Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Beholder Bob" data-source="post: 1442614" data-attributes="member: 12866">The PHB does not provide a numeric framework to compare the racial abilities and their cumalitive worth.  You can not compare it in pure PH terms - it will have to boil down to 'I think this is roughly equal to that, cause of this'.  We tried that already with the -2 dex/+2 natural armor - and that boils down to opinion.  Use the savage species book if you need 'official' ratings - though that automatically starts you out at +1 ecl - that darn natural armor.My opinion - they are imbalanced.  The races were made not with a breakdown of value, but of transfering past editions over, trying to keep flavor and meet expectations.  So the races would almost have to be imbalanced - eh?  It is not a bad thing to be imbalanced (or, perhaps we should say, have a wide margin) - but as a general rule, balance is prefered.  By my and upper krusts system - we found dwarves & gnomes have more benefits (in value if not number) then the other races.  You may disagree with us - but outside of the savage species book - there is no attempt to quantify the races.  I made my system because I was making new races - and wanted to be able to more then just 'eyeball them' for balance.  If you go by straight PHB - there is no formal way to compare.For the record - have you looked at savage species yet?  You should - it is the only 'official' way of measuring races published right now.  I (and I believe upper krust) find it a clumsy tool - which is why we have made our own systems.If I, Upper Krust, and that book agree that your race is ECL +1 unless reigned in, does it matter to you?</blockquote>

Verification