What core 3.5 race is the weakest?

[jerichothebard]

I gotta go gnome, especially with the favored class of bard. I mean, really - let's saddle the dwarf-lite with a mediocre favored class and watch them squirm.

Bard doesn't even fit their archetype.

Plus:
Strength penalty. (ON TOP of the cut to carrying capacity for being small)
Speed penalty.
Didn't even get dark vision like thier cooler cousins, the dwarves.



Even in 3.0, they're saddled with illusionist, which also is pretty mediocre.



meh.
gnomes.


jtb

 

[wizardneedsfood]

The half-elf? Why, well because the half-elf is the only race that I'd like to play conceptually that I never do. Anything they can do, can be done better with a human or an elf. All the other races I think work pretty well, even the half-orcs. Of course, any race that doesn't have to carry a torch has an advantage in dungeon crawls.

 

[d4]

Bard doesn't even fit their archetype.

sure it does, if you consider them mystical beings of illusion and trickery.

or are you one of those people who think tinker gnomes are the real gnomes?

 

[Mr. Kaze]

I have to say that horcs are weaker than helves simply because the helves have rather more versatility via race-specific PrCs available to them (Arcane Archer [DMG], Foe Stalker(?) [CW], Seeker of Misty Isle [CD]). Horcs can become an "Eye of Gruumesh" [CW] or somesuch, but presumably only by worshipping the evil Orc god.

I'm not sure where gnomes fall in there -- a small creature mismatch of other races' features with probably the weakest standard class as their favored class? Doesn't bode well for them. While they're not crimped on casting as a straight wizard or somesuch like a horc would be, one still has to consider the racial benefits of being a halfling wizard instead.

Cheers,
::Kaze

 

[Thanee]

I surely wouldn't trade all that for a mere +2 Strength.

Not that it really helps, but you would also get +10' movement in comparison!

Bye
Thanee

 

[Kalendraf]

I voted gnome mostly because nobody in my campaigns is ever willing to play one, considering them to be weak and worthless. I guess I'm a bit guilty of that too, since when I've had the chance, I've never opted to play a gnome either.

I don't think they did a good enough job in differentiating the gnome, and it ended up being some kind of wannabe dwarf in a halfling-sized frame.

 

[Zudrak]

I went with Half-Orc. Only because they're always the stereotype of the slow-witted brute. Horc smash! Horc fight! Like Dr. Banner after someone makes him mad -- ALL THE TIME. Helves are close behind because, as one person wrote earlier, they're conceptually cool, but the human and elf are better. But at least they can conceivably be any class. Horcs are limited, conceptually, to the fighting classes and the cleric.

I love the human for the feat and skill points. It gives you a three level start on the other races, as someone stated before. That's a great headstart on the way to PrC goodness.

Question on the gnome. Wouldn't either psion (if you're playing a psionic campaign) or sorcerer make a better standard class, just based on the trickster personality? Maybe that's a question for another topic...

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Not that it really helps, but you would also get +10' movement in comparison!

Only as long as he's lightly armoured. In medium armour or heavier, the dwarf and half-orc have equivalent speed. And since they're both fighter-type races, it's not that odd to have both the half-orc and the dwarf in heavy armour.

 

[Dark Jezter]

I voted half-elves, simply because they aren't especially good at anything. They have a mishmash of elf and human racial abilites that don't particularly add up to anything impressive.

Half-orcs may look weak on paper, but I've found that in actual gameplay they can be quite powerful. Obviously, they make kickass fighters and barbarians.

 

[Slife]

Haflings or gnomes. Half-orcs are strongest.

Gnomes are least powerful. Half halfling, half dwarf.