What core 3.5 race is the weakest?

[Malin Genie]

The half-elf's major problem IMHO is that the major role envisaged for them is the 'diplomat' (made more explicit with the 3.5E skill bonuses.) However a 'diplomat' bard/rogue is aa skill-based choice, and the human +1 skill point/level quickly overcomes the limited initial bonuses offered to the half-elf.

Elves make better scouts - better Spot/Listen bonuses and +2 Dex to help with the Hide/Move Silently checks (although the Favoured Class:Any might perhaps give half-elves a niche role as multi-class ranger/Xs.)

So definitely half-elves - each of the other races has their place to shine but there are few roles in which a half-elf is mechanically a better choice than either the human or elvish 'parent'.

 

[Ogre Mage]

I'd have to agree with the majority -- the half elf. Half-orc is a close second, but their racial abilities are strongly tailored toward fulfilling a necessary role -- the frontline fighter. For this reason alone they have a niche. The half elf is just a sucktard.

I am a little surprised that some see the elf as the weakest race. Elves can be very good. Many skills are DEX based, as is initiative and ranged attacks. This is a big plus for elven rogues. The -2 CON certainly hurts big time, but I don't think that alone makes elves the worst race.

+2 to Listen, Spot and Search is hardly a useless benefit, especially for rogues, druids and rangers. In most games, these are the 3 most commonly utilized skills. Considering how often you will make these rolls, it is a strong benefit.

Sleep immunity is pretty useless after low levels, but +2 vs. enchantments is nice. Admittedly the +2 vs. magic of dwarves is better.

Low-light vision: great for rogues and rangers.

Auto proficiency with longbow, longsword, and rapier: some have commented that this is useless for elven wizards because they have such a bad BAB anyway. But what about elven rogues, druids and clerics? This is a big benefit for them. The elven cleric-archer is one of the most powerful archetypes around.

All in all the elf abilities seems very well suited toward playing

*Cleric-Archer
*Ranger-Archer
*Rogue (any type)

Especially given that the cleric and rogue are mainstays of any party, I would say the elf race is strong, not weak.

LOL that someone actually voted for dwarf as weakest race.

 

[Thanee]

Elves are pretty good as Rogue/Wizards, too.

Half-Orcs are pretty bad, if you count their disadvantages against their advantages, but they have a unique (and very powerful) +2 Str increase.

Half-Elves simply have nothing going for them.

Bye
Thanee

 

[LostSoul]

Elves are good Wizards. The Bow prof and the +2 Dex keeps them alive and contributing at low levels. (Once Wizards hit med- to high-levels, they don't really need massive Con. Because if you take damage, you're doing something wrong. )

Half-Orcs are great warriors. Fighters, Barbarians. You could even make a case for a Half-Orc Cleric of War. Who needs Cha or Int when you have an 18 Str and Wis?

Half-Elves, while improved from previous versions, fill no niche (the "jack of all trades" is taken by the Humans (stupid Humans)). Half-Elves would be better if they got, say, 1 extra skill pint (yes, an extra pint of skills, that's not a typo) every even level.

 

[Scratched_back]

I vote Half-Elf for worst base race... somebody move over, there's no room left on the damn bandwagon!

I'm stunned however, that anyone would ever consider the full blooded elf as worst race though. +2 DEX can't be a bad thing. As far as I see it, it's the stat that modifies the most things in the game anyway, most heavy-play factors at least. AC, Initiative, Reflex Save and Ranged Attack Bonus. Not other stat increases affect that many large factors... or am I mistaken?

The other freebies Elves get are also useful, as many people have already pointed out in this thread, some are excellent, some are negligable, but the sheer frequency of the bonuses does it for me.

Lucky we all play what we feel in our hearts we want to play then, and numbers don't come into it then eh?

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Gnomes get rated low because they're seen as wimpy, and there's no good RP reason to play one.

I played one in 3e once - just to play a wizard with a high Con score. Other than for such pure powergaming, I can't think of any reason why I'd play a gnome.

 

[Epametheus]

Wow, someone voted Dwarf. So 1 out of 329 at this point.

I voted Half-orc -- I conceptually like them, but all they are is +2 Str and Darkvision, and they're pretty heavily discouraged from taking 4 different classes (wizard, paladin, bard, and sorcerer). Half-elves are at least flexible, even if they have nothing cool.

 

[Brain]

in 3.5 i'd say halflings are the worst. being small sucks for fighter types, and caster types are better off being a gnome if they have to be small.

 

[Ogre Mage]

Halflings and Gnomes

With regards to halflings and gnomes, their small size and -2 STR does make them bad for warrior types. But their small size, +2 DEX/CON and variety of other bonuses make them a strong choice for an arcane caster or rogue. Halflings in particular are exceptional rogues, while gnomes are good druids as well.

 

[Thanee]

Wow, someone voted Dwarf. So 1 out of 329 at this point.

You don't expect that vote to be meant serious, or do you?

Well, or maybe they are playing in a olympics style campaign, where dwarves are pretty bad at running, pole-vaulting and stuff like that.

Bye
Thanee