PDA

View Full Version : [3.5] Intelligent Orc Subrace?



Rhiannon87
2009-08-13, 10:38 PM
Second question for the day...

Friend of mine is planning a character for an upcoming campaign, and he swears he saw this subrace of orc in a 3.5 book somewhere. It's a group of orcs that are trying to get rid of the savagery in their race. He's pretty sure they lost the CHA penalty and picked up an INT bonus. He described them as "urbane orcs"; googling and searching the forums here has turned up nothing. So, any ideas? Do these orcs exist or has he just lost his mind?

Eldariel
2009-08-13, 10:55 PM
Gray Orcs exist in Races of Faerun, but they have bonus to Wisdom, not Intelligence. Unfortunately they also have Level Adjustment +1.

Orogs (Deep Orcs) are from the same book and don't have an Int-penalty (though not a bonus either) along with a hefty +2 LA stamp.


That's all I could find. Only other reference I could find is the Tanarukk but I didn't find stats for them and they are outsiders with 5 racial HD anyways so I guess they're not what he's looking for.

Dhavaer
2009-08-13, 10:59 PM
Sharakim, Races of Destiny, I believe.

sofawall
2009-08-13, 10:59 PM
The only smarter "brutish" race I can bring to mind is high ogres, from DragonLance.

AstralFire
2009-08-13, 11:00 PM
Sharakim, Races of Destiny, I believe.

Correct. LA +1.

Sanguine
2009-08-13, 11:11 PM
I concur he's talking about Sharakim, although technically there a subrace of Human not Orc.(At least fluff wise haven't seen there actual stats in a while)

Biffoniacus_Furiou
2009-08-14, 12:06 AM
They're right here. (http://wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20041203a&page=3)

Mongoose87
2009-08-14, 12:40 AM
They're right here. (http://wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20041203a&page=3)

Why the heck is that LA+1?

Kylarra
2009-08-14, 12:43 AM
Why the heck is that LA+1?
Because orcs aren't allowed to have nice things.

Mongoose87
2009-08-14, 12:44 AM
Because orcs aren't allowed to have nice things.

Seriously, the halfling and dwarf both just laugh in that guy's face.

Sanguine
2009-08-14, 12:47 AM
Why the heck is that LA+1?

Only reason I can think of is the natural armor but kobolds have natural armor as well and no LA...

Kylarra
2009-08-14, 12:52 AM
Only reason I can think of is the natural armor but kobolds have natural armor as well and no LA...kobolds are the only ones allowed to have nice things.

RTGoodman
2009-08-14, 01:02 AM
Why the heck is that LA+1?

I think it's probably because of the Int boost - almost no LA +0 has that, and most that do have a Con penalty. This one has a Dex penalty, which is partially off-set by the +1 NA and skill boosts, and has Darkvision and qualifies for human-only stuff (Able Learner, etc.).

Honestly, though, I'd probably allow it at LA +0, and maybe even remove the light sensitivity.

Tempest Fennac
2009-08-14, 01:07 AM
To be honest, I can't see anything about those guys which is worth LA (especiallty since they have Light Sensitivity as well).

awa
2009-08-14, 01:43 AM
personally removing their weakness and dropping their level adjustment is two much they have natural armor a bonus on 4 skills darkvison and a Bonus to strength and int. racial enemies are nothing special and the dex penalty hurts but this race makes a half orc obsolete it can excel in a similar nich now if every player is playing particularly powerful races like elans and water orcs then theirs probably no problem.

Jergmo
2009-08-14, 01:49 AM
You could always...make your own race of orcs. I've done away with the brutish ugly evil orc stereotype in my homebrewed setting, although they're still not as intelligent as humans. However, I wouldn't call them stupid becuse of that; I gave them a bonus to wisdom to make up for it. The orc stats I have are as follows:

+2 Str, +2 Con, -2 Int, +2 Wis
+2 racial bonus on Climb, Jump and Swim checks.
+2 racial bonus on fortitude saves vs. poison.

They don't originate from the Underdark and live aboveground, so no darkvision nonsense. They aren't a race of bloodthirsty barbarians, they're a race of farmers, nomads, and sailors.

And yes, I know, typically those racials should give them a level adjustment because "oh noes, those bonuses are SO POWERFUL", but in reality, they're pretty equal in general power to humans and dwarves.

Edit: This is what was used to determine the strength of stats that a couple folks have been working on and I expanded on a teeny.

Bonuses vs. certain effects (IE: Poison): Good
Bonuses vs. broad effects (IE: Spells): Great
Bonuses in general (IE: +1 on all saving throws): Awesome

Bonuses to certain skills: Crap except in niche builds
Bonuses to certain checks (Stability, thrown weapons): Good
Bonuses to certain stats: Great (usually)
Bonuses to variable things (Bonus feat): Awesome

Crap = 1/3 points
Good = 1 points
Great = 2 points
Awesome = 3 or 4 points

If it has more than 7 points, give it a level adjustment. A minimum of 5 is good. If it has higher than 14 points, give it a level adjustment of +2. And so on.

The core races, as are were, like...

Human and Dwarf = 6-7
Gnome and Halfling = 5
Elf = Friggin' 4 (Yeah, elves ain't so perfect)

JaxGaret
2009-08-14, 01:49 AM
Why the heck is that LA+1?

WotC-published 3e product? Check. Terrible balance issues? Check. Everything seems normal here.

I agree that you can easily just drop them to LA +0 and they're fine. If you drop the Light Sensitivity you should drop the Shadow Affinity as well.

Thurbane
2009-08-14, 01:51 AM
Why the heck is that LA+1?
Tell it to the Hobgoblin! :redcloak:

Jergmo
2009-08-14, 01:54 AM
Tell it to the Hobgoblin! :redcloak:

Hobgoblin = 7 points even with the system I use. :smallannoyed: I treat them as an LA +0 race.

UserClone
2009-08-14, 02:05 AM
For those of you looking at light sensitivity as a genuine hiderance:

For shame.

Sundark goggles, anyone?

Jergmo
2009-08-14, 02:08 AM
For those of you looking at light sensitivity as a genuine hiderance:

For shame.

Sundark goggles, anyone?

But 10 gp is SO MUCH!! :smallamused:

Cyclocone
2009-08-14, 02:15 AM
The discrepancy becomes especially obvious if you try comparing Sharakim to Deep Imaskari. (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20031003b)

Maybe if they had +2 CON instead of +2 STR, they would have been LA +1, but as-is?:smallsigh:

Jergmo
2009-08-14, 02:20 AM
The discrepancy becomes especially obvious if you try comparing Sharakim to Deep Imaskari. (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20031003b)

Maybe if they had +2 CON instead of +2 STR, they would have been LA +1, but as-is?:smallsigh:

That is one of the things that bugs me, that strength is seen as being the most powerful attribute there is according to the DMG for designing races, when Con is an attribute that is important for every class, and the benefits stack as you level. It's the only attribute where this happens. Also...the Deep Imaskari could use a little love. Jeez, what is it with WotC and shafting various races?

Tempest Fennac
2009-08-14, 02:45 AM
Aren't there other items which can be used in the Eye slots which goggles would take up, though? For Hobgoblins, I tend to give them a -2 Cha penalty solely to make it look as though I'm nerfing them to LA 0 (I couldn't think of anything to really cut, but I don't think they really need changing to be honest).

As far as the importance of stats is concerned, I see it as depending entirely on the class (I expect people to try to RP their mental stats in my games as well, so dumping those can be a bad idea).

Wardog
2009-08-14, 04:07 AM
That is one of the things that bugs me, that strength is seen as being the most powerful attribute there is according to the DMG for designing races, when Con is an attribute that is important for every class, and the benefits stack as you level. It's the only attribute where this happens. Also...the Deep Imaskari could use a little love. Jeez, what is it with WotC and shafting various races?

If STR is as good as the DMG claims, shouldn't high strenght have a greater point-buy cost, and shouldn't str-boosting spells be weaker (or higher level) than the equivilent other attribute boosts?


Also, does anyone else think that the fluff for the Sharakim sounds a bit morally dubious?

For example, "Real orcs are evil, and we hate them, because they are like that through no fault of their own, whereas we are like this because our ancestors sinned, and so we are ok".

And the culture seems far too homogenous to be reasonable for an entire race (all their houses are spotless, they all like wear fine clothes, they all "greet anyone they meet openly and cheerfully, often in the stranger's native language" (despite having a CHA penalty), they all like rules (apart from the ones that are chaotic:smallconfused:), they don't like living near rivers; every sharakim feels he has to prove his worth; etc.


Also, even for a world where magic exists and the gods took and take an active role in creation, it seems very unlikely that all humans once lived in the same village, and some were cursed to become Sharakim.

I wouldn't be surprised if these actually are orcs, that have managed to develop a civilized culture, but instead of being proud that they have overcome their more barbaric origins, they (or rather their ancestors) developed an origin myth to convince themselves that we've got nothing to do with them.

Actually, that could lead to an interesting character idea: a sharakim who believes (and tried to convince others) that sharakim are orcs, and that they should be proud of what they have achieved rather than following a basically self-loathing myth; but other sharakim despise him for these ideas, which they view as disgusting and blasphemous.

Thurbane
2009-08-14, 04:13 AM
Yep, WotC say STR is the most powaful abilitah evah! Then design races like the Neanderthal and Skarn, who not only get better ability mods than 1/2 Orcs, but better racial abilities too.

Tempest Fennac
2009-08-14, 04:14 AM
I agree with all of your points, Wardog (I find the "we are like this because of out ancestors" part to be bad enough, but the rest of it makes them look really 1-d). I tend to solve this problem with races by ignoring racial fluff beyond basic things like the sort of settlements they are likely to have and some basic governmental/societal details Regarding the attack bonuses vs. Orcs, I never got how that sort of racial hatred could work for a supposedly Good race (it's the same with Dwarves and their hatred of Goblins, Orcs and Giants and the Lupin's hatred of Lycanthropes).

Wood Elves arguably get better bonuses then Half Orcs as well (they get standard Elf traits with +2 Str and -2 Int).

AstralFire
2009-08-14, 07:36 AM
personally removing their weakness and dropping their level adjustment is two much they have natural armor a bonus on 4 skills darkvison and a Bonus to strength and int. racial enemies are nothing special and the dex penalty hurts but this race makes a half orc obsolete it can excel in a similar nich now if every player is playing particularly powerful races like elans and water orcs then theirs probably no problem.

By 'elans and water orcs' you mean 'humans and dwarves', right?

And frankly, everything makes a half orc or half elf obsolete.

Rhiannon87
2009-08-14, 07:45 AM
That's probably it. I'll show that to the future DM of the campaign, he might make some changes... as has been quite thoroughly pointed out, level adjustment wtf?

Thanks everyone!