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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Clay_More" data-source="post: 4379233" data-attributes="member: 9813">Howdy SigurdI agree that the LA is a little bit on the low side for a standard campaign, and it is a bit my fault for not explaining it better when I posted the race. I have given all races a boost in power relative to LA, meaning that even LA 0 races will be a bit more potent than standard PhB races. For example, humans have a number of additional traits in addition to those listed in the PhB. They gain a free +2 increase to an ability score of their choice, they select a skill when they're created that they can treat as class-skill no matter what class they pick, and they have the ability to "retrain", enabling them to switch one feat with another when they level up (naturally, they have to fulfill all requirements for the new feat, and they can't remove a feat if other feats have it as prerequisite). I still don't know, even with the advantages given to humans, if the orc has too low LA.As for the reduced critical chance, I have previously experimented with it as a magic item in my campaign had a similar ability. It worked out decently, it did occasionally get forgotten, but usually it worked. An ogre is different from the orcs in that the ogre doesn't have the redundancy in design that the orcs do. They have on heart, one kidney, etc. The orcs, on the other hand, have spares of virtually all vital organs, in addition to a thicker bone-growth around the brain. You can injure on orc, naturally, but your chance of striking a part of the orc's body that will critically diminish his ability to operate is far lower than the chance of performing such a critical attack on a normal humanoid. Why don't creatures in "real life" have such redundancy in their design? Well, they do, to some extent. We have two lungs, we have the ability to regrow some of our body-parts (such as our liver), but generally there is a cost associated with redundancy that isn't worth paying for a creature.While historically, injury would be a common cause of death amongst humans, few animals have natural attacks that allow them to harm our internal organs. Usually, an animal kills its foe by causing blood-loss, asphyxiation or poisoning, none of which can be negated through the redundancy I implemented for the orcs. Only in relatively modern times do you experience humans dying from "critical" injuries, as weapons have the ability to injure our internal organs or brain. Hmmm, think this explanation is getting a little out of hand, but anyways, the ogre is a naturally evolved creature who wouldn't gain any immediate benefit from redundancy, whereas the orc is a created being made  for medieval warfare. Thats also why I implemented the trait of "high metabolism" to give this redundancy a cost (a cost which would be quite critical in situations where there is a scarcity of food). I do though agree that having a critical-reducing trait might be a bit wonky to implement. It requires that the players and DM remember to calculate it in when rolling attack rolls. Gah I really ramble sometimes.</blockquote>

Verification