This is a phenomenal point, but by RAW, it's also your natural charm; I'm arguing that most people wouldn't find Orcs charming. However, I'd be willing to concede the +2 STR is better balanced by the -2 INT with no CHA loss. That would have a greated impact in a skill-heavy campaign and still leave many avenues open for the racial package to persue. Point well taken, Li Shenron.Originally Posted by Li Shenron
- because Charisma is still defined as the general ability to persuade & influence others, whatever the way chosen (and not just through charming): generally speaking, it's the ability of having someone do what you tell him to do.
Done and done. Also, excellent points. I'll still keep my 'may take Scent at 1st level' option open, because it is powerful, but is moderately offset by forcing you to take it early and put yourself in a position to use it. May also help offset the skill loss if taken that way. Hence, what we currently have (based on the input that I liked, basically) is this:Originally Posted by Khaalis
* +2 Racial Bonus to Intimidate, Listen, Spot and Survival skill checks.
+2 STR, -2 INT; Orcs are preternaturally strong, but often have difficulty reaching conclusions swiftly, and prefer action to consideration.
+2 Racial Bonus on Intimidate, Listen, Spot & Survival checks. Orcs may use their Strength bonus in lieu of their Charisma bonus for Intimidate checks (whichever is higher).
Orcish Blood (if anyone is willing to share their material on how they incorported this, the rest of us would appreciate it. As I said in my original post, unless you go to specific lengths to make it work, this is worthless, but retained).
Dark vision (see PHB/SRD)
Endurance Feat (automatic at 1st level)
Scent Feat - this is considered an unrestricted feat for Orcs, but must be taken at 1st level (character creation).
The idea behind avoiding +1/-1 ability adjustments is not allowing players to manage their initial stats so they gain a benefit, but recieve no penalty.Nyaricus said:WotC seems to shun a "partial" bonus [ie one that doesnt give +1 to a stat mod, or +2 to a stat] but for half-races it would make sense, since they inherit half their heritage from each parent). Comments?
Well, since it is all just luck of the die when rolling ability scores, this shouldnt matter. Also, i said in my arguments that should they be sturdy? yes. As sturdy as they are strong? no. I dont think that giving them +1/2 HP, +1/2 fort save, etc will be breaking the race as a whole, and since you are as likely going to roll all even numbers compared to any other type, this isnt such a bad idea IMO. As since many arrange ability scores as desired, you example of what happens with + and - scores already occurs, just on a larger scale (+2 to a score, and not +1 as with my example).Felix said:The idea behind avoiding +1/-1 ability adjustments is not allowing players to manage their initial stats so they gain a benefit, but recieve no penalty.
Starting stats thus:
15
14
13
12
10
8
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.
I am well aware that there are a variety of orcish sub-races in Middle-earth. Goblins (a name which is [as mentioned] interchangable with "orc") are from Moria and surrounding areas, Uruk-Hai from Mordor (and at the time of the War of the Ring, from Isenguard), Orcs from the Misty Mountains (and other places) etc. Half-breeds include half-orcs (mainly from human/uruk-hai stock) and goblin-men (which obviously come froms goblin stock). Unfortunately, since the names "goblin" and "orc" are interchangable, we cannot always grasp exactly which which is which; and can become confused by it. My outline of orcish races and sub-races from Middle-earth is rudimentary at best, but we can draw some ideas of "which which is which."Felix said:Also, in LotR (book, not movie) the word "Orc" was interchangeable with "Goblin". JRRT also mentioned, as Sam and Frodo are making their way from Cirith Ungol to Mt. Doom, that there were different races of orc... the trackers and the fighters to be specific.
So you cannot think that LOTR only has one kind of orc. For DnD purposes, the races of goblin, hobgoblin, orc, half-orc, and bugbear (and maybe others) might all be caught under the LotR title of "Orc". If that's the case, no need for house rules on LotR's account... you already have your variation in the race.
Peter said:I think Half Orcs got the shaft but I'm at a loss for the best way to fix. As a GM a couple of years ago I allowed the Scent feat for free and that seems like maybe a bit too much.
Those stats are the standard 25-point buy array, and you miss the point.Nyaricus said:Well, since it is all just luck of the die when rolling ability scores, this shouldnt matter.
It does not happen on a larger scale with +2/-2. When you add or subtract 2, you will raise or lower the ability bonus by 1. In a +1/-1 system this is not the case... it is possible to gain a benefit without suffering a drawback.Nyaricus said:As since many arrange ability scores as desired, you example of what happens with + and - scores already occurs, just on a larger scale (+2 to a score, and not +1 as with my example).
Glad to hear it. I'm all for House Ruling, but only when the same effect cannot be satisfactorily achieved within the system. And as far as Tolkeinesque orcs go, there's plenty of variation already.Nyaricus said:your comments have made me re-look at what i am doing with the half-orc seriously
That being the role of "holder of loot until PCs come to take it after killing"?Nyaricus said:these races all have their own "made-up" (as in 'D&D made-up" not "Tolkien made-up") niches that they fill.

(Dungeons & Dragons)
Rulebook featuring "high magic" options, including a host of new spells.