Half-orcs and why people think they are/aren't powerful

[Plane Sailing]

When using point but I see pretty much *every* character have an 18 in their primary stat. I don't see that with die rolled characters (an 18 comes up on average once every 216 casts of the dice on 3d6 and is, what, about four times as common on 4d6 drop lowest?).

I think half-orcs are a powerful choice for anyone who wants to be primarily a fighter. +1 hit and damage from Str is brilliant, and the cost is two attributes that frankly are not that important to you if you are primarily a fighter. That +1 to hit and damage are going to come into play every time you swing your weapon.

Darkvision is a huge benefit for any dungeon investigation, and the fact that you can move at full speed (30ft) unlike the runty dwarves is great too.

Now if you want a rubbish choice, try the half-elf (although they have had a slight, slight boost in 3.5e)

 

[Li Shenron]

Well, I think that we can see from the variants to HOrcs used or proposed by people in this thread that the problem is still more with flavor and flexibility than power.

Flavor because every other race except human get small bonuses here and there which help make them more distinctive, while HOrcs don't get anything unique, not even a tiny bonus on a specific skill.

Flexibility... at least in practice I have never seen anyone playing a HOrc which wasn't a Fighter, a Monk or a Barbarian :\ although I think that there are other classes which would work very well (Cleric, Rogue...). Yes, you can say that "HOrcs ARE intended" to be that, but it doesn't always happen with other classes.

Certaninly the race is not unpopular, but IMXP it is generally quite boring and leads to cliche' characters.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Half Orcs are not exactly weak, but they are much more limited in scope than other races.
The ideas like "Toughness" or "Endurance" for free are nice, but actually they don`t change the scope of the Half Orc - he still best (now even better) in melee combat.

Compare it to the elf: +2 Dex is a boon to everyone. Spellcasters use it for AC and ranged touch attack, fighters for AC and attacks, Rogues for stealth and attacks and so on... (In the same way, -2 Con is a penalty for everyone - everybody needs hp). There other racial abilities are nice to have for everyone, even though the skill bonus might be more useful for rangers or rogues.

The Half Orc is simply not as well-rounded. Their abilities make them a good choice for warriors, but for everything else, they are weak.
(Even our own house rules don`t change it: We give the Half Orc a +2 racial bonus to Intimidate and Survival - great for Barbarian, Rangers and nice, to a lesser extent, Druids, Fighters and Rogues)

 

[Staffan]

When using point but I see pretty much *every* character have an 18 in their primary stat.

How many points do you allow? On 25 or 28 points, the 16-point cost for an 18 is very painful.

I don't see that with die rolled characters (an 18 comes up on average once every 216 casts of the dice on 3d6 and is, what, about four times as common on 4d6 drop lowest?).

3.5 times as common, actually - 21/1296. The 21 comes from four permutations of {1 through 5, 6, 6, 6} plus one permutation of {6, 6, 6, 6}.

I think half-orcs are a powerful choice for anyone who wants to be primarily a fighter. +1 hit and damage from Str is brilliant, and the cost is two attributes that frankly are not that important to you if you are primarily a fighter. That +1 to hit and damage are going to come into play every time you swing your weapon.

You usually want a decent Intelligence as a fighter to get access to Combat Expertise and the nifty feats depending on it. Don't need to be a genius or anything, but somewhat clever (Int 13+).

Darkvision is a huge benefit for any dungeon investigation, and the fact that you can move at full speed (30ft) unlike the runty dwarves is great too.

Though if you're wearing medium or heavy armor, you're as slow as the dwarf who gets to ignore the speed penalty for armor. And most fighters I've seen do wear full plate once they can afford it.

 

[Pax]

When using point but I see pretty much *every* character have an 18 in their primary stat. I don't see that with die rolled characters (an 18 comes up on average once every 216 casts of the dice on 3d6 and is, what, about four times as common on 4d6 drop lowest?).

We're not talkign about rolling a straight 18. We're talking about being able to have the 18 after racial modifiers, which means only have a 16 or higher to start with.

And inmy experience, only the rankest newbies (in terms of using point buy), and dedicated spellcasters, buy 18's with the DMG standard scale. 14's and maybe the occasional 16, yes. 18's? Almost never ... it's just not worth it.

I think half-orcs are a powerful choice for anyone who wants to be primarily a fighter. +1 hit and damage from Str is brilliant,

... but not neccessarily worth more than the +1 to hit at ranged, +1 to AC (including +1 to touch AC), +1 to initiative, and +1 to reflex saves that Elves and Halflings enjoy.

Or the +1hp/level and +1 fortitude saves that dwarves and gnomes enjoy.

and the cost is two attributes that frankly are not that important to you if you are primarily a fighter.

If you'd said "barbarian" instead of "fighter", I'd agree. But a surprising number of Fighter-oriented feats require Combat Expertise, which means, anIntelligence of 13+.

And a shocking number of Fighter-oriented Prestige Classes require not-insignificant-for-Fighters investments of skill points - which, of course, are directly affected by a penalty to Intelligence.

Adding the Charisma penalty on top of theIntelligence penalty, is just plain unfair. I could swallow a -4 Charisma penalty easier than -2 to eachof intelligence and charisma.

That +1 to hit and damage are going to come into play every time you swing your weapon.

And the -1 effective skill point is going to come into play every time the opportunity to use skills comes up (which happens both in and out of combat).

Darkvision is a huge benefit for any dungeon investigation, and the fact that you can move at full speed (30ft) unlike the runty dwarves is great too.

Oh, gee, an extra 10' of movement.

Unless you wear more than light armor, of course, in which case, you're notmoving any fasterthanthe Dwarf after all.

Now if you want a rubbish choice, try the half-elf (although they have had a slight, slight boost in 3.5e)

No argument there. They should get to pick EITHER the bonus feat OR the bonus skill point of their human parent, IMO.

But that doesn't mean the HalfOrc isn't also behind the curve.

 

[Bauglir]

But that doesn't mean the HalfOrc isn't also behind the curve.

Although that in turn doesn't mean that the Dwarf isn't ahead of the curve. (With all those abilities, they're borderline ECL +1 IMO)

 

[Pax]

Yes, the dwarf is a bit too good to be true. Watering down some of those craft bonusses would be a grand idea - make 'em all +1's instead of +2's, and the race would back off from the LA +0/+1 bounadary somewhat.

Good CON, no slower than a human in heavy armor - plays right up to the Dwarf's archetypal role as a "tank", and their penalties don't make "tank" the ONLY viable role for the race.

Halforcs, OTOH, have NO real choices besides "high-damage-output warrior". Only the flavor of "warrior" has any wiggle room - and precious little of THAT, even.

 

[Bauglir]

Yes, the dwarf is a bit too good to be true. Watering down some of those craft bonusses would be a grand idea - make 'em all +1's instead of +2's, and the race would back off from the LA +0/+1 bounadary somewhat.

Good CON, no slower than a human in heavy armor - plays right up to the Dwarf's archetypal role as a "tank", and their penalties don't make "tank" the ONLY viable role for the race.

Halforcs, OTOH, have NO real choices besides "high-damage-output warrior". Only the flavor of "warrior" has any wiggle room - and precious little of THAT, even.

The stability bonus is good, as is the bonus vs giants, and goblinoids (the racial weapon is also very nice (something that half-orcs bizarrely did not get), and the darkvision is pretty powerful too. All of this alone would make an above-par ECL0 race. What pushes it over the top for me is the +2 to spell and poison saves (since these will likely comprise a majority of the saves you will ever make). Dwarven paladins can be practically magic-immune.

Anyway, enough derailing

 

[Pax]

So. Take all the numeric bonusses otehrthan that to Constitution ... and cut 'em in half. If the halfling's flat +1 to all saves isn't a problem, then a +1 to spell- and poison-saves shouldn't be, either. ^_^

 

[Shin Okada]

Don't compare Half Orc against Dwarf. Dwarf is rather too good. They were one of the best (power-gaming wise) core class in 3.0e. And they gained most from 3.5e (movement in armor, stability bonus, racial weapon familiarity).

Half-Orc is not underpowered if you compare it against other core races. Str is important. No doubt. Racial bonus to Str, Int, Wis & Cha are more important than bonus to other abilities. Because those stats will directly linked to offensive capability of some core-class. Dex may be slightly less-useful than Str, because basically, finesse-fighters are not so successful comparing to str fighters. And for armored fighters, there always be "max dex bonus" cap.

Darkvision is good and it is worth exchanging for +1 feat and +1 skill point per level of human race.

Regarding class-restrictions. Well, of course, Half-Orcs are not so good as Wizards, Sorcerers and Bards. and maybe not so great as a single-class fighter as it is somewhat hard to get Int of 13. But they still make good Barbarians, Druids & Monks. Also, not so bad as Rangers & Clerics. Half-Orc Rogue may suffer from low Int. But having Darkvision and higher movement than dwarf, they are not that bad. I say they can be better Rogue than Halflings.

For flavor. This is simply a matter of each player's taste. Some may feel that playing Elf is just boring and playing "wild" race such as Half-Orc is more attractive.