New Race: Gutterkin

[Thraka]

Not liking gnomes, halflings, or goblins for my campaign world’s Small race, I cobbled together my own. Enter the Gutterkin- I tried to model them off of the gnomes in Majesty, which are basically little grubby humanoids that live on the outskirts of civilization. Gutterkin are industrious, quick, and able to survive on refuse, but alas: they’re not terribly bright.

Anyway, this is what I came up with. I can’t decide if it’s too powerful or not powerful enough (which probably means it’s about right), or just not different enough from the standard halfling. Anyway, I’d love to hear your comments, so without further ado:

Gutterkin Racial Traits
• +2 Dexterity, -2 Intelligence. Gutterkin are quick and strong for their size, but don't do well when in comes to thinking ahead, or thinking in abstracts, or thinking at all.
• Small: As a Small creature, a gutterkin gains a +1 size bonus to Armor Class, a +1 size bonus on attack rolls, and a +4 size bonus on Hide checks, but he uses smaller weapons than humans use, and his lifting and carrying limits are three-quarters of those of a Medium character.
• A gutterkin's base speed is 30 feet. Gutterkins' speed has helped them get out of danger on more than one occasion.
• +2 racial bonus on Spot, Search, and Listen checks. Having been forced to live in particularly hazardous areas, gutterkin have learned to always be wary of potential hazards.
• +2 racial bonus on Move Silently checks. Gutterkin have found that keeping quiet is invariably tied to a longer life expectancy.
• +1 racial bonus on all saving throws. Survival of the fittest is the name of the game for gutterkin, and those that are fittest are the ones best able to shrug off the poisons, diseases, falling rubble, collapsing shanties, and other accidents that plague gutterkin communities.
• Automatic Languages: Common, Gutterkin.
• Bonus Languages: Dwarven, Elven, Orc.
• Favored Class: Ranger. A multiclass gutterkin’s ranger class does not count when determining whether he or she takes an experience point penalty for multiclassing.

 

[Tonguez]

nice goblin

 

[Angel Tarragon]

For some reason, they remind me of kender.

 

[monboesen]

I think they should have a -2 str penalty (that already makes them quite strong for small creatures who usually has a -4 str penalty).

Otherwise they will be better fighters than many medium races. the smaller weapon size is more or less cancelled out by using power attack and taking advantage of their size bonus to hit. They will have a better AC, same move and so on.

It also seems wrong that a creature of about 1-1,20 meters high would be as strong as a human almost twice its height and quadruple its weight.

Perhaps -2 str and +2 con will be fitting. Either in addition to the dex/str adjustment or replacing it.

 

[ARandomGod]

I think they should have a -2 str penalty (that already makes them quite strong for small creatures who usually has a -4 str penalty).

Otherwise they will be better fighters than many medium races. the smaller weapon size is more or less cancelled out by using power attack and taking advantage of their size bonus to hit. They will have a better AC, same move and so on.

It also seems wrong that a creature of about 1-1,20 meters high would be as strong as a human almost twice its height and quadruple its weight.

Perhaps -2 str and +2 con will be fitting. Either in addition to the dex/str adjustment or replacing it.

While I understand where you're coming from, if you research the math of the penalties involved you'll discover the penalty for small size IS an effective strength penalty. (Sometimes a very high one, depending on weapon-type). It averages out to about a -4 strength penalty if you just look at normal weapons and ignore high end cases like high level monks. (Edit: and looking at encumberance/carrying capacity, etcetera). Giving an additional -2 should just be for specially weak creatures.

 

[monboesen]

While I understand where you're coming from, if you research the math of the penalties involved you'll discover the penalty for small size IS an effective strength penalty. (Sometimes a very high one, depending on weapon-type). It averages out to about a -4 strength penalty

I don't quite get that.

A gutterkin fighter with power attack armed with say a longsword will do 1d6 points of damage. Compared with a medium creature he will be at +1 to hit. If he then power attacks for 1, he will do 2-7 damage compared to the medium fighters 1d8 (also armed with a longsword). Same average for both.

That match will hold true with all one damage dice weapons. The difference will get larger with some of the two damage dice weapons.

IMO the gutterkins major weakness would be grabbling where his -4 adjustment will spell doom.

But should the medium fighter and the gutterkin engage in other feats of strength (except lifting) they will be even. I would be freakishly scared if a creature that small matched my strength.

 

[Thraka]

I would be freakishly scared if a creature that small matched my strength.

Heh, that’s kind of what I was going for- everyone looks down on these wiry, little nebbishes, but they’re much stronger than they look. Sort of in the same vein that Terry Pratchett does his gnomes.

But yeah, I see where you’re coming from, monboesen. I’m still a little leery of dropping their strength (since that's part of my concept for them), so here's some ideas for other penalties that could apply to make up for it:

• –2 Cha penalty (which means they’ll sort of end up as short half-orcs, since they’ll be high-ish strength and –2 Int, -2 Con).
• Dropping their speed down to 20 ft (bringing them in line with other Small creatures, except goblins and kobolds).
• Lastly, I could take awaay their Dex bonus, and just leave them with the Int and Cha penalties, since they’re effectively getting a Str bonus.

Thoughts? Would any one of these (or even a combination) be all right?

 

[ARandomGod]

I don't quite get that.

A gutterkin fighter with power attack armed with say a longsword will do 1d6 points of damage. Compared with a medium creature he will be at +1 to hit. If he then power attacks for 1, he will do 2-7 damage compared to the medium fighters 1d8 (also armed with a longsword). Same average for both.

That match will hold true with all one damage dice weapons. The difference will get larger with some of the two damage dice weapons.

IMO the gutterkins major weakness would be grabbling where his -4 adjustment will spell doom.

The double dice weapons, mid to high level monks, feats like monkey grip or improved natural attack where you try to get larger to increase your damage... the enlarge spell which is almost a staple on the fighter in some games.

I mean, why would a *fighter* use a longsword?

OK, I admit, sometimes they do. But still, "if he then power attacks for one", you're including a feat cost to get back to the damage that the longsword weilder would have. And since you're power attacking with a one handed weapon there, I can counter with another feat the medium longsword wielder could use to catch up... weapon specialization. (Now if you were using a two handed weapon for both, then I could see why both would use the power attack feat... but then you're into double dice weapons and once again the smaller guy is at a disadvantage. But for a longsword wielder it's probable that the only reason they'd be getting that power attack is to 'catch up' to the damage potential of a larger opponent)

But should the medium fighter and the gutterkin engage in other feats of strength (except lifting) they will be even. I would be freakishly scared if a creature that small matched my strength.

That does seem like the idea. And I think it makes a good picture. There's some biological evidence to back up the possibility as well. Although you're right, a smaller person is in general less powerful, that's a smaller HUMAN. Chimps are smaller than humans (about gutterkin size?) and are indeed stronger.

I also like the idea of them being just as fast as a human. Making them seem like they're really speeding along, comparatively.

 

[ARandomGod]

Heh, that’s kind of what I was going for- everyone looks down on these wiry, little nebbishes, but they’re much stronger than they look. Sort of in the same vein that Terry Pratchett does his gnomes.

I LOVED Terry Pratchets little gnomes. Of course, to do THAT you'd have to make them smaller still, give them all mobility (or tumble as a racial "class skill"), and give them a bonus to strength!

But yeah, I see where you’re coming from, monboesen. I’m still a little leery of dropping their strength (since that's part of my concept for them), so here's some ideas for other penalties that could apply to make up for it:

I don't think that monboesen disagreed with the overall 'power level' of the race, just with the lack of strength penalty. (That was my reading anyhow). And they're not really effectively getting a strength bonus... the size penalties for race building does not automatically include a hit to strength (that just seems to be highly recommended), as they always get a bonus to make up for that additional hit.

If you did want to give them a -2 to strength (which would be consistent) then you'd be relatively obliged to give them a +2 somewhere else... or other additional racial features.

Overall, as it is the build seems a pretty strong build, but not approaching dwarfishly strong! A pretty good build overall.

Thinking about the int penalty ... racially that's going to be a pretty big thing. This race would make pretty good rogues and wizards, but both of those classes rely pretty highly on intelligence. Which means it's a better sorceror class. And potentially ranger, looking at it from a ranged fighting perspective. If you wanted to allow them to be good melee fighters you'd have to give them a racial +4 to grapple... (to make up for the size modifier), because that's going to be a big issue in melee combat. I think that as written they're best suited to a ranged attack class, so ranger is a good fit for 'favored class'.

A racial +4 to grapple? That's a pretty strong ability. I still don't think that would put it in the realm of the all mighty dwarf (IMO one of the most "powerful" +0 ECL races), but it would put it a little closer. (Edit: Maybe only a +2? They'd still be the underdog in a grapple, but at only 1/2 the penalty you'd think they'd be at...)

But personally I'd do it. It's not a full bonus feat (not quite improved grapple), but it's close to one.

 

[monboesen]

I don't think that monboesen disagreed with the overall 'power level' of the race

Correct. I do not think they are overpowered.