Lwaxy
Cute but dangerous
Statism, not stateism
I don't mind extra feats here and there, or even a skill point plus to account for the adaptability and different cultures. But the stats should stay the same.
How should humans be human?
- Thread starter Blood & Bones
- Start date
Statism, not stateism
I don't mind extra feats here and there, or even a skill point plus to account for the adaptability and different cultures. But the stats should stay the same.
variant
Adventurer
Aesthetically, I don't like the additional +1. I don't think it is unbalanced, I just don't like humans being better than where the other races are suppose to excel. I also don't like the humans being by default as good as every other races on that ability those races are suppose to excel at. It would be better if a human could be on the same level with a single race, but that would mean giving the other races a +2 instead and giving humans something else. I am not sure what could be added to humans that is generic and won't cause a large amount of bloat for a check.
Now that would be overpowered for the non-humans. They already get a list of powerful abilities.
Feats are optional and so are skills.
Now that would be overpowered for the non-humans. They already get a list of powerful abilities.
Statism, not stateism
I don't mind extra feats here and there, or even a skill point plus to account for the adaptability and different cultures. But the stats should stay the same.
Feats are optional and so are skills.
Last edited:
Sadras
Legend
I'm tired of the human centered statismIt is unrealistic. If the humans are the base race, then no need to add anything at all.
I wouldnt worry about that too much. The playtest revealed that dwarves are the default race. I mean all I saw was a pair of dwarves and their friends.
Blackwarder
Adventurer
Right now I don't have a problem with humans getting +1 to all abilities.
But I'll hold my judgment until we get more information on character creation rules, we simply don't have enough information to go on.
Warder
But I'll hold my judgment until we get more information on character creation rules, we simply don't have enough information to go on.
Warder
variant
Adventurer
Giving humans a +1 to all ability checks (excluding saving throws, attacks, contests) plus a +1 to any ability score might be good. Maybe something else.
Another option could be something like a +2 to all ability checks (excluding saving throws, attacks, contests), and no bonus to ability scores.
Another option could be something like a +2 to all ability checks (excluding saving throws, attacks, contests), and no bonus to ability scores.
Last edited:
Viktyr Gehrig
First Post
They only have to be balanced relative to the human. I think +2 to two fixed abilities balances acceptably with +1 to all six. I am still holding out for Humans having actual racial features.
Mattachine
Adventurer
I suspect the human ability bonuses are just a stand-in for something else during this playtest.
Chris_Nightwing
First Post
My most significant objection to the human ability bonuses is that it allows them to have a single higher ability score than races that are supposed to be inclined towards those abilities. More dextrous than elves, tougher than dwarves, etc. It was a nice feature previously that certain races were the only races that could achieve certain ability scores.
Now, other racial features might mitigate this (immunity to toxins for instance), but it still feels off to me. Humans, compared to demi-humans, have always been all-rounders, not as good in a single thing, but not as bad at other things. If we don't want to give out penalties to demi-humans then consider giving them ability increases *except* to their highest ability. Or none at all. I think extra skills would work, extra feats not so much (if players choose to play with only themes).
Now, other racial features might mitigate this (immunity to toxins for instance), but it still feels off to me. Humans, compared to demi-humans, have always been all-rounders, not as good in a single thing, but not as bad at other things. If we don't want to give out penalties to demi-humans then consider giving them ability increases *except* to their highest ability. Or none at all. I think extra skills would work, extra feats not so much (if players choose to play with only themes).
steeldragons
Steeliest of the dragons
Humans are adaptable, versatile, ambitious (due to the shorter life span than most demihumans), and I'll throw in what someone said about capable of learning well.
Humans, or MOST humans, should not be as agile or generally as wise as an elf, hardy as a dwarf, strong as a half-orc, or as "lucky" or nimble as a halfling.
Humans ARE the default (if you want to make a non-humanocentric world, go for it, but the game has to start somewhere).
I say the +1 across the board doesn't really make sense...while making sense. If humans are the baseline that elves, dwarves, etc. receive a +1 to their specific areas then it doesn't really make sense...you're just taking the baseline and adding 1 to it across the board...so there IS no "baseline" there's only "baseline +1."
I do get the argument that adventuring PCs are just "better" than your normal commoner human, that makes sense to a degree...but I don't think it necessary to give them +1 across the board to accomplish that. Part of the fun of roleplaying is figuring out and playing to your strengths and weaknesses. Giving everyone +1 to everything just seems like you'll end up with every human PC, and classed NPC, being rather "the same" as each other and generally 'better" than all other races. Everyone is fairly as strong, as smart, as charismatic...within a couple of points of each other...and I'd rather see the strong but slow/dim fighters and the charismatic but clumsy rogues, or the dextrous but addle-brained wizards in the mix as well.
If they ARE going to go with +1 across the board than there is certainly NO reason for a floating +1 on top of that!
I would say, better, give humans floating +2 to ability scores. So if you want a Conan-esque fighter, put +2 in your Strength. If you want some streetsmart quick moving thief, put +1 in Int. and +1 in Dex. Yes, you/this particular human MAY be just as fast or smart as an elf or as tough as a dwarf, but not every human should be able to have a Con. as good as if not better than a dwarf, etc.
This will also allow the bonuses toward certain (not ALL) saves/checks in abilities where the floating bonus(es) are applied.
Add to that, for the versatility/learning thing +1 skill of choice, regardless of background, for something they "picked up along the way." Maybe 2 skills...so it would be like a "half-background"...something they were exposed to/around, but didn't really ever "study or train fully in.
So, +2 floating applied to ability scores (and thus to the checks/saves of those abilities), and extra skill(s), and that's all.
That makes the humans "feel" human to me without all being supermen. They get to apply +s to their character sheets too, but only a couple (not 7!), so the Balance-meisters don't get all in a bunch. And a couple of extra skills to offset demihuman special abilities.
That's what I think/my 2 coppers, anyway.
--SD
Humans, or MOST humans, should not be as agile or generally as wise as an elf, hardy as a dwarf, strong as a half-orc, or as "lucky" or nimble as a halfling.
Humans ARE the default (if you want to make a non-humanocentric world, go for it, but the game has to start somewhere).
I say the +1 across the board doesn't really make sense...while making sense. If humans are the baseline that elves, dwarves, etc. receive a +1 to their specific areas then it doesn't really make sense...you're just taking the baseline and adding 1 to it across the board...so there IS no "baseline" there's only "baseline +1."
I do get the argument that adventuring PCs are just "better" than your normal commoner human, that makes sense to a degree...but I don't think it necessary to give them +1 across the board to accomplish that. Part of the fun of roleplaying is figuring out and playing to your strengths and weaknesses. Giving everyone +1 to everything just seems like you'll end up with every human PC, and classed NPC, being rather "the same" as each other and generally 'better" than all other races. Everyone is fairly as strong, as smart, as charismatic...within a couple of points of each other...and I'd rather see the strong but slow/dim fighters and the charismatic but clumsy rogues, or the dextrous but addle-brained wizards in the mix as well.
If they ARE going to go with +1 across the board than there is certainly NO reason for a floating +1 on top of that!
I would say, better, give humans floating +2 to ability scores. So if you want a Conan-esque fighter, put +2 in your Strength. If you want some streetsmart quick moving thief, put +1 in Int. and +1 in Dex. Yes, you/this particular human MAY be just as fast or smart as an elf or as tough as a dwarf, but not every human should be able to have a Con. as good as if not better than a dwarf, etc.
This will also allow the bonuses toward certain (not ALL) saves/checks in abilities where the floating bonus(es) are applied.
Add to that, for the versatility/learning thing +1 skill of choice, regardless of background, for something they "picked up along the way." Maybe 2 skills...so it would be like a "half-background"...something they were exposed to/around, but didn't really ever "study or train fully in.
So, +2 floating applied to ability scores (and thus to the checks/saves of those abilities), and extra skill(s), and that's all.
That makes the humans "feel" human to me without all being supermen. They get to apply +s to their character sheets too, but only a couple (not 7!), so the Balance-meisters don't get all in a bunch. And a couple of extra skills to offset demihuman special abilities.
That's what I think/my 2 coppers, anyway.
--SD
Chris_Nightwing
First Post
Assuming that characters gain skills as they level up.. perhaps humans could do so at an increased rate?
Similar Threads
