Half-elves........why no one chooses them?

[Jdvn1]

I said humans may not have the edge and half elves don't either. By this I mean that dwarves have the edge. +2 on all saves and Darkvision is substantially better than what half-elves get, and the +2 Con and other bonuses notwithstanding.

I misunderstood. Still, it means Half-Elf is at least viable.

Those weren't respectively Elf for Archery and Dwarf for melee.

Oh, I suppose. I'm just saying the Half-Elf isn't particularly weak. It's not the best at any class, but it's not sub-par.

If they manage leave for the PrC at the same time, the Human keeps the one feat advantage over the half-elf, and it remains substantial (as opposed to sticking with Fighter, which admittedly renders one feat less important).

Which takes us back to neither having a clear edge.

 

[Rystil Arden]

I misunderstood. Still, it means Half-Elf is at least viable.

And I've always agreed with that. The half-elf is weaker, universally so, than the best choice for any occasion. But not so much as to not be viable. I don't think anyone would say that it isn't viable, just that it is noticably weaker.

Which takes us back to neither having a clear edge.

Not really. It takes us back to advantage for the human. In fact, if the characters are building feat chains, then the human's being ahead by one feat will generally mean that the human is able to access the powerful chain-enders while the half-elf is still building them. In other words, if the build is planned in advance, then usually the one feat that the human has over the half-elf is one strong feat.

 

[Goolpsy]

If theres a little difference between the races "powerlevel" it isn't gamebreaking at all... I love Half Elves..

The only problem i can see is in the Powergaming aspect... But if the game were suposed only to be powergames why didn't they just make all races alike... different name ans heights... all have the human race abilities... + 2 to any stat they like...

Then people can powergame on the level they want

As it is now... for ROLEPLAY (INSTEAD OF COMPUTERGAMING) theres no need to change the race....

 

[Arkhandus]

If I wanted to make the half-elf more acceptable in game mechanics without much fuss, I'd just replace all their skill bonuses with a bonus feat of choice like the human's. Then they'd basically be like humans mechanically, except with no extra skill points, and having an elf's mental benefits, subtype, language, and low-light vision. They'd be a tad less favorable than humans for spellcasting types (who already have good Will saves, and can either create magical light or magically augment their senses), but slightly more favorable in mundane roles where their vision, mental resilience, and access to elven PrCs/etc. is of marginally greater usefulness than a human's extra skill points.

I figure the races and classes should just be mechanically equal in power (with a tiny bit of variance being reasonable), so effectiveness wouldn't have to suffer for concept. You can play a conceptually interesting and beloved dwarven fighter, or elven wizard, so why sacrifice some usefulness just to be a conceptually interesting half-elf anything?

 

[Arkhandus]

Goolpsy, and others, it's not just about a character's "power level". It's about their usefulness.

Take the earlier example of a half-elf bard versus a human bard. Both are good at what they do as bards, generally, except the half-elf bard is practically a liability in any dangerous situation, whereas the human bard is actually still useful to the party when danger arises. Adventuring is dangerous no matter what kind of adventuring it is. The 1st-level half-elf bard with Point Blank Shot isn't much use in a fight, especially once muggers or elfblood-hatin' half-orcs or what-have-you get into melee with the half-elf or his/her comrades. The human bard, though, with Point Blank Shot and Precise Shot, remains useful to his companions even when bad guys get up close and personal with violent intent.

The half-elf bard may risk moving into melee reach himself and poking baddies with his longsword, but as soon as one of those baddies looks at him funny, his piddly bard HPs won't keep him in the fight more'n a round or two most likely. Also, his feat doesn't help at all when he's not shooting stuff. The human bard won't feel like a burden on the party, since he'll still be useful, but the half-elf bard will likely feel like a liability, no good on the attack and not really helpful on the defense yet either. Sure he can still contribute a bit with bardic music and flanking or something, but he'll mostly just be putting himself in danger then or just not helping as much as if he were actually shooting stuff with his crossbow like the human bard would be doing.

At later levels, the human bard will have gained things like Rapid Shot, Far Shot, and maybe even Shot On The Run, Mounted Archery, or Improved Critical. He'll be able to help the party effectively in a fight, while the half-elf bard will be behind in that regard; no SotR or MA or IC for the half-elf, most likely.

Skills-wise, the half-elf might instead take Skill Focus (Diplomacy) at 1st-level, but the human could just take that AND Negotiator (or whatever the feat was called), remaining equal with the half-elf when it comes to Diplomacy. He'll also have enough skill points to be better than the half-elf at something else; he may be a bit behind in Gather Information, but the Negotiator feat will even that out by making hiim better at a different skill, still leaving the human better than the half-elf with 1 more skill. Sure the half-elf will be able to take Negotiator at 3rd-level, but then the human will have taken Stealthy or the like, remaining ahead with 1 skill more than the half-elf; the half-elf will be better at Diplomacy and Gather Information, maybe, but the human will be better with Hide, Move Silently, and at least one other of his own choice (not determined by his race); plus with the human's extra skill points, he will likely be getting another +2 synergy with one or more skills from having 5+ ranks in one more key skill than the half-elf, maybe even making up for his otherwise-slightly-lower Diplomacy and Gather Information skills. The human will just generally be a slightly better bard than the half-elf, and thus more useful to the party.

 

[Seeten]

JDVN1: I believe I said in the first 30 posts that Half-Elf wasnt so horrendous that it was unplayable, simply subpar. No one is claiming every half-elf instantly dies, just that its not "good" for anything. I argue it isnt even best for its own diplomacy face niche, but it isnt like it has -4 all stats. Its playable, but bad.

 

[Jdvn1]

Not really. It takes us back to advantage for the human. In fact, if the characters are building feat chains, then the human's being ahead by one feat will generally mean that the human is able to access the powerful chain-enders while the half-elf is still building them. In other words, if the build is planned in advance, then usually the one feat that the human has over the half-elf is one strong feat.

No, it's back to the feat+skills v lowlight vision+will save bonuses idea from the beginning. Since, by then, most feat chains have ended for both characters.

 

[Jdvn1]

JDVN1: I believe I said in the first 30 posts that Half-Elf wasnt so horrendous that it was unplayable, simply subpar. No one is claiming every half-elf instantly dies, just that its not "good" for anything. I argue it isnt even best for its own diplomacy face niche, but it isnt like it has -4 all stats. Its playable, but bad.

I don't think it's "bad" if it's one of the better fighter races. But, what's your definition of "par"? If "par" is "human," then I'm arguing that the Half-Elf isn't subpar at all.

 

[Votan]

I don't think it's "bad" if it's one of the better fighter races. But, what's your definition of "par"? If "par" is "human," then I'm arguing that the Half-Elf isn't subpar at all.

I think (and have tried to argue on a related thread) that the issue is the Half Elf is (except for one extreme niche case) not the best at anything. All of the other races will have a specialty that makes them shine.

Half Elf is the best race for no class and is an adequete one for surprisingly few.

Now, bad does not mean completely useless. The Kobold is another "niche" race that can do a highly limited of classes and it isn't impossible to have a highly successful Kbobold character. Elves are widely regarded as subpar (including by me) but my 2 favorite characters in D&D to date were an Elf Paladin and an elf druid (who focused on being an archer and never wildshaped even once).

Still, it is poor design for a race to lag. However, it may be that you can enjoy succeeding despite a race that handicaps you. In particular, it is a good choice for an optimizer in a group of non-optimizers -- your character will be much less brutally effective if you try and optimize a "subpar" element of the design.

 

[Particle_Man]

No, it's back to the feat+skills v lowlight vision+will save bonuses idea from the beginning. Since, by then, most feat chains have ended for both characters.

This brings up another point. Every new book that comes out with more good feats gives a reason to prefer humans to half-elves, since the human will always be one feat ahead of the half-elf. Thus half-elves have been getting worse, the more books of good feats that come out. I think PHBII really hurt half-elves, with all those good feats for high level fighters (especially the ones with so many prerequisite feats).

That said, the same PHB II may have given the half-elf a niche to shine in: I submit that half-elves make respectable beguilers. Now the Diplomacy/Gather Info bonuses have more of an active gaming place, lowlight vision works more often in shadowy city streets (where I could see a beguiler), and the spot/listen bonus doesn't hurt. Well, its a start.