Is a constitution penalty consistent with the long lifespan of elves?

[drnuncheon]

Perhaps if they didn't have the Con penalty, they'd live even longer...

J

 

[Dirigible]

(digging through notes)

Maximum lifespans in my campaign :
Humans, halflings : 120 years
Orcs : 125 years (due to improved recuperation, and sheer frigging toughness)
Dwarves : 500 years
Elves : 95 years

I have never, never, never liked the Tolkienesque long lived elves (except in Tolkien's works themselves, of course).
I figure that the light that burns twice as bright burns half as long. Elves, with their joyous lives and fragile constitutions live only a fraction of a human lifespan, but many times richer for it. On the other hadn, due to their affinity for magic, they have slightly easier access than most other races to longevity magic.

 

[Tsyr]

Your proposed race is easily +1 ECL.

Penalties/Bonuses do not quite work like that, you cannot simply reverse them. On the other hand you might consider +2 Int, -2 Str, which is a reasonable adjustment and almost like grey elves.

Why? If wizards of the coast says +2 STR is worth loosing -2 INT and -2 CHA, then I don't see why the reverse isn't balanced.

Mind you, I personaly disagree with that assessment to begin with. I think all ability scores, in the long run, should be valued equaly... +2 STR should ONLY be balanced by -2 to 1 other stat. But WotC set the precedent here, that STR is the "best" stat and thus worth more.

And looking at some of the +1 ECL races... Uh-uh. I don't see how that is "easily" +1 at all.

 

[Tsyr]

Re: not important

You got a major PC race, it has got to have balancing penalties. So why worry about such details? Recall too that our picture of an elf -skinny- does give us a picture of a weak constitution.

You give the elf normal con, you have got to go to the trouble of giving him a different penalty, and getting your players to accept that, and making sure you don't mess up, which you may well, and...
You have better things to do with your time.

So... What your saying is, DMs should never change anything that doesn't feel right to them? In other words, that whole "Rule 0" bit in the beginning of the book is just a lie?

As to "Don't bother, because you might mess up"... Wow. That sounds an awful lot like homers "The moral of the story is, never try", which is one of the most horrible ways to live your life I can imagine.

Furthermore, how do you know he has better things to do with his time, and what buisness is it of yours at any rate?

 

[Bagpuss]

Heck I go with the Birthright type elves...

Elves resist aging and normal disease – only magical dis-eases such as lycanthrope can harm them. They cannot see in total darkness, but can see by starlight or moonlight as well as a human sees by daylight. Elves don't need to sleep, but they can become physically exhausted and must rest quietly, study-ing spells or standing watch, for about as long as a human needs to sleep. Cerilian elves can move over heavy snow, soft sand, or a mountainside as easily as a human walks across a level surface.

and the standard +2 Dex, -2 Con and it doesn't seem to cause a balance problem.

 

[RingXero]

Why? If wizards of the coast says +2 STR is worth loosing -2 INT and -2 CHA, then I don't see why the reverse isn't balanced.

In DMG 3.5 pg 173
They balance the physical and mental skills differently, and whether a bonus or negative is applied is handled differently.
------------------------------------------------
Ability score equivalencies:
A.S. Bonus Ability Score or Scores Penalty
Strength--------Dex OR Con OR Int and Cha OR Int and Wis OR Wis and Cha

Dexterity--------Str OR Con OR Int and Cha OR Int and Wis OR Wis and Cha

Con---------------Dex OR Int OR Wis OR Cha

Int----------------Wis OR Cha

Wis---------------Int OR Cha

Cha---------------Int OR Wis
--------------------------------------------

They also point out that it is ok to have a 'weaker' race by not evening out the penalties (ex. +2 Cha, -2 Str) but be aware that some players may not want to play it.

So in the end they point out that a -2 to Str is worth more than the +2 to Cha, valuing the physical stats above mental in both positive and negative.

This is of course based on the assumption that physical combat will happen more often than diplomatic encounters in the average D&D campaign. But then I still have a problem with it overall, as you do. If I had a campaign that centered around magic use or diplomacy more than physical combat, then the +2 to int or cha would be worth more than the physical values.

Elves in my campaign are -2 Str, -2 Con, +2 Dex, +2 Int, +2 Cha.
I personally feel that this is a little top heavy but overall balanced, considering some penalties in the game with playing an elf. Would this be considered balanced for everyone? no, but it balances out in my campaign which is all that matters. This also allowed me to give the half elves a +2 to Cha, to balance what I felt where some inadequacies in their alotment.

 

[WizarDru]

I have trouble reconciling a constitution penalty with the elven lifespan. Consequently, I have two (surface) elven subraces, neither of which has a constitution penalty. I would be interested in hearing other posters views on this, though.

Consider then, that elves don't rule the world. A powerful elder race of magic-wielders who are masters of several weapons as a race. Why, then, aren't they masters of all they survey? They don't sleep as other races do, and their time of inactivity is a mere 4 hours. They are resistant to enchantments, and other abilities, as well. In the Greyhawk setting, they taught magic to humans, for the most part.

Consider, then, that CON does not directly translate into fragile, per se, but more fragile than other races. Their birth rates are lower, possibly due to the rigors of childbirth being more hazardous for both mother and child. Elves may be frailer than humans, who tend to adapt to environments better than any other race...perhaps Elves, outside of their native environment, tend to adapt poorly. That is to say that a wood-elf may find living in the mountains, plains or sea coast much more difficult and hazardous than a human in a similar situation. Given how elves are usually protrayed as insular, sometimes to the level of xenophobia, this seems appropriate. By segmenting themselves off, they propagate the problem, genetically speaking. Note how many elven subraces seem radically different from each other.

Simply put, the CON score doesn't have to mean a purely weak and sickly race...just that it reflects an aspect of their makeup.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

Why? If wizards of the coast says +2 STR is worth loosing -2 INT and -2 CHA, then I don't see why the reverse isn't balanced.

I'd say becuase the stat penalties and bonuses don't blend well. For the classes that want a high int a str penalty is meaningless. Virtually the same is true for chr excpet for the case of the paladin, and a physical combat focussed bard.(which I have yet to see)

If your going to give a benefit to a stat I'd say look at what class that stat is primarily for. Now which stat is still important enough to that class that getting a bonus in your most important stat still balances it to some degree. A +2 int or chr isn't even balanced under this theory with a penalty to str. A +2 int and chr isn't even close to balanced with a penalty to str.

Heck in the case of INT for wizards virtually no penalty really balances well with this. Con comes close, but with a d4 hp its very easy to accept that fact that you just suck in HP and just do your best to just avoid getting hit or anywhere near melle combat.

I personally think they were wrong with their +2 str = -2 int and chr, or at least for my games. A -1 to skills at every level is dang near crippling in my games and no other penalties would be needed. Though a -2 to chr wouldn't be enough on its own though.

 

[BigFreekinGoblinoid]

These types of discussions are always amoosing. The hardest part for me to understand about the "elf phenomenon" was why they would have less skill points at level 1 than a human, but have a MUCH higher starting age. What the hell do elves do for 20 hours a day without gaining any knowledge or skills? Play video games? Surf the net for pron?

You can assign more ability bonuses or skill points ( etc. etc. ) to Elves, and assign them an ECL if this pleases your sense of "plausibility", but where do you stop? Dwarves and other races will no doubt need adjustments too.

Much in our favorite hobby requires a suspension of plausibility in the name of "balance". You can choose to not get hung up on it, or just make your own rules. Balance is overrated anyway. -Just don't be surprised when every player shows up with a character sheet with "elf" filled in for race...

 

[Simplicity]

What the hell do elves do for 20 hours a day without gaining any knowledge or skills? Play video games? Surf the net for pron?

It's the elves arrogance that gets 'em. It takes much longer to teach young elves anything because they're always like:
"Pfffft... Bows. Like THAT will ever work."

Also, I wouldn't assume that a high Con means long life. Recent studies on caloric reduction show that you could probably increase your life span considerably by cutting down on the amount of food you eat and staying in a constant state of hunger. I might consider that a Con penalty...