PDA

View Full Version : [4e] Tons O Races



Erom
2009-12-14, 04:27 PM
Background:

Prepping to DM. The players are friends of mine, and this is a one-off, (so "get a new group" doesn't apply here). The players are the type who tend to go by-the-books and take a dim view of changing the "official" material, fluff included. That said, there are like a freaking ton of races in the DnD world, and I'd like to reduce the number of races to ease wordbuilding. Ideally, I'd like any sentient, civilized race in the world (good or evil) to be a valid player choice, so ultimately despite deleting a bunch of PHB races, I'd actually like to end up with more PC races than I started with, pulling from the DMG to compensate.

As an example, Goblins are going to exist as enemies, so why not let them also be the "small, sneaky type" PC's, and replace Halflings? One less race, not too much loss of player choice.

I'd also like to replace Eladrin with Drow, so I was wondering if giving drow +2 dex/int instead of +2 dex/cha was reasonable?

Finally, I want to drop Tieflings since I just hate their stupid faces for no rational reason. How about Gnome to replace?

Finally finally, the world is probably going to have Orcs and Warforged in it, so I'd like to offer those up to players as well. Any reason not too?

Thanks in advance! This is my first time with 4E and the first face-to-face game I've had since late second edition, so I'm excited!

Kurald Galain
2009-12-14, 04:33 PM
I see no problem with anything you're proposing.

Note that all the races you mention are explicitly statted out in one of the sourcebooks, too.

Erom
2009-12-14, 04:38 PM
Do the source book versions vary substantially from the DMG versions? One of my players has a much more complete book collection that the rest of us, so I'd hate to disappoint him if he shows up expecting something more awesome than what I'm offering.

Kurald Galain
2009-12-14, 04:40 PM
Do the source book versions vary substantially from the DMG versions?
Not really, but they do tend to offer racial feats and such.

The only change I can think of off-hand is that an item exists that substantially boosts healing to "constructs". By the most recent errata, this was considered overpowered on "living constructs", i.e. warforged, and therefore no longer works on them.

Yakk
2009-12-14, 04:46 PM
You could also ask them what races they want to play, then use that in your worldbuilding.


As an example, Goblins are going to exist as enemies, so why not let them also be the "small, sneaky type" PC's, and replace Halflings? One less race, not too much loss of player choice.
Why not say that in your world, Halflings are also known as Goblins?

Easier, and the PCs get a whole lot more crunch.

I'd also like to replace Eladrin with Drow, so I was wondering if giving drow +2 dex/int instead of +2 dex/cha was reasonable?
Sure. But instead, say that Drow are FR PG Drow. If a player wants to play a Drow, they can buy the book. If not, Drow just exist.

Finally, I want to drop Tieflings since I just hate their stupid faces for no rational reason. How about Gnome to replace?
Gnomes exist in PHB2, and are pretty well fleshed out. Similarly, if a PC wants to play a Gnome...

Finally finally, the world is probably going to have Orcs and Warforged in it, so I'd like to offer those up to players as well. Any reason not too?
Warforged are fleshed out in the Eberonn suppliment. If a player wants to play a Warforged, ask them to bring that suppliment.

Orcs are not heavily fleshed out, but half-orcs are in PHB2. You could use the stats of half-Orcs for player Orcs? Or, you could say that pure-blood orcs have been wiped out, and what is left are the descendents of the half-Orc bred soldiers of a previous empire who proceeded to tear that empire apart.

Which has the neat property that the first full-blooded Orc the players run into can be bad-ass.

The point of what I'm saying above is that there is lots of crunch out there for these races in existing supplements (with the exception of Orcs).

4e player material, barring a few rough spots (and much of Dragon) is pretty balanced. There are a handful of exceptions (see Charop), but you really don't have to worry much about player power unless they are serious munchkins.

Either ask them what races they want to have (and work them into your world), or pick races and let them know. You don't need to own all of the PC crunch to allow a race in your world even.

And as NPCs don't follow PC rules, you don't need the PC rules for them either!

Next, note that the 4e compendium and character builder is your friend.

Kurald Galain
2009-12-14, 05:02 PM
4e player material, barring a few rough spots (and much of Dragon) is pretty balanced. There are a handful of exceptions (see Charop), but you really don't have to worry much about player power unless they are serious munchkins.

I disagree that 4E dragon material is less balanced than 4E book material. Both seem to contain an equally proportionate amount of unbalanced exceptions.

Thajocoth
2009-12-14, 05:20 PM
Full list of statted out 4e races by source:

PHB:
Dragonborn
Dwarf
Eladrin
Elf
Half-Elf
Halfling
Human
Tiefling

PHB2:
Deva
Gnome
Goliath
Half-Orc
Longtooth Shifter
Razorclaw Shifter

MotP:
Bladeling

MM:
Bugbear
Goblin
Hobgoblin
Kobold
Orc
Githyanki

MM2:
Bullywug
Duergar
Kenku

EPG:
Changeling - Used to be called Doppleganger in the MM.
Kalashtar
Warforged

FRG:
Drow
Genasi

PHB3 Preview:
Githzerai
Wilden

Dragon:
Gnoll - 367
Minotaur - 369
Shadar-kai - 372
Revenant - 376

The races that were in the MM but republished in another book later were almost all edited to some degree. For example Dopplegangers in the MM had +20 bluff when they Change Shape to appear as the new person (via footnote on another page)... Changelings now have +5 to the bluff instead, but with the same +2 Cha, can choose between +2 Dex or +2 Int instead of getting a specific 2 stats... So not all of it's nerf, but some of it certainly is.

Personally, I think they're all balanced just fine right now.

Yakk
2009-12-14, 05:24 PM
I disagree that 4E dragon material is less balanced than 4E book material. Both seem to contain an equally proportionate amount of unbalanced exceptions.
Really? The Dragon material is pretty rough, up to and including typoes that make it unusable. And even after being in Dragon annual...

To put it another way, when I'm feeling cheesy in character builder, and looking at powers, I look at the Dragon powers first. Because they are more likely to be ridiculously good (and sometimes ridiculously bad).

Take a swordmage. Look at their heroic tier powers. From swordmage shielding fire, to incendiary sword, to the new level 6 stance -- almost half of the best level 1-10 swordmage powers are from Dragon, while 80%-90% of the published swordmage powers are not from Dragon.

And even though the powers are good, they are horribly written. Swordmage shielding fire doubles up a bunch of text, adding a hit and a miss description that is nigh-identical, instead of having a single Effect: slot.

Dragon has far less material in it, so there are admittedly fewer "I break the game combos" in it (thinks like applying slashing wake 5-6 times a round, or the like).

Also bad is some of the fiddly bits that Dragon powers contain. The entire Arcane * chain of feats, where you place a one-round counter on usually a large number of hit-or-missed opponents with minor effects (-1 defence, -1 attack, takes damage if you attack the player, yada yada).

The quality of them is more than a tad lower than the hardcover books.

Mando Knight
2009-12-14, 05:24 PM
The races that were in the MM but republished in another book later were almost all edited to some degree. For example Dopplegangers in the MM had +20 bluff when the Change Shape to appear as the new person (via footnote on another page)... Changelings now have +5 to the bluff instead, but get +2 Cha and can choose between +2 Dex or +2 Int instead of getting a specific 2 stats... So not all of it's nerf, but some of it certainly is.

Personally, I think they're all balanced just fine.

Note: Changelings might miss out on a +15 modifier to their bluff check for impersonating someone, but if they've got Bluff trained and are in a high-Cha class, it doesn't really matter, since now the super-insightful might be able to figure it out but those without training in that area will find it rather difficult.

Thajocoth
2009-12-14, 05:25 PM
Note: Changelings might miss out on a +15 modifier to their bluff check for impersonating someone, but if they've got Bluff trained and are in a high-Cha class, it doesn't really matter, since now the super-insightful might be able to figure it out but those without training in that area will find it rather difficult.

Yes, it SHOULD be difficult to figure out... But it's POSSIBLE now!

Mando Knight
2009-12-14, 05:29 PM
Yes, it SHOULD be difficult to figure out... But it's POSSIBLE now!

Because the guy who can figure it out is Sherlock Holmes. The omni-insightful super-detective type character should always be able to figure out if something's amiss. It's just a good bit harder for him to do so with the super-Spy as his adversary.

...

...

Gentlemen.

DabblerWizard
2009-12-14, 09:46 PM
This is a one-off, (so "get a new group" doesn't apply here). The players are the type who tend to go by-the-books and take a dim view of changing the "official" material, fluff included. That said, there are like a freaking ton of races in the DnD world, and I'd like to reduce the number of races to ease wordbuilding.

If this is a one-shot game, why spend so much time worrying about races you'll mention (at most) in a one sentence summary, and then forget?

Focus on the races you have worked out in your encounters, and maybe the ones your players end up picking, I'd say.

erikun
2009-12-14, 09:55 PM
About the only thing I have to add is that it looks like the Oversized properity (Bugbear, Minotaur) is being phased out. The Minotaur write-up in Dragon removed Oversized for some charging bonus, and the only reason its still on the Bugbear is because they haven't had a write-up anywhere.

Then again, in a one-shot session it probably won't matter much. If you're looking at a campaign, you might consider swapping Oversized with some other ability. (Brutal 1 for all weapons? That might be overpowered anyways, though.)

Thajocoth
2009-12-14, 11:14 PM
About the only thing I have to add is that it looks like the Oversized properity (Bugbear, Minotaur) is being phased out. The Minotaur write-up in Dragon removed Oversized for some charging bonus, and the only reason its still on the Bugbear is because they haven't had a write-up anywhere.

Then again, in a one-shot session it probably won't matter much. If you're looking at a campaign, you might consider swapping Oversized with some other ability. (Brutal 1 for all weapons? That might be overpowered anyways, though.)

Oversized for Bugbears isn't overpowered though. A Goliath with their weapon feat and a Maul or a Dwarf with their weapon feat and a Mordenkrad do about the same as a Bugbear with a Proficiency feat in a good superior weapon. That and, for a lot of weapons, it's not a huge bonus. Executioner's Axe = 1d12, Large Executioner's Axe = 2d6. Quarterstaff = 1d8, Large Quarterstaff = 2d4. So the places where you think you can cheese out with Oversized, you can do just as good with another race.

erikun
2009-12-14, 11:25 PM
You obviously never saw the Oversized Maul insanity with the Minotaur. Yes, the 2d6+4 from the Minotaur Maul is comparable to the 2d6 Brutal 2 from the Bugbear Executioner's Axe, but those [W] get multiplied quite quickly. How does 12d6+4 compare to 12d6 Brutal 2, after all? Or just 12d8 with a Bugbear Maul, for that matter.