 14, 14, 10, 8 can be worth the same points as a human with 18, 16, 12, 12, 10, 8. I wouldn't fuss about a potential gain of +1 and blink at a +2.

Meanwhile, the human has an extra feat, generally allowing him earlier access to PrCs, the human has an extra 4 skill points, with an extra at each level, meaning he can be skillful at more things than the elf, and also allowing him entry into PrCs with more ease.

That is the benefit that the human gets, when the elf with those stats gets other things.

Consequently, the larger the point buy (and that human is 36 point buy, if I'm not mistaken), the less advantageous it is to play a human. The smaller the point buy, the more advantageous. With larger point-buy systems, it becomes easer to reach higher primary stat scores with racial mods, which are worth more points than the human has available.

Meaning, the value of the elf's higher ability scores weighed against the human's advantages changes depending on the power-level of your game. So trying to compare the two is meaningless unless you set a given power level, and it is certainly unlike my (the) problem with +1/-1 systems. Point buy is balanced, +1/-1 is potentially not.

I just don't think that a +1/-1 pair of ability adjustments is all that abusive. Under point-buy is is the same as +2/-2 except less so.

+2/-2 forces a penalty to be swallowed.
+1/-1 does not force it.

Even with the default array this 'abuse' produces an advantage that vanishes at fourth level.

Have you ever heard of the theory of the time value of money? It means that money today is worth more than money tomorrow. Similarly, you do not erase the fact that the PC has enjoyed an advantage for three levels by simply removing the advantage.

And it's not abuse.
It's not min-maxing.
It's not powergaming.

It's a flaw that you're trying to build into the system. Those three things above are a problem with the player. This is a problem with the design.

Finally, the supposed problem of odd ability scores would be even much diminished if ability enhancement items were available with odd modifiers, and to a maximum of say +5 instead of +6. This would, of course, mean that some magical items would be of less advantage to some characters than to others (perhaps even of no practical advantage in the case of +1 ability enhancement items) and that some would be able to get bonuses cheaper than others. But I think that that price would be worth paying to reduce the current small value of odd abilities scores. As is stands, a rule that seems designed to cope withteh problem of odd ability scores actually exacerbates that problem.

A +2 Cloak of CHA will always give a +1 to CHA ability mod. And so it will always be worth the same to everyone.

A +1 Cloak of CHA will give a +1 to CHA ability mod to some folks, and nothing to others. It will be worth 4,000gp to some people and 0gp to others. But who would be willing to buy a Cloak of CHA +1 for 4k when you could get a +2 for the same. So the price needs to go down. 2k maybe? And now you're giving +1 CHA mod for half price to some people, and others get nothing... based on the virtue of having even or odd ability scores.

Odd ability enhancers will be worth more to some than others, and so their prices should reflect that change. Meaning some would be not willing to buy it at all, and others would be overjoyed to purchase it at such a discount. You'll be creating a mess for pricing, if you even care to try to sort it out.

 

[Aus_Snow]

This holds if the score increased were 7 and the score reduced were 17... He has shored up a weakness and lost nothing.

No, that doesn't 'hold', at all. But we've been through that.

+2/-2 forces a penalty to be swallowed.
+1/-1 does not force it.

I think there's still something over. . . there. . . on your blindside.

Odd ability enhancers will be worth more to some than others, and so their prices should reflect that change.

Not necessarily, no. Therefore, no.


It doesn't matter how many times you say it, or in how many ultimately very similar ways, it still so happens that you do not hold the monopoly on truth in this instance. And neither does anyone else, for that matter. Simply agree to disagree, and the thread's direction might even resemble its title once again.

 

[Nyaricus]

Simply agree to disagree, and the thread's direction might even resemble its title once again.

Thank you for saying it; if you didnt, a few more of these posts may have gotten me to muster up the time to bother to say so. From now on, let's stay on topic

Perhaps we could create a poll for this question. I dont know how to do such things, but we could question Enworlders on what design of Half-orc we should have.

ie Barbaric heir of human tribes and orcish warbands
civilised (sort of) half-orc with fury and strenght

etc. i dunno, reallt tired right now, rmoe on this later

 

[Agback]

The problem (as in, there are no others), comes when the abilities to be adjusted are both odd, and the player gains a +1 and loses nothing.

I don't agree tha that is true. The player may gain a +1 if his or her rolls happen to be right (odd numbers in the right ranges), but he or she does give up something.

And even if it were true, so what?

A player gets something for nothing when he rolls a high set of abilities. That doesn't cause a problem. A player gets something for nothing when he or she chooses a race with at +2/-2 adjustment if a point-buy system is being used. That doesn't cause a problem either.

Have you ever heard of the theory of the time value of money? It means that money today is worth more than money tomorrow.

They called it 'the opportunity cost of capital', 'pure time preference', and 'consumption discount rate' when I was doing my degree in economics, but never 'theory of the time value of money'. Nevertheless, I understand what you are referring to.

I am also familiar with the economic theory that options have value. A minimaxer who finesses his or her stat values to squeeze a +1 to the modifier of an unimportant stat out of a +1/-1 ability adjustment pays for it by giving up the option to cheaply and quickly raise an important stat.

A +1 Cloak of CHA will give a +1 to CHA ability mod to some folks, and nothing to others.

Just like a +1 enhancement bonus on an exotic weapon. Or just like a wand or scroll. Most magical items are more useful to some characters than to others. That isn't a problem.

And these cheap stat raises will be available only to characters who have not finessed their stats to even values. That will increase the option value of an odd stat and ease any problem that might have occurred from a +1/-1 ability adjustment such as you described in the first part of your post.