PDA

View Full Version : [3.5] Alternative Orc Racial Attributes



Jergmo
2009-09-19, 04:32 PM
Alright, so I think it's plain silly that orcs get so little love and are pretty much stupid about everything except at killing things with big sticks. So I've come up with the following attributes:

Edited;

Orcs
+2 Con, -2 Int
Medium: As Medium creatures, Orcs have no special bonuses or penalties due to their size.
Orc base land speed is 30 feet.
+2 racial bonus on Climb, Swim, Listen and Spot checks.
Low-Light Vision: An orc can see twice as far as a human in starlight, moonlight, torchlight, and similar conditions of poor illumination. It retains the ability to distinguish color and detail under these conditions.
Weapon Proficiency: Orcs receive the Exotic Weapon Proficiency feat for the Orcish Goleyo.
Favored Class: Druid

Goleyo: 2d4 damage, 19-20 x2 critical. 10 ft. range increment, 2 lbs., slashing damage.

(The Goleyo is based on the African Hunga Munga. Goleyo is actually an alternative name that a specific tribe uses for it.)

Gorgondantess
2009-09-19, 04:42 PM
Easily LA+1. Even out the stats so that the attribute bonuses add up to 0.

Jergmo
2009-09-19, 04:46 PM
Easily LA+1. Even out the stats so that the attribute bonuses add up to 0.

But...then it's not really worth playing if it were +1 LA. Also, if its bonuses added up to 0, it would be a mere 2 point race.

Gorgondantess
2009-09-19, 04:49 PM
But...then it's not really worth playing.

Then things like elves aren't worth playing either. The vast majority of LA0 races add up to a net bonus of +0, and those that don't are widely considered OP. Drop some bonuses/add some penalties and throw them a bonus feat.

Jergmo
2009-09-19, 04:50 PM
Then things like elves aren't worth playing either. The vast majority of LA0 races add up to a net bonus of +0, and those that don't are widely considered OP. Drop some bonuses/add some penalties and throw them a bonus feat.

Well, actually, elves are underpowered. They add up to 4 points. A dwarf, with all of its myriad bonuses besides attributes, are worth 6-7 points.

Gorgondantess
2009-09-19, 04:53 PM
Well, actually, elves are underpowered. They add up to 4 points. A dwarf, with all of its myriad bonuses besides attributes, are worth 6-7 points.

:smallsigh:
Alright, fine. Listen, I think it's OP. Like, incredibly. No chance I'd let it in one of my games. If you disagree... fine. That's your choice, and I respect that.

Jergmo
2009-09-19, 04:56 PM
:smallsigh:
Alright, fine. Listen, I think it's OP. Like, incredibly. No chance I'd let it in one of my games. If you disagree... fine. That's your choice, and I respect that.

But how? Explain that, because I fail to see how it's overpowered compared to something like a dwarf.

The Orc has +2 on some skills that don't mean squat, +2 vs. poison (which dwarves have), and +1 attack and damage with melee, as well as +1 fortitude, concentration, and +1 hp per level, +1 will, and fewer skill points. Now compare it to other races and tell me that's overpowered.

Gorgondantess
2009-09-19, 04:59 PM
But how? Explain that, because I fail to see how it's overpowered compared to something like a dwarf.

Because attribute bonuses are big. A +4 net bonus is generally considered to be worth +1 LA. Some consider a +2 net bonus to be worth +1 LA. How many LA0 races do you see with even a +2 net bonus? All I can think of is the lesser tiefling and aasimar (which are, again, considered to be very OP.)

Jergmo
2009-09-19, 05:02 PM
Because attribute bonuses are big. A +4 net bonus is generally considered to be worth +1 LA. Some consider a +2 net bonus to be worth +1 LA. How many LA0 races do you see with even a +2 net bonus? All I can think of is the lesser tiefling and aasimar (which are, again, considered to be very OP.)

Okay, why are attribute bonuses so powerful when a bonus to two attributes is equal to a bunch of lesser miscellaneous bonuses? That doesn't make sense. I could give miscellaneous bonuses that mirror what the attributes give to a t and it would be fine, so why is it overpowered when I merely simplify things?

Gorgondantess
2009-09-19, 05:10 PM
Okay, why are attribute bonuses so powerful when a bonus to two attributes is equal to a bunch of lesser miscellaneous bonuses? That doesn't make sense. I could give miscellaneous bonuses that mirror what the attributes give to a t and it would be fine, so why is it overpowered when I merely simplify things?

Do they? +2 str gives, with a 2 handed weapon, +1 to attack and +1.5 to damage, as well as bonuses to a bunch of checks. Is that equivalent to a miscellaneous ability? ...Not really.
+2 con gives a bonus to a save, +1 hp/level, and a bonus to a skill that is very important to casters. Once again, lesser miscellaneous bonus? I think not.
+2 wis gives a bonus to a bunch of skills, a save, and if it's your casting stat it's pretty friggin incredible.
I honestly disagree with you. Abilities are important.

Amros Aldarion
2009-09-19, 05:12 PM
Well, technically, every benefit you give him stats wise also has bonuses skills wise.

Consider that Orcs, given your stat line, also receive a +1 to all strength skills and a +1 to all constitution based skills, and a +1 to all wisdom based skills. In addition to this, they gain racial skill bonuses whose benefits stack with their stat bonuses.

This race makes for a powerful fighter, cleric, paladin, sorcerer, monk, druid, bard, ranger, and barbarian. The only things that are specifically hurt by its abilities are rogues and wizards (though both bards and rangers take some pain in the skills area).

With the benefits you've given to Strength and Constitution AND wisdom, I would recommend a harsher penalty to intelligence and maybe a penalty to charisma. If that's too much for you, give them the daylight antipathy that orcs have, to give them a bit of balance.

You mention that Dwarves have a series of bonuses that is vast in comparison to Orcs and Elves. Consider giving the Orc similar benefits in place of that strength (or constitution) modifier. Perhaps the Orc gets benefits to hit against certain foes, resistances against certain spells, whatever you like - so long as its a conditional benefit. The Dwarve's power often only excels when fighting giants and spellcasters. Perhaps the Orc has special benefits against Elves, for example, or certain spell schools are prefered by them (do you envision them as being more divinely aligned with this wisdom benefit or simply more in tune with their surroundings?).

You could change their skill set to reflect that wisdom bonus and get rid of both the strength benefit and the wisdom benefit in favor of a slew of skill bonuses and combat abilities.

Also, a final technical question, do you mean a Half-Orc?

Jergmo
2009-09-19, 05:19 PM
No, this is just what regular Orcs are like. And I can see what you mean in some cases, but the difference is, the laundry list of misc. stuff cannot be taken away with attribute penalties/damage, while the attribute bonuses can. And I was aiming for being more in tune with their surroundings. Orcs strike me as being wisdom-y if not intelligence-y. As is, they're just idiots in the wilderness with big sticks. I wanted them to actually be good at living where they live.

As examples I was thinking of: Halflings have a +1 bonus to all saves. +1 to 2 didn't seem like a big deal.
Humans could take Improved Toughness with their bonus feat, giving an equal amount to hit points that couldn't be taken away. etc. (Eh, I want to save some time and my last minute edits already get in too late)

It just didn't really seem overpowered in comparison. It's good, yeah, but I'd still play a human over it for most things.

Jergmo
2009-09-19, 05:24 PM
Just so it doesn't become unnoticed because of an edit: I suppose +2 to two of the same type probably isn't "most cases" and the bonus would be 1.5, so 6 points. Would it be reasonable if I got rid of the skill bonuses? Poison isn't encountered that often and the DC's are generally lousy.

Ashtagon
2009-09-19, 05:41 PM
That race design looks incredibly optimised for a druid build, not even counting the favoured class line. At least in any game I've read about or played in, orcs aren't noted for that class as being their most powerful option. Character-wise, this design fails to resemble any orc I've ever seen.

Balance-wise, it's easily a LA +1 race. An overall +4 on ability scores is just plain powerful.

Regarding your system for balancing race abilities, I'd've put dwarf stability firmly in the "crap" camp. In my games, it just doesn't come up that often.

Jergmo
2009-09-19, 06:01 PM
Regarding your system for balancing race abilities, I'd've put dwarf stability firmly in the "crap" camp. In my games, it just doesn't come up that often.

Really? I'm a big fan of the various combat actions; few of the intelligent NPC's I have my players face are simply going to go with the "hit it with your weapon 'til it's dead" approach.

Eh, also, I'll tinker around with the stats I guess.

Ponce
2009-09-19, 06:10 PM
The world would be overrun by orc clerics with the introduction of this alternative racial entry.

...which is AWESOME!

:smallwink: I agree you might want to tone it down considerably.

Jergmo
2009-09-19, 06:19 PM
Orcs
+2 Con, -2 Int, +2 Wis
Medium: As Medium creatures, Orcs have no special bonuses or penalties due to their size.
Orc base land speed is 30 feet.
Orcs gain a +1 bonus on Strength-based skill checks and ability checks.
+2 racial bonus on saving throws vs. poison.
Favored Class: Druid

How about this?

Lvl45DM!
2009-09-19, 07:40 PM
Orcs are supposed to be strong and dwarves are supposed to be tough
now if you wanna change that, thats fine but I'd go with +2 Str rather than con *shrugs*

Jergmo
2009-09-19, 08:18 PM
Orcs are supposed to be strong and dwarves are supposed to be tough
now if you wanna change that, thats fine but I'd go with +2 Str rather than con *shrugs*

Constitution seemed more useful and logical for their lifestyle, is all. Strength is very useful, but the branches of sapient races in our own world has shown us that the ones that relied on brute strength alone in melee died out because their style became obsolete. There are a lot more attributes of constitution than just being the tough guy that can take more hits in battle.

Kuma Kode
2009-09-19, 10:10 PM
As a general rule, races with a total ability bonus greater than +0 automatically get a +1 ECL. This is because, as has been said before, abilities are far more powerful than a miscellaneous bonus. The examples above didn't even get into class features that are based on ability scores for use limits, durations, save DCs, bonus spells, or feat requirements.

You are also right in saying that dwarves are rather powerful. I usually use them to gauge the maximum power level that a +0 ECL race can have, in the same way that the monk is also the maximum power level a base class may have..... then I drop it down. Dancing near the edge is unnecessarily complicated.

Take, for instance, the Hobgoblin. +2 Dex, +2 Con, +4 on Move Silently. That's it. They're a +1 ECL race because of the unbalanced ability scores, but they are severely lacking in miscellaneous stat fluff like the dwarf has. So even though they are statistically more powerful than a player race, they're not nearly as interesting.

So instead of giving broad, sweeping bonuses in the form of ability bonuses, why not elaborate on their special skills by giving bonuses to skills, or maybe a bonus feat, or save bonuses against particular effects?

EDIT: MAN I said 'bonus' a lot.

Rainbownaga
2009-09-19, 11:32 PM
What's wrong with an orc's attributes to begin with?

Darkvision and +4 strength with weak mental stats can still make for a great ubercharger barbarian or strength rogue. Sure, they miss out on a bit, but I think it's the half-orcs that are the real problem, and even they make okay clerics.


Edit: Oops, i kinda missed the point, but still, big sticks are fun :smallbiggrin:

LibraryOgre
2009-09-20, 01:03 AM
Bonuses to certain skills: Crap except in niche builds


See, there's a problem with this right here. An elven bonus to Spot and listen is useful for almost any build... might not be critical, but useful. The gnomish bonus to a skill that can only be used by spellcasters and must be trained? Yeah, that's crap.

Eloel
2009-09-20, 02:36 AM
Savage Species has ways of determining LA. I suggest you check those.

golentan
2009-09-20, 02:54 AM
Orcs
+2 Con, -2 Int, +2 Wis
Medium: As Medium creatures, Orcs have no special bonuses or penalties due to their size.
Orc base land speed is 30 feet.
Orcs gain a +1 bonus on Strength-based skill checks and ability checks.
+2 racial bonus on saving throws vs. poison.
Favored Class: Druid

How about this?

You're still winding up with an over powered wild shape druid. That's bonuses to spellcasting and hitpoints, and still hitting bonuses with strength checks. Plus you're redefining orcs from their traditional role. Radically so, in fact. Orcs are soldiers typically. Whether that's barbaric brutes, noble savages, honor bound enforcers, or what have you varies campaign to campaign (tending towards somewhere between the first two in my experience). Not nature loving wild folk. In fact, they have a long history of burning down forests to get at iron for axes in most of the source material.

Oh, and the earlier post about strength adding +1 to hit and +1.5 to damage is not the full optimization benefit. With a single feat, it's +1 to hit and +3.5 to damage. With two, it's +1 to hit and +4.5 to damage.

Ashtagon
2009-09-20, 03:32 AM
Honestly, on what basis are you granting a bonus to Wisdom? As a racial trait, it doesn't fit with traditional characterisation...

* Will saving throws? Orcs are either undistinguished or notably bad at resisting charms.
* Divine magic? They aren't noted in any fantasy literature as having superior divine magic compared to humanity. Equality, at best, and usually inferior.
* Heal, Listen, Profession, Sense Motive, Spot, and Survival checks. These are skills that have Wisdom as their key ability. I can see a potential for a racial bonus on Listen, , Spot, and Survival. None of the other skills seem to have any reason to be superior.

Jergmo
2009-09-20, 03:09 PM
Honestly, on what basis are you granting a bonus to Wisdom? As a racial trait, it doesn't fit with traditional characterisation...

* Will saving throws? Orcs are either undistinguished or notably bad at resisting charms.
* Divine magic? They aren't noted in any fantasy literature as having superior divine magic compared to humanity. Equality, at best, and usually inferior.
* Heal, Listen, Profession, Sense Motive, Spot, and Survival checks. These are skills that have Wisdom as their key ability. I can see a potential for a racial bonus on Listen, , Spot, and Survival. None of the other skills seem to have any reason to be superior.

On the divine magic bit, even as the usually evil race where they're idiotic savages, divine magic users are portrayed as being nearly the utmost authority and are very important. The Eyes of Gruumsh might as well be the real leaders.

I thought I had said something about it earlier, but oh well. But, again, I'm not going with the archetype of them being a bunch of evil bloodthirsty savages. They're humanoids, and I treat them like they're humanoids, not monsters. They're not intelligent book-smart wise, but I see them as focusing on common sense and cunning, and some of them having a civilization similar to native north American culture although I imagine them as having a few archetypes that fall under their bonuses: the hunter-gatherer nomads, the sedentary farmers, and seafarers.

Nomads: The constitution and wisdom help them outlast their prey on the chase and outwit them.
Sedentary farmers: Farming is gruelling work and endurance is very helpful, and the wisdom helps with that as well.
Seafarers: Constitution again helps with endurance when you're on a ship with long work hours and insufficient nutrients in many cases. Pirates are glorified, but most of the time they mostly tried to avoid starving to death. It's also another profession where wisdom helps greatly.

Ashtagon
2009-09-20, 03:39 PM
Everything you have said about them vis a vis Wisdom could be better expressed as a skill bonus to Listen/Spot/Survival (or all three) rather than a bonus to Wisdom itself. Boosting Wisdom directly makes this race an uber-divine caster race, which is fine if that is what you are after, but doesn't seem to be the case from what you have written.

yes, I am well aware of the trope that has the shamans as being the real power behind the thrones. But that's because they are smarter than their chieftains. By boosting Wisdom directly, you'd make them not only smarter than the orc chieftains, but smarter than their human/elf/dwarf analogues too. You need to compare them, not only against themselves, but against others.

Reality check question: is it Wisdom that helps those careers you see as normal for orcs, or is it the skills that are supported by Wisdom that help those careers?

Jergmo
2009-09-20, 03:54 PM
Everything you have said about them vis a vis Wisdom could be better expressed as a skill bonus to Listen/Spot/Survival (or all three) rather than a bonus to Wisdom itself. Boosting Wisdom directly makes this race an uber-divine caster race, which is fine if that is what you are after, but doesn't seem to be the case from what you have written.

yes, I am well aware of the trope that has the shamans as being the real power behind the thrones. But that's because they are smarter than their chieftains. By boosting Wisdom directly, you'd make them not only smarter than the orc chieftains, but smarter than their human/elf/dwarf analogues too. You need to compare them, not only against themselves, but against others.

Reality check question: is it Wisdom that helps those careers you see as normal for orcs, or is it the skills that are supported by Wisdom that help those careers?

Well, the skills, but just boosting the skills you mention doesn't fit as well, and apparently three skill bonuses is overpowered too.

Ashtagon
2009-09-20, 03:57 PM
Why is it so vitally important to boost Will saves and divine casting ability too? Convince me that orcs should be better clerics/druids than humans.

If you want to say "they are in my campaign world", fine, that's your win button. But I haven't seen any established fantasy trope or D&D fluff that says orcs should be so wise.

Kuma Kode
2009-09-20, 04:02 PM
Drop the Str, give them a Charisma penalty. They're simple, but their in tune with their surroundings and with the world of spirits, since spirits and the worship thereof are intricate parts of their everyday lives.

However, they tend to be very suspicious of strangers and their strict adherence to the laws of the spirits and their tribes tends to cause their individuality to melt slightly.

They now have balanced ability scores.

+2 Con = -2 Int
+2 Wis = -2 Cha

Keep the athetlics bonuses to keep the athletic flavor while losing the Strength bonus, and drop the poison thing since it doesn't seem to fit them. Maybe give them a bonus on Craft checks related to wood or leather, since self sufficiency is a necessity for the hunters, and maybe a bonus to Survival, too.


But I haven't seen any established fantasy trope or D&D fluff that says orcs should be so wise. Which is a valid reason to make them so. Switching things up from what is cliche and traditional is perfectly fine.

Jergmo
2009-09-20, 04:22 PM
Drop the Str, give them a Charisma penalty. They're simple, but their in tune with their surroundings and with the world of spirits, since spirits and the worship thereof are intricate parts of their everyday lives.

However, they tend to be very suspicious of strangers and their strict adherence to the laws of the spirits and their tribes tends to cause their individuality to melt slightly.

They now have balanced ability scores.

+2 Con = -2 Int
+2 Wis = -2 Cha

Keep the athetlics bonuses to keep the athletic flavor while losing the Strength bonus, and drop the poison thing since it doesn't seem to fit them. Maybe give them a bonus on Craft checks related to wood or leather, since self sufficiency is a necessity for the hunters, and maybe a bonus to Survival, too.

Which is a valid reason to make them so. Switching things up from what is cliche and traditional is perfectly fine.

This sounds like a good idea, but now we're getting back to the underpowered race territory without a laundry list of other bonuses. This all just seems so needlessly difficult. :smallfrown:

Hrrgh...okay, Constitution gives 1 hp per level (which could be as powerful as a bonus feat, making it 3-4 points), +1 concentration (crap), +1 fortitude (good = 1 point). Evened out mental attributes = 0 points, and the strength check bonus or athletic skills would be 1 point, which would make it the minimum for a decent race. Is that not okay enough?

Kuma Kode
2009-09-20, 04:32 PM
I don't see how that's "underpowered."

Give them a few more abilities like Low-Light Vision, maybe automatic proficiency with a bow. Keep the poison save bonus. Ya know, things like that.

EDIT: You're also forgetting the bonus on Fortitude saves, Constitution checks for endurance-related activities, additional uses of various special abilities, extended rage duration. It's a really bad idea to try to break down each ability into what it does to try to even them out, because there's no way you could possibly account for every single thing an ability score alters.

Jergmo
2009-09-20, 04:38 PM
I don't see how that's "underpowered."

Give them a few more abilities like Low-Light Vision, maybe automatic proficiency with a bow. Keep the poison save bonus. Ya know, things like that.

Because it's canceling out the bulk of their power as a race with nothing in return. Core races aren't canceled out. They have a bunch of stuff to make up for it. I just fail to understand how it would suddenly be okay if I were to give them a bonus feat and a +1 racial bonus on Fortitude saves, but +2 Con is horribly overpowered when that Con can be taken away with attribute penalties or damage, and the racial bonuses are there permanently. Canceled out stats would be okay if *every* race worked that way, but the problem is they don't. And I was really hoping I could avoid giving them Low-light vision, but eh.

Edit: Well, actually, it's not that difficult to figure out the worth of the attribute. Constitution is by far the most powerful attribute, but eh. You've got +1 hp per level, which can be acquired via a bonus feat (Improved Toughness). 3 points. +1 Fortitude. 1 point. +1 on Constitution-related skills ability checks. 1 point. 5 points total, so it alone could make a race halfway decent (but that would be boring, other stuff is needed for flavor). I guess mental attributes would be worth...eh. Well, wisdom is +1 Will. 1 point. +1 on wisdom-based skills and checks. 1 point. Caster bonus = 1 point. 3 points. +2 Con and +2 Wis would be 8 points, which would require a LA. But -2 int: +1 for caster, +1 for int-based skills and ability checks = 2 points. So +2 Con, -2 Int, +2 Wis = 6 points, which would put them around the power of dwarves/humans. A small additional bonus helps bridge the gap without breaking them.

Edit Edit:
Strength = 3 points
Dexterity = 3 points
Constitution = 5 points
Intelligence = 2 points
Wisdom = 3 points
Charisma = 2 points?

Same-type bonuses IE: +Strength and +Con = x1.25 cost? That would make a hobgoblin an 11 point race as is, which is +1 LA.

Ashtagon
2009-09-20, 05:02 PM
Which is a valid reason to make them so. Switching things up from what is cliche and traditional is perfectly fine.

I never said changing orcs from the trope is inherently wrong. But changing the race's ruleset so that it differs significantly from established tropes, and passing it of as alternative, rather than a completely different race, seems marginally dishonest somehow.

there are many ways to switch from cliche and still allow for what is fundamentally the same rules crunch underneath the fluff. the shadow elves of Mystara (contrasted with FR's drow) are an excellent example of this. Both could easily use the exact same crunch, but they are fluffed so differently.

Jergmo
2009-09-20, 05:08 PM
Okay, so they're not Tolkien's orcs. Fine, I'll find a new name for them. I've already given Hobbits the boot.

Kuma Kode
2009-09-20, 05:23 PM
Because it's canceling out the bulk of their power as a race with nothing in return. Core races aren't canceled out. Okay, I think the problem here is your insistence on using a point-based balancing system and splitting up the value of various stats, ignoring their enhanced effect on certain classes, and then trying to claim that unbalanced ability scores, are, in fact, balanced, despite the fact that ability scores that don't cancel out are automatically worth a +1 ECL in standard rules. Where did you find this system?

You're free to make whatever you want, but we're all in agreement here that the race you've made is not balanced with the core races, who all have net +0 ability bonus.

The Dungeon Master's Guide gives a table on what stats can balance out what stats. I'd suggest going by that to balance the ability scores and then eyeballing miscellaneous abilities until they're on par with some of the player races. I usually use Dwarf to gauge the maximum power a player race can have, since they're often considered to be the most powerful player race.

Jergmo
2009-09-20, 05:29 PM
Okay, I think the problem here is your insistence on using a point-based balancing system and splitting up the value of various stats, ignoring their enhanced effect on certain classes, and then trying to claim that unbalanced ability scores, are, in fact, balanced, despite the fact that ability scores that don't cancel out are automatically worth a +1 ECL in standard rules. Where did you find this system?

You're free to make whatever you want, but we're all in agreement here that the race you've made is not balanced with the core races, who all have net +0 ability bonus.

The Dungeon Master's Guide gives a table on what stats can balance out what stats. I'd suggest going by that to balance the ability scores and then eyeballing miscellaneous abilities until they're on par with some of the player races. I usually use Dwarf to gauge the maximum power a player race can have, since they're often considered to be the most powerful player race.

Well, I give up. It's overpowered, I guess. No point in arguing about it anymore even though it's not inherently more powerful than a human or dwarf or what have you, and have tried to show why. All anyone does is point out that all the core races have +0 attributes even though they end up equaling to certain attributes. We all know that core rules as written are correct and balanced, after all.

golentan
2009-09-20, 05:56 PM
Okay, so let's compare this to a human.

Humans Have:
No ability modifier (no balance effect)
Bonus feat (one feat effect)
Extra skill points (about on par with feat "Skilled")
Any favored class (mild benefit).

Your orcs have:
Positive Ability modifier of +2 (moderate to major balance effect depending on minmaxing)
Skill bonuses better than the feat "Athletic" (better than feat)
Bonus on saves vs. Poison, (equivalent to feat effect)
Favored Class: Normally no balance effect. But it is a first tier class that meshes perfectly with ability bonuses. (moderate benefit)

Dwarves Have: More power than humans. I'll grant you that. But most of their modifiers are situational, and they have a TIER 5 class as their favored. And the ability scores don't sum to a +2 or +4 (which is huge for an optimizer) and only boost one of the important class traits.

Jergmo
2009-09-20, 06:00 PM
Okay, so let's compare this to a human.

Humans Have:
No ability modifier (no balance effect)
Bonus feat (one feat effect)
Extra skill points (about on par with feat "Skilled")
Any favored class (mild benefit).

Your orcs have:
Positive Ability modifier of +2 (moderate to major balance effect depending on minmaxing)
Skill bonuses better than the feat "Athletic" (better than feat)
Bonus on saves vs. Poison, (equivalent to feat effect)
Favored Class: Normally no balance effect. But it is a first tier class that meshes perfectly with ability bonuses. (moderate benefit)

Dwarves Have: More power than humans. I'll grant you that. But most of their modifiers are situational, and they have a TIER 5 class as their favored. And the ability scores don't sum to a +2 or +4 (which is huge for an optimizer) and only boost one of the important class traits.

Actually, dwarves would make pretty awesome druids or wizards. I'd play a dwarf wizard or druid over a dwarf fighter.

Edit: A dwarf Transmuter sounds really fitting...

Jergmo
2009-09-20, 10:50 PM
Eh...did some reworking, hopefully this is okay.

Orcs
+2 Con, -2 Int
Medium: As Medium creatures, Orcs have no special bonuses or penalties due to their size.
Orc base land speed is 30 feet.
+2 racial bonus on Climb, Swim, Listen and Spot checks.
Low-Light Vision: An orc can see twice as far as a human in starlight, moonlight, torchlight, and similar conditions of poor illumination. It retains the ability to distinguish color and detail under these conditions.
Weapon Proficiency: Orcs receive the Exotic Weapon Proficiency feat for the Orcish Goleyo.
Favored Class: Druid

Goleyo: 2d4 damage, 19-20 x2 critical. 10 ft. range increment, 2 lbs., slashing damage.

(The Goleyo is based on the African Hunga Munga. Goleyo is actually an alternative name that a specific tribe uses for it.)

Reckon I ought to edit the OP for the changes...

And apologies if I've been a jerk, I've been under a lot of stress lately.

Ashtagon
2009-09-21, 01:13 AM
Orcs
+2 Con, -2 Int
Medium: As Medium creatures, Orcs have no special bonuses or penalties due to their size.
Orc base land speed is 30 feet.
+2 racial bonus on Climb, Swim, Listen and Spot checks.
Low-Light Vision: An orc can see twice as far as a human in starlight, moonlight, torchlight, and similar conditions of poor illumination. It retains the ability to distinguish color and detail under these conditions.
Weapon Proficiency: Orcs receive the Exotic Weapon Proficiency feat for the Orcish Goleyo.
Favored Class: Druid

Goleyo: 2d4 damage, 19-20 x2 critical. 10 ft. range increment, 2 lbs., slashing damage.


This looks reasonable to me.

golentan
2009-09-21, 01:48 AM
I concur. This seems reasonably balanced, perhaps you can even tack on the poison resistance.

Iferus
2009-09-21, 08:43 AM
Now this draft is a lot better than the previous ones :)

I'd probably give the exotic proficiency only if the character is proficient with at least two martial weapons. For flavor reasons, I'd limit myself to two skill bonuses. In return, you can add a +1 bonus to poison or even all fortitude saves.

Jergmo
2009-09-21, 11:24 AM
Now this draft is a lot better than the previous ones :)

I'd probably give the exotic proficiency only if the character is proficient with at least two martial weapons. For flavor reasons, I'd limit myself to two skill bonuses. In return, you can add a +1 bonus to poison or even all fortitude saves.

Eh, I was thinking there wouldn't be a problem with the skill bonuses, as halflings get four skill bonuses and theirs as a whole are more widely applicable besides the sensory bonuses. I gave them all Exotic Proficiency because the goleyo is a really flexible tool. It's used not only as a weapon, but also as a farming implement and a tool for construction, so nearly everyone that is able-bodied would have some experience with it.

The skill bonuses also just don't really bother me because I mean...they're already going to be suffering when it comes to skills. Your average human starts with 12 skill points. Your average orc would start with 4. They'd do alright with specialized members, but humans in general have a big advantage with that with their flexibility.