How should humans be human?

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Hmmm ... I'd prefer that my humans not be more human than human.

The other races tend to have specific niches. I'd like humans to be a nicheless race, equally balanced with the others. I think the answer is to design other races first and work backwards to humans; without the full mechanics for the other races I have a hard time suggesting the best human mechanics.

 

[Mercule]

To me, the real issue is the lack of drawbacks. It used to be that when you wanted to be an Elf (or whatever) that you could expect some resultant troubles. People are just too averse to penalties nowadays.

This. This is exactly it. Too many people with delicate feelings whined about how "unfair" it is to have to accept a penalty to play an elf (dwarf, etc.).

Humans are the base, unmodified race because they are what we can identify with. The entire ability score array is only comprehensible because it represents deviation from human norms. I don't really mind if "adventuring humans" are above average. That makes sense, actually. Adventurers of all stripes are probably above average -- at least those that make it to 2nd level. That's what's represented by the higher point buy values.

That actually sparks a potential compromise. Give human PCs a bonus to their buy points. Going by either the 3e or 4e table, the net effect would be to push up the lower stats for humans, because one point goes a lot further at 10 than at 16. If you gave them, say, 8 extra points, they could either add one to all the weaker stats and a secondary stat or only max out their primary. Most human PCs would probably just have fewer weaknesses than the other races, which fits the versatility theme quite well, as does the option to excel in one area. Even if a group wanted use 3d6, the human PCs can still have 8 buy points to tweak stats after generation. I'm sure it could be argued that's just six of one and a half dozen of the other, but it's more aesthetically pleasing, to me, especially considering NPCs are rarely built with point buy.

 

[WSmith]

This may be a case of six of one, half a dozen of the other, though. If you have to give one race a bonus in every ability, something just feels off. It's over-complicating, maybe? Just reduce the bonus the other races receive by a point and the same effect is achieved. You still have the human as baseline, but everyone feels better about option one because the human is bolstered all the way around? It's just weird to me on a psychological level.

A case could be made for removing ability modifiers based on race altogether, rather instead rewarding each race, humans included, an ability that reflects the strengths of the race. In a way, this has already been done. Dwarven immunity to poison. Elven immunity to charm and sleep effects. And so on.

I'm probably rambling on and on and I will pay for it tomorrow, but I hope I made a valid point in there somewhere.

Valid point, indeed. Bolded for emphasis. Things like the immunities are light in mechanics on the surface view, easy to remember, and give that race the flavor it needs. I actually could see ditching bonuses altogether, (but possibly have the -1 penalty as mentioned to the races except human) but the flavor of humans needs to set them apart without a bonus. That is a passive benefit in game play. The other races have a more active or at least flavorful benefit that the player can invoke during actual play.