D&D 5E Letting Char-Gen Influence Race Concept

[Hriston]

A recent thread about racial weapon proficiencies got me to thinking about the tension between world consistency, especially with reference to racial concepts, vs character generation. I believe this comes from the fact that PCs are usually built by assigning ability scores, creating an opportunity for optimization based on racial stat bonuses, whereas the game's assumption about NPC abilities across any given race is that they are distributed randomly. It seems that there is a tendency to prioritize the character generation side of this equation, to the possible detriment of the original concept behind the race itself. To what extent do you advocate modifying the existing races to further facilitate character optimization, or, on the other hand, do you feel that character racial features are there to give a character a particular flavor as a member of its race in maintaining that race's identity as part of the larger game-world?

 

[evilbob]

A long while back I was also frustrated at the difference between watching players who had optimal race/class combos with well-placed ability scores vs. players who wanted to play their own thing (and were very unoptimized). It was frustrating because even though the non-optimized players couldn't really put their finger on any one specific thing, they just didn't enjoy the game as much - they failed a little more often, missed a little more often, and didn't really get to DO things a little more often compared to their optimized compatriots. The players wouldn't really even be able to describe their specific frustrations, but I could see it from a meta perspective while leading the game. And I hated that they weren't able to enjoy the game as much because they weren't as optimized. (Also note that there is absolutely a level of relativity in this: if no one were optimized, they probably wouldn't have noticed anything. But when some are and some aren't, it's the comparison that will get you.)

For a while I would just strongly lead players into optimized combinations during character creation, since I knew their overall play experience would be more enjoyable (hit more, succeed more, DO more, etc.) - but I later realized I was effectively ruining their character concepts. Once I realized that, I decided to stop limiting the players, and start adjusting the rules. So I started letting any race give a bonus to any score, for example. Because in the end, it's way more important that someone be able to play the character they want - and not just fail a lot more because it's an oddball (read: interesting) choice - than to keep to any long-standing traditions of subtly encouraging very specific class/race cliches. And it's worked for us ever since.

 

[Hriston]

Awesome response!

I'm not in favor of pushing the same old cliches either, and I like your solution of essentially letting everyone apply a bonus to whatever ability score they want regardless of race, but it does raise a couple of issues.

1. Assuming you are giving non-human characters something like the ability score bonus for variant humans, how do you compensate for that being less than what a mountain dwarf would get, to use an extreme example, if that character used the default bonuses?

2. Doesn't this diminish the individual character of the races, essentially turning them all into variant humans, or do you think other racial features are enough to retain some of that character?

 

[Blue]

I had problems bringing my kids into 4e because of this. My eldest had ideas about what she wanted to do that didn't really fit any class, but when I went though them she was okay with druid. but she have very specific race ideas, which didn't play into druid. And then she wanted a defining trait that she was "agile like spiderman", which put the high ability score rolls into a third place (and not aligned with the race she wanted).

Being 4e, I could have handwaved and said you are race X while using the stats of race Y, but really that was a level of abstraction that took away from the rules providing value for her as well as being confusing.

On a tangent, I'm also playing 13th Age right now and races get a bonus to choice of several relevant abilities and class gets a bonus to a choice of several relevant abilities - and you can't double up. So you can always bump the prime requisite for your class without worrying about taking "the right race". And with race offering several, those will still likely go to something reasonable matched with class no matter how odd you pick.

That said, bounded accuracy is a boon in face of mixing optimized characters with those who aren't. Starting with +1 less to hit/damage is noticeable, but more easily overcome.

I don't see a need to make sure that every racial ability is fully optimized, like changing elves to have a +Str/+Dex because they have longsword and longbow proficiencies. Some of these are flavorful that can be useful if you chose, not must be useful to every player.

 

[Ahrimon]

I've been toying with the idea of removing racial ability bonuses and replacing them with other thematic things. Stuff like, instead of +2 dex and elves get advantage on dex checks. I haven't worked out much for details, but it allows the players to build what they want without worrying about "optimum".

I was really hoping 5e would remove the ability score modifiers.

 

[Hriston]

So it seems that certain races being better suited for certain classes exerts pressure of a sort on players to conform to always using the same race/class combinations in the name of optimization even when it goes against the players' character concepts.

But how can the separate identities of the races be maintained if the solution to the above stated problem is to do away with the mechanical advantages that one race may have compared with others? Is there some way to represent the differences between the races in a way that is class-neutral?

 

[Ahrimon]

So it seems that certain races being better suited for certain classes exerts pressure of a sort on players to conform to always using the same race/class combinations in the name of optimization even when it goes against the players' character concepts.

But how can the separate identities of the races be maintained if the solution to the above stated problem is to do away with the mechanical advantages that one race may have compared with others? Is there some way to represent the differences between the races in a way that is class-neutral?

Quick WAG: Elves: advantage on all dex checks
Dwarves: advantage on con checks
Half-orcs: advantage on str checks
etc

This keeps a mechanical advantage without that advantage being in the ability scores. It divorces the racial advantages from combat advantages which is where I think most players get caught up. They worry about being the best in combat, or that if they're not the best they're group will be upset, etc. The advantages still apply to many situations withing combat but not the direct attack/damage effects.

I guess that what I would like to see is racial distinction that does not directly affect combat.

 

[Paraxis]

The only way to do what you all are talking about would be to remove ability score modifiers from race. I would then grant ability modifiers to the class. Something like if you get proficiency in the saving throw at 1st level you get a +2 to that ability score. Give mountain dwarves and half-elves a little something to compensate.

 

[Ahrimon]

The only way to do what you all are talking about would be to remove ability score modifiers from race. I would then grant ability modifiers to the class. Something like if you get proficiency in the saving throw at 1st level you get a +2 to that ability score. Give mountain dwarves and half-elves a little something to compensate.

I agree, removing ability score modifiers from race would be my preferred game. I don't know if I would give it to the class though. You just end up with another style of "this is the way you should play" with several classes. Give a fighter a str bonus and the dex fighter crowd will be upset. Give a ranger a dex bonus and the melee ranger players will be annoyed. Do clerics get a wisdom bonus? What about the battle clerics that want to have a higher str? Granted this doesn't affect the pure spellcasting classes as much, but it could.

Why not just go with no bonuses to attributes? I'd probably change the point buy and the default array a bit so that folks could start with a 16 rather than 15 being the max. It's slightly lower power curve than regular 5e, but not by much. And there's no worry about X character concept being weaker than Y character concept just because someone wanted to be race A and not race B.

 

[Barantor]

Honestly if I was going to all out homebrew the racial abilities to make the field a bit more even and not ruin characters I would start by giving every race the same thing that humans currently get.

Then I would take a look at some of the racial abilities and see if they could be turned into feats.

Everyone would get human variant starting with either a higher point buy or allowing everyone to boost two stats by +2.

The only real differences then would be the physical look of characters and everyone could effectively get what they want. Yeah elves would probably lose trance and such, but you would gain the ability to make your elf how you like it.