How should humans be human?

[mlund]

While some humans are jacks of all trade, their core feature is ambition and adaptability. That makes them superior specialists and they produce a greater ratio of adventurers and villains. Human adventurers should have a +1 bonus to any two different stats of the player's choice and maybe a racial +1 bonus to Saving Throws (while normal humans should just have +1 to Saves).

Meanwhile Demi-humans should get +1 to their race's specialty stat along with their racial abilities.

- Marty Lund

 

[1Mac]

Just because humans get +1 to all abilities does not make them the best at all abilities. Other races could get +2 to one or more abilities.

I very much doubt humans will be more graceful than elves, or hardier than dwarves, by default.

 

[deadwor1d]

Love the extra die 6 or advantage ideas. Simple, useful, unique. Is it enough? Not sure. I see no reason why humans need to be the standard, btw, but that is another topic.

Sent using Tapatalk 2

I know /I'm/ not talking about humans being the standard. Each campaign world will be different in that regard based on the wants of the players and DM involved. But humans should be used as a baseline from which we derive the game stats for the other races. The reasoning on this is simple: We are human. We know what we are capable of. Use humans as Ground Zero.

That said, there's nothing wrong with giving them something (I would vote natural as opposed to supernatural) to speak to their own 'uniqueness', if that makes sense. I think 3.x did a good job with this by granting the bonus feat and extra skill points per level. The skill points option is probably out with the flatter math they are going for, but then you COULD grant them one or two bonus skills based on culture or something. Combined with a bonus feat, I don't think anything else needs to be done.

Ability score modifiers? My opinion on this is don't give humans any modifiers to their ability scores. They are the baseline in my 'perfect D&D game'. Hit the other races with some stat penalties based on subrace or something like that.

Here's the thing people are missing: If you give humans +1 to all ability scores and then a further +1 to a score of their choice, the game starts to heavily favor humans. I like humans. I USUALLY play humans. But that imbalance is too much. One of DDN's core notions is the return of the ability score as king. Are we sure we want humans to totally dominate that arena?

Yes, give them something. But not the keys to the kingdom.

 

[Mercule]

But humans should be used as a baseline from which we derive the game stats for the other races. The reasoning on this is simple: We are human. We know what we are capable of. Use humans as Ground Zero.

That's probably the best I've seen that worded.

Humans are the baseline. They should not have modifiers, especially to something consistent, like stats (I could make an argument for a bonus feat, but that's mainly just the definition of what "standard" entails). If the basic human has an 11 average, then just make the starting point for point buy 9 instead of 8, and penalize the other races. Or make the default stat 3d6+1, whatever.

I think the key to this, though, is that phrase "penalize the other races". They've pretty much already said "penalties aren't fun" so elves don't get a penalty to Con, anymore. Just a bonus to Dex. I don't care for that mentality. If it doesn't make sense for elves to be puny, that's one thing. But to avoid penalties just because they aren't fun is really lame. Besides, if humans are the baseline and get a +1 to all stats, then any race than doesn't get a bonus to a stat is effectively getting a penalty. It's just semantic games and misdirection.

As far as balance goes, I don't see an issue with the typical human adventurer averaging an 11 instead of a 10. Whatever. Even if elves get a +2 to both Int and Dex, that nets to a +1 Int and Dex and a -1 to the other stats.

Odds are, I'd just tell my players I was cutting the crap, humans have unmodified stats, and the other races were universally at -1 to what was listed.

 

[deadwor1d]

I think the key to this, though, is that phrase "penalize the other races". They've pretty much already said "penalties aren't fun" so elves don't get a penalty to Con, anymore. Just a bonus to Dex. I don't care for that mentality. If it doesn't make sense for elves to be puny, that's one thing. But to avoid penalties just because they aren't fun is really lame. Besides, if humans are the baseline and get a +1 to all stats, then any race than doesn't get a bonus to a stat is effectively getting a penalty. It's just semantic games and misdirection.

I keep seeing this pop up--the whole notion that penalties aren't fun. My personal opinion on that is: disagree completely.

I once played a fighter with 7 Wisdom and HAD A BLAST. He might even be my most memorable character.

Sometimes penalties are unfun. I counter with consistency to the myth and legend we're all familiar with (I could probably explain this idea better, but the words are failing me at the moment) is more fun than complaining over the loss of a point of dex on the tubby dwarf.

 

[Mercule]

I keep seeing this pop up--the whole notion that penalties aren't fun. My personal opinion on that is: disagree completely.

I'm with you, if it wasn't clear. One of the most fun characters I ever played had a 5 INT and WIS. Almost 20 years later, he still gets referenced with some regularity.

I think the objection is that it isn't "fun" to be told that your character can never max out his CON. My simple solution is to not play a freaking elf, then. Humans can (should) never get a 19 DEX, either, but elves can. I have extremely low tolerance for that train of thought.

 

[deadwor1d]

I'm with you, if it wasn't clear. One of the most fun characters I ever played had a 5 INT and WIS. Almost 20 years later, he still gets referenced with some regularity.

I think the objection is that it isn't "fun" to be told that your character can never max out his CON. My simple solution is to not play a freaking elf, then. Humans can (should) never get a 19 DEX, either, but elves can. I have extremely low tolerance for that train of thought.

Oh no, you were clear on that point. I was just meandering the observation some. I think the penalties are unfun "problem" may be more a difference in play styles between old-schoolers and new-schoolers. Damn kids and their weird nerdisms trying to replace our weird nerdisms. GET OFFA MAH LAWN. Ahem. >.>

Seriously, though. One person's fun is another person's ZOMGRUN! So with that in mind, how DO we navigate the Human Baseline? However it plays out, I just hate the across the board ability bonus idea. That seems like an illusion to me and it steps on the idea that humans are the familiar ground for measurement of the others...

 

[variant]

While some humans are jacks of all trade, their core feature is ambition and adaptability. That makes them superior specialists and they produce a greater ratio of adventurers and villains. Human adventurers should have a +1 bonus to any two different stats of the player's choice and maybe a racial +1 bonus to Saving Throws (while normal humans should just have +1 to Saves).

Meanwhile Demi-humans should get +1 to their race's specialty stat along with their racial abilities.

- Marty Lund

I do not want 'adventurer human' separated from 'regular human'. They get their racial bonuses because they are human, not because they are 'adventurer human'.

 

[deadwor1d]

I do not want 'adventurer human' separated from 'regular human'. They get their racial bonuses because they are human, not because they are 'adventurer human'.

Agree. And I will further expand that sentiment to other races.

Which leads me to another rambling mash-up of text: monster design and monsters of a race being different from PCs of the same race. It was fail in Basic D&D and it fails just as much (for me) in more recent editions.

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

I don't think the Humans necessarily must, or should, be the baseline by which everything else is calculated. By definition, that means that Humans are not in any fashion distinct.

There should be a hypothetical 'baseline' humanoid to which all PC humanoid races, including Humans, are automatically superior. It has an average of 10.5 in each of its ability scores and gains no racial abilities that are not intrinsic to the humanoid type.

I very much like the idea that Humans are +1 to everything, thus having an average of 11.5 in everything, with the other races averaging 12.5 in two scores and 10.5 in the others. (Growing less and less fond of racial penalties.) This makes Humans theoretically superior-- albeit less focused-- and better capable of mixing diverse class types.