Using generic +2/+1 stats for all races

[Theodoxus]

Hey Playgrounders. I'm considering using a generic +2/+1 for stats (player choice) instead of the racial stat bonuses for my next campaign, and I was curious if anyone has in game experience doing so.

I'm outlawing half-elves, as the races can't interbreed on my world. (Half-orcs are just a type of orc). That solves the half-elf stat dilemma, but not the mountain dwarf...

So, two questions, I guess. Anyone who's done the generic stats, how did you handle helves and mdwarves?
Second, more of an opinion poll, what race becomes most popular with this? Being able to boost Int or Wis by two on any race, are there certain races that would make better wizards than high elves and gnomes. or better clerics than wood elves or hill dwarves?

I'd like to address any potential problems that might pop up before finalizing the campaign houserules...

Thanks!

[ZeltArruin]

Do humans get anything to compensate their loss? Otherwise I don't see much of an issue with anything, people will still play what they want or what they perceive to be the best for their build.

[DracoKnight]

Yes! My players were rather pleased when I did this. And I will probably do it again. We as a group agreed that Helves and Mdwarves could apply their stat increases wherever they wished. The races that became most popular were actually the Dragonborn and the Half-Orc, as players could now be a Dex-based Half-Orc assassin, or a Dragonborn Arcane Trickster. It worked rather well, and the only thing that was done that was close to something I wouldn't allow again was the Abjurer Mountain Dwarf who put his racial increases as +2 CON, +2 INT. This combined with medium armor and various weapon proficiencies made it a damn solid Abjurer, but honestly, it wasn't that much better than the rest of the party.

Hmmmmm...I'm trying to think if anyone made a cleric that game...I don't think that they did...but I could see Lightfoot Halfling making an excellent cleric, hiding behind a meat shield and hurling sacred flames and healing words. :smallbiggrin:


Do humans get anything to compensate their loss? Otherwise I don't see much of an issue with anything, people will still play what they want or what they perceive to be the best for their build.

For humans' loss, I made Vhuman the only human and made its stat increases +2/+1 like everyone else. The feat more than compensates for everyone being able to put their stats wherever.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Hey Playgrounders. I'm considering using a generic +2/+1 for stats (player choice) instead of the racial stat bonuses for my next campaign, and I was curious if anyone has in game experience doing so.


Thanks!

This has been my basic houserule for quite a while now and it works fantastically well in order to get new race/class combinations. This helps people from being punished for wanting to be cool with specific races.

You still have features that differentiate races. Keen Senses for elves, poison resistance for dwarves, and so on.

There is absolutely no problem with this.


***

For humans just use the variant version as the only human. You could make a list of what feats they are allowed to take.

[Theodoxus]

Yes! My players were rather pleased when I did this. And I will probably do it again. We as a group agreed that Helves and Mdwarves could apply their stat increases wherever they wished. The races that became most popular were actually the Dragonborn and the Half-Orc, as players could now be a Dex-based Half-Orc assassin, or a Dragonborn Arcane Trickster. It worked rather well, and the only thing that was done that was close to something I wouldn't allow again was the Abjurer Mountain Dwarf who put his racial increases as +2 CON, +2 INT. This combined with medium armor and various weapon proficiencies made it a damn solid Abjurer, but honestly, it wasn't that much better than the rest of the party.

Good to hear! My primary concern with helves is with book standard, they have been 95% of the race chosen for any Cha class. Their bennies are just too good. 2 skills, 2 languages, elf resistances and darkvision on top of +4 stat bonuses... I use helves for non-cha based classes too - especially rogues (though with the advent of Swashbuckler... sigh. But it seems if you can put that +2 to anything, everyone will play them - especially if you have more skill based game... But that might just be my specific table...


For humans' loss, I made Vhuman the only human and made its stat increases +2/+1 like everyone else. The feat more than compensates for everyone being able to put their stats wherever.

That is my plan as well...

[DracoKnight]

Good to hear! My primary concern with helves is with book standard, they have been 95% of the race chosen for any Cha class. Their bennies are just too good. 2 skills, 2 languages, elf resistances and darkvision on top of +4 stat bonuses... I use helves for non-cha based classes too - especially rogues (though with the advent of Swashbuckler... sigh. But it seems if you can put that +2 to anything, everyone will play them - especially if you have more skill based game... But that might just be my specific table...

To be fair, Helves don't see a lot of play at my table. I guess they'd make a really good cleric if they could put that +2 in WIS, but other than that, I can't think of anything they'd be able to do that's VASTLY superior to every other race if you allow this rule. A solution might be: "If a race already allows you to place some of its stats as you wish, any stat increase with a defined stat must be placed there.


That is my plan as well...

It works really well. :smallsmile:

[krunchyfrogg]

I hate this idea. different races have different bonuses. Not every race is created with the same bonuses.

elves should be more nimble, and dwarves should be more hardy.

Why are you changing anything?

[SpawnOfMorbo]

I hate this idea. different races have different bonuses. Not every race is created with the same bonuses.

elves should be more nimble, and dwarves should be more hardy.

Why are you changing anything?

Ever played a game with a Half-Orc barbarian?

Ever played a game with a Elven ranger?

Ever played a game with a Halfling rogue?

Well, after the millionth time it gets boring as all hell to see the same race/class combos put out there. Oh? Your character is a Half-Elf sorcerer? How original.

Racial bonuses force players to pick between what is mechanically superior (no one likes to suck) and what they think is awesome. Doing this in such a way limits people , especially new players, because no one wants to sit around the table and not contribute in the way they want their class to contribute.

Halfling Barbarians? Awesome

High Elf Druid? Awesome

Half-Efl Monk? Fantastic.

[DracoKnight]

Ever played a game with a Half-Orc barbarian?

Ever played a game with a Elven ranger?

Ever played a game with a Halfling rogue?

Well, after the millionth time it gets boring as all hell to see the same race/class combos put out there. Oh? Your character is a Half-Elf sorcerer? How original.

Racial bonuses force players to pick between what is mechanically superior (no one likes to suck) and what they think is awesome. Doing this in such a way limits people , especially new players, because no one wants to sit around the table and not contribute in the way they want their class to contribute.

Halfling Barbarians? Awesome

High Elf Druid? Awesome

Half-Efl Monk? Fantastic.

THIS! It allows for optimization without creating cookie-cutter characters :smallbiggrin:

[SpawnOfMorbo]

THIS! It allows for optimization without creating cookie-cutter characters :smallbiggrin:

Now, sometimes what is mechanically superior IS awesome but you shouldn't have to worry about sucking just cause you want to make a character a specific way.

I've seen way too many people choose cookie cutter combos just because they didn't want to suck. Optimization shouldn't be a requirement.

Personally I think the player who wanted to play a Barbarian Tiefling had a great idea.

[Kryx]

I did something similar: Set all races to have +1/+1 to specific ability scores and then left +1 on any ability score (including the +1's). It retained the expected while allowing for variation.

Though this thread makes me rethink that idea. +2/+1 or +1/+1/+1 as a general rule could be a bit nicer.

[DwarvenGM]

Ever played a game with a Half-Orc barbarian?

Ever played a game with a Elven ranger?

Ever played a game with a Halfling rogue?

Well, after the millionth time it gets boring as all hell to see the same race/class combos put out there. Oh? Your character is a Half-Elf sorcerer? How original.

Racial bonuses force players to pick between what is mechanically superior (no one likes to suck) and what they think is awesome. Doing this in such a way limits people , especially new players, because no one wants to sit around the table and not contribute in the way they want their class to contribute.

Halfling Barbarians? Awesome

High Elf Druid? Awesome

Half-Efl Monk? Fantastic.

I didn't even realize this was a big deal in my games we have gnome barbarians, Dwarven wizards, half orc bards. Only a few players ever cared about the optimizing and after a few sessions of seeing how much fun the unoptimized player's have role-playing they usually ask to change their character.

I mean I knew some people really cared about it but I always thought it was uncommon.

[krunchyfrogg]

I'm not ok with STR 20 halflings at level 1. sorry

[DracoKnight]

I'm not ok with STR 20 halflings at level 1. sorry

Well, what about STR 20 Half-Orcs?

[Finlam]

I'm not ok with STR 20 halflings at level 1. sorry

You skipped a few steps down the board there...

[Pazerniusz]

Well, what about STR 20 Half-Orcs?
Half-Orc is cross breed between Human, who had gorilla like ancestors and Green big muscular creatures with pig face and tusk, with brutal tendency.
Halfling is a joyfull small human, who would spend his live peacefully.

[R.Shackleford]

I'm not ok with STR 20 halflings at level 1. sorry

Then guess what? You don't have to have a 20 str halfling, no one is forcing you to make that character.

However if my joy for the game comes from having a 20 str halfling at first level (and having 20 str is a thing possible... some games allow max of 16 or 18) then you have absolutely zero say in the matter.

Worry about your own character and don't push your hang ups on characters that aren't yours.

[JellyPooga]

I'm not ok with STR 20 halflings at level 1. sorry

Pretty much this.

I get the argument that set Racial Ability Score modifiers encourage "cookie cutter" Class/Race combos, but without them the non-euclidian combinations don't feel in any way more or less special than any other.

A Tiefling Barbarian should be noteworthy, not for their great Strength; that's the realm of Dragonborn and Half-Orcs, but for their devilish cunning and intimidatin' presence, as represented by their +Int and +Cha.

A Gnome Fighter isn't about being big and brawny, because Gnomes are neither big nor brawny; it's about playing the smart game, of using their small stature to their advantage, or being the tactician.

The Half-Orc Bard is never going to have the glib tongue and boyish good looks of a Half-Elf or Lightfoot Halfling; he's rough and tough and doesn't duck out the back door when the tavern erupts into a brawl; he gets stuck in and when it's all over, he's just about charming enough to get the lads to shake hands and buy a round.

That's partly the point of playing a so-called "sub-optimal" Race for a given Class; you sacrifice "teh ultim8 powahz" of your primary Class for increased ability in other areas. It's the specialised vs. generalised optimisation ogre rearing it's ugly head again; no, your Half-Orc Bard isn't going to be as good at spellcasting or Performance as his Half-Elven counterpart, but he's a damn sight better in a brawl and he won't go down like a chump when he's bashed on the head with a bar-stool; that's what being a Half-Orc is about, whether it's contrary or complementary to what being a Bard or any other Class is about.

If you want to be the best Bard ever, then don't play a Half-Orc or a Dwarf. They're simply not as good at being Bards as other Races. They are quite good at fightin' though, so if you want to be the best WarBard, then those Races will stand you in good stead. Or if you just want to be a Half-Orc that happens to also be a Bard (good or bad), that's also an option; a Half-Orc Valour Bard with minimal Charisma can be a perfectly valid and contributing member of the party, even if he can't hold a tune, play an instrument well or cast spells with as much variety or efficacy as a Half-Elf.

Removing fixed Racial Ability Score modifiers means that every character, regardless of Race, will be the same, boring cookie-cutter Class with only minor differences for Race. Using point buy, every level 1 Barbarian will have 16 Str, every level 1 Wizard will have Int 16, every Bard 16 Cha, because that's the optimal choice. There's no incentive to do otherwise, because any Half-Orc can be as good as any Half-Elf or Gnome or Dwarf.

As a result of this, Half-Orcs are no longer noteworthy for being strong and tough and Halflings aren't charming and agile; those traits are reserved solely for the Classes that benefit the most from them. Fighters are noteworthy for being strong and tough and Rogues are noted for their agility and winning smiles. Race ceases to mean as much.

You're not playing a Dwarf because they're tough, you're playing a Fighter and happen to be tough; being a Dwarf had nothing to do with it, despite the fact that it's an inherent part of the Dwarven Racial identity that they are, in fact, supposed to be tougher than other Races. Even sickly, dungeon-tanned, introverted Dwarves with allergies and weak stomachs are supposed to be less sickly, better tanned and stronger stomached than their equivalent Human counterparts. That's an integral part of what it means to be a Dwarf.

If you don't want to Dwarf, don't Dwarf.

It's not a case of game balance; that will generally take care of itself. It's about racial identity and whilst Ability Score modifiers are probably the least important aspect of Racial identity in most cases, they are still very much integral. Dwarves are tough, Elves are agile and Dragonborn are strong. Ignore that and...well, you might as well ignore every other fluff aspect of everything and go play GURPS or FATE or another generic system.[/rant]

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Pretty much this.

I get the argument that set Racial Ability Score modifiers encourage "cookie cutter" Class/Race combos, but without them the non-euclidian combinations don't feel in any way more or less special than any other.

A Tiefling Barbarian should be noteworthy, not for their great Strength; that's the realm of Dragonborn and Half-Orcs, but for their devilish cunning and intimidatin' presence, as represented by their +Int and +Cha.

A Gnome Fighter isn't about being big and brawny, because Gnomes are neither big nor brawny; it's about playing the smart game, of using their small stature to their advantage, or being the tactician.

The Half-Orc Bard is never going to have the glib tongue and boyish good looks of a Half-Elf or Lightfoot Halfling; he's rough and tough and doesn't duck out the back door when the tavern erupts into a brawl; he gets stuck in and when it's all over, he's just about charming enough to get the lads to shake hands and buy a round.

That's partly the point of playing a so-called "sub-optimal" Race for a given Class; you sacrifice "teh ultim8 powahz" of your primary Class for increased ability in other areas. It's the specialised vs. generalised optimisation ogre rearing it's ugly head again; no, your Half-Orc Bard isn't going to be as good at spellcasting or Performance as his Half-Elven counterpart, but he's a damn sight better in a brawl and he won't go down like a chump when he's bashed on the head with a bar-stool; that's what being a Half-Orc is about, whether it's contrary or complementary to what being a Bard or any other Class is about.

If you want to be the best Bard ever, then don't play a Half-Orc or a Dwarf. They're simply not as good at being Bards as other Races. They are quite good at fightin' though, so if you want to be the best WarBard, then those Races will stand you in good stead. Or if you just want to be a Half-Orc that happens to also be a Bard (good or bad), that's also an option; a Half-Orc Valour Bard with minimal Charisma can be a perfectly valid and contributing member of the party, even if he can't hold a tune, play an instrument well or cast spells with as much variety or efficacy as a Half-Elf.

Removing fixed Racial Ability Score modifiers means that every character, regardless of Race, will be the same, boring cookie-cutter Class with only minor differences for Race. Using point buy, every level 1 Barbarian will have 16 Str, every level 1 Wizard will have Int 16, every Bard 16 Cha, because that's the optimal choice. There's no incentive to do otherwise, because any Half-Orc can be as good as any Half-Elf or Gnome or Dwarf.

As a result of this, Half-Orcs are no longer noteworthy for being strong and tough and Halflings aren't charming and agile; those traits are reserved solely for the Classes that benefit the most from them. Fighters are noteworthy for being strong and tough and Rogues are noted for their agility and winning smiles. Race ceases to mean as much.

You're not playing a Dwarf because they're tough, you're playing a Fighter and happen to be tough; being a Dwarf had nothing to do with it, despite the fact that it's an inherent part of the Dwarven Racial identity that they are, in fact, supposed to be tougher than other Races. Even sickly, dungeon-tanned, introverted Dwarves with allergies and weak stomachs are supposed to be less sickly, better tanned and stronger stomached than their equivalent Human counterparts. That's an integral part of what it means to be a Dwarf.

If you don't want to Dwarf, don't Dwarf.

It's not a case of game balance; that will generally take care of itself. It's about racial identity and whilst Ability Score modifiers are probably the least important aspect of Racial identity in most cases, they are still very much integral. Dwarves are tough, Elves are agile and Dragonborn are strong. Ignore that and...well, you might as well ignore every other fluff aspect of everything and go play GURPS or FATE or another generic system.[/rant]


Just because you don't want your Gnome to be brawny and strong doesn't mean anyone else doesn't. As been said many times and will probably need said many times more.

You have no right to decide what my character will be. If your happiness is contingent on MY character fitting your little cookie cutter mold then I don't think its me that needs to play a different game, I think the person spewing BAD WRONG FUN is the one that needs to check themselves.

[JellyPooga]

You have no right to decide what my character will be.

To a certain extent, I agree with this. You're right that I have no say in what you get to play...within the bounds of the setting we have both agreed to play in. If that setting says Gnomes are little guys with a talent for the intellectual, then I have had a say in who your character is. If you then come along with a Gnome that's stronger than my Half-Orc, then yeah, I feel perfectly justified saying that you are, in fact, doing it wrong.

We just agreed that Gnomes are little weedy guys and you're all, like, "Yeah, but my Gnome isn't brah; he's well tonk, whatchoo gonna do 'bout it, fool?". Yeah, well, that's not in the contract.

If the setting allows for super-buff Gnomes, great, I'm all for that. The generic D&D setting, though? Well, it doesn't. Sorry. I'm sorry it ruined your character concept. I'm sorry you don't get to have your fun. Would you like to play a different game? That's cool with me, but at the end of the day Gnomes don't get to be the strong guys because in this setting that we've both agreed to play in, Gnomes aren't built like bears.

If you want to take that away from the setting, that's fine too. Just be sure of what you're doing because when the GM puts a Gnome in your way and you jump to the assumption that he's a weedy little guy, but he turns out to be a 7ft monstrosity, you've only got yourself to blame for removing that particular piece of that Races identity.

That's what I'm talking about. Racial identity, according to the setting and the ways we model that in-game. I'm not talking about you having badwrongfun; in some settings Gnomes do have the option of being a bear (both figuratively and literally). I'm just saying that if you want that, go play that game instead, because baseline D&D might not be what you're looking for.

As I said before; game balance isn't an issue here. The setting is.

[Theodoxus]

I'm tired of the same old tropes though. At worst, I'd want individual variability. Even if every half-orc in the land has a +2 Str, +1 Con racial mod, I want the players to be special. Heck, it'd be great if you encounter a half-orc camp and your half-orc rogue had a +2 Int and +1 Dex and was full on Arcane Trickster, and the other other horcs are all just staring in disbelief. That's what I think is fun.

Besides, if you, in your unoptimized desire, created a half-orc barbarian with all 13's, and I decided to play a gnome fighter with a 15 str, just by the book, I'm stronger that you. You gonna flip out then?

What if we roll stats, and both get a 17 and a 14 as our highest stats. You want to be tanky, so you throw that 17 into Con. I wanna be strong, so I throw it into Str. Uh oh, now my gnome is stronger than you again... what are you going to do?

Variability happens. If the premise is that player characters are special little snowflakes, why on earth are they relegated to be the MOST archetypal examples of their species, rather than least?

I'm not saying your way is BadWrongFun - I'm just saying, I'm tired of running and playing it that way. 2 years without any racial mods in UA? So, I wanted to know how well it works in actual play. Not your thing, no worries, you're not at my table :smallwink:

[JellyPooga]

I'm tired of the same old tropes though. At worst, I'd want individual variability. Even if every half-orc in the land has a +2 Str, +1 Con racial mod, I want the players to be special. Heck, it'd be great if you encounter a half-orc camp and your half-orc rogue had a +2 Int and +1 Dex and was full on Arcane Trickster, and the other other horcs are all just staring in disbelief. That's what I think is fun.

Yeah, I get this. It's cool. It's not my thing, though. As you points out...

Besides, if you, in your unoptimized desire, created a half-orc barbarian with all 13's, and I decided to play a gnome fighter with a 15 str, just by the book, I'm stronger that you. You gonna flip out then?

It would be easily done to replicate your Half-Orc Rogue scenario including the fixed Racial mods. Player Characters are already special by virtue of being PC's, which gives them the ability to optimise. Your average Orc isn't all that smart. A Half-Orc with Int:14 at level 1 is definitely something noteworthy when stood next to his average peer and having +Str+Con doesn't detract from that; I'd argue it adds to your identity as a Half-Orc.

And no, I wouldn't flip out. I'd probably rethink my own character design and question the reasons I wanted to go Half-Orc, though.


What if we roll stats, and both get a 17 and a 14 as our highest stats. You want to be tanky, so you throw that 17 into Con. I wanna be strong, so I throw it into Str. Uh oh, now my gnome is stronger than you again... what are you going to do?

Not panic, because the 14 I put into Str turns into a 16, functionally identical to your 17 and that 17 I put into Con turns into an 18, which beats your 14+1 by (+2). So I've got Str:16, Con:18 and you've got Str:17, Con 15. I've got better stats for a front-line fighter, as I'd expect from being a Half-Orc. You're probably smarter than me with that +2 Int, though, so that about evens us out.

With your floating variables, we both take +Str+Con and what's to differentiate my being a Half-Orc and you being a Gnome with regards to our Ability Scores?


I'm not saying your way is BadWrongFun - I'm just saying, I'm tired of running and playing it that way. 2 years without any racial mods in UA? So, I wanted to know how well it works in actual play. Not your thing, no worries, you're not at my table :smallwink:

Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm in no way trying to say your way is either. You've shown me how it can work, but as you say, it's not my thing.

[D.U.P.A.]

meh it makes all races feel the same then, does not matter which one you choose. Makes sense for an only human setting for example, otherwise, especially for established settings, does not make sense that an orc wizard, usually barbarians and fighters, is on equal with high elven wizard, a race known for their wizards. At least this edition has no negative points, so such incompatible race class combos are still viable.

[Klorox]

If you're rolling for stats and every race gets bonuses wherever it wants, then I'm in the "against this" party.

Dwarves and half orcs are supposed to be stronger than gnomes and halflings. Are there exceptions? Yes. But with this rule, the races are all equally good at everything.

[Mandragola]

I wonder if there's a way to go half way on this, so as to maintain some sense that the races are distinct but still allow them all to be any class.

My solution to this would be to fix the +2 bonus that most races have in place, but allow them to stick the other +1 anywhere they wanted - though no stat could have +3.

So for instance any kind of elf would have +2 dex, then +1 to any other stat they wanted.

Not too sure about dwarves. +2 con for all. Then maybe Mdwarves would always have +1 strength, as well as a free +1 anywhere (potentially including strength). Hill dwarves would keep their +1hp/lvl. Only worry here is that suddenly hill dwarves are actually the better fighters, since +1hp/lvl is probably bette than +1 strength.

I don't mind that this makes mountain dwarves better wizards. At the moment their free medium armour proficiency does almost nothing, as they tend to be made into classes that already get it.

I wouldn't change variant humans. They are already good enough. I think this change would help bring other races slightly nearer their level. Half elves are already like this so no need to change them.

[Socratov]

[snap]

Halfling Barbarians? Awesome

[snip]

so, how do you tackle heavy weapons and small character sizes?

But funny stuff aside, I see no harm in using this rule, as long as it improves the fun of the table.

As for execution, some races get more and some races get less stat increases, I'd model the release of stat increases after the stat increases the races had before this conversion.

That said, I'd see Mandragola's version of this work as well as it does maintain a certain difference between the races, yet not something that can't be overcome through point-buy.

[MrStabby]

Maybe all races can assign their bonus scores as they wish but scores are capped at 18. THe exception is that the cap is 20 for scores that the race would normally boost?

[Logosloki]

This is what I have done at my tables and people do enjoy the extra little bit of freedom. Still trying to find a suitable replacement for Variant Human in low power games (I usually start adventures off at level 4/5 so the extra feat is nice on vHuman but not seen as vital).

[jas61292]

I wonder if there's a way to go half way on this, so as to maintain some sense that the races are distinct but still allow them all to be any class.

Something I have been thinking about is having characters get +3 total to their stats, letting them choose where to put them based on their race and class. Their options would be the stats their race gets normally, and the key abilities of their class. As far as what the key abilities are, would say they are the abilities for the class in the multiclassing requirements table [unless they only have one, in which case I would add in whatever other stat that class gets a save proficiency in].

Now, with that said, you would only be allowed to put +1 in any stat, unless the race normally gets +2, or you get it from both your class and race. For example, a Hill Dwarf Paladin would have 3 stat points to distribute between Str, Con, Wis, and Cha. And they could put no more than a +1 in any stat, except for Con, which could be +2. On the other hand, if you had a Dragonborn Bard, you would have 3 points to distribute between Str, Dex, and Cha, with a maximum of 2 in Str or Cha, and 1 in Dex.

With a method like this, assuming point buy, anyone could have a 16 (+3 mod) to start in their class's key stats. But with that said, unless your race has a natural talent for something, you can never get a +2, forcing you to dedicate more of your stat points to it.

Its not perfect, and don't know what I would do for Mountain Dwarves or Humans (I despise variant humans, so that is not an option for me personally), but it sounds good in my head.

[Lollerabe]

We just allowed 16s through pointbuy, my gnome fighter started with 16 strength - would have been 18 had he been a half Orc. Races are still different but you feel less pigeonholed into playing a certain class/race combo fx you can play that half Orc tempest cleric and have a 16 wis score - it's just a bit more expensive, works well for us.

[rollingForInit]

To a certain extent, I agree with this. You're right that I have no say in what you get to play...within the bounds of the setting we have both agreed to play in. If that setting says Gnomes are little guys with a talent for the intellectual, then I have had a say in who your character is. If you then come along with a Gnome that's stronger than my Half-Orc, then yeah, I feel perfectly justified saying that you are, in fact, doing it wrong.

The issue with this is that by level 4 it's 100% RAW to have a gnome with 20 strength. By level 8 you could have one with 19 Strength if you do points buy. So unless you're going to do major houserules and actually limit the ability scores of certain races, you're going to have gnomes stronger than half-orcs anyway.

Besides, it seems very strange to say that all gnomes all small and slim, and all elves are tall and slim and more dextrous than strong, and that all half-orcs are large and brawny. That might well be the average, even the vastly more common scenario ... but adventures are the exceptional by definition. A gnome with 15 strength is already much stronger than the average half-orc (that'd have 12, if 10 is the global average).

[JellyPooga]

The issue with this is that by level 4 it's 100% RAW to have a gnome with 20 strength. By level 8 you could have one with 19 Strength if you do points buy. So unless you're going to do major houserules and actually limit the ability scores of certain races, you're going to have gnomes stronger than half-orcs anyway.

Besides, it seems very strange to say that all gnomes all small and slim, and all elves are tall and slim and more dextrous than strong, and that all half-orcs are large and brawny. That might well be the average, even the vastly more common scenario ... but adventures are the exceptional by definition. A gnome with 15 strength is already much stronger than the average half-orc (that'd have 12, if 10 is the global average).

True enough and I've got no real argument against this. However, the lvl.4 Gnome with Str:20 is a real oddity. For one, you have to be rolling stats (which is the baseline default, I know). Then you have to actually roll an 18; by no means guaranteed. Then you have to decide that you want to play against type and that you want (the) high(est) Str. I'm only spit-balling my expectations, but I wouldn't, personally, expect to actually see such a character played more than once, if at all, in a lifetime of gaming, even though the odds and RAW tell me it's very much possible.

If you then consider that PC's are inherently stand-out characters within the setting, a Str:20 Gnome is going to cause comment wherever he goes. Will it cause him problems? Probably not; not many people argue with Str:20! But the roleplaying implications are something worth considering, beyond just getting +5 to hit and damage.

Now, if you take away fixed racial mods, the instances of Str:20 Gnome, which should be rare as rocking horse proverbials, increase. Who wouldn't want a Fighter type with as solid a defence against spells as a Gnome has? I foresee Gnome front-liners being relatively common, at least as PC's. This doesn't gel with the expectation that Gnomes are supposed to be somewhat lacking in the physical department. After all, the only experience of the setting we get is the specific instances we encounter during play. It's all well and good saying that Gnomes are small and weak, but if the only Gnome in play is a hulking barbarian, then we're not getting the expected experience we signed up for. Does that make sense?

Now compare to Half-Orcs; with fixed mods we see lots and lots of high-strength Half-Orcs. It's what they're good at, so it's what people play. What's their fluff? Oh yeah, that they're strong and tough. Our experience is meeting our expectations. Take away the fixed mods and, well to be honest we'll probably still see lots of high-strength Half-Orcs, but we'll be seeing just as many high-strength Gnomes (well, maybe a few less), so your big brawny Half-Orc is left feeling a bit gipped; he played a Half-Orc because they're strong, but he's only as strong as the "weedy" Gnome.

Now, in RAW, yes you can play a Gnome with Str:15 or whatever and the next guy can play a Str:10 Half-Orc. This is fine, because despite the game telling those players what the expectations are, they've decided to fly in the face of those expectations and play contrary to type. The game is telling them that they've still got to conform somewhat; using point-buy, no Half-Orc has a negative Str mod for example, but you can still optimise for something else (e.g. Intelligence if you wanted the previously mentioned Half-Orc Arcane Trickster).

The point is that all things being equal, a Half-Orc is supposed to be and will be stronger than a Gnome.

That's the Racial Identity.

This doesn't mean that every Half-Orc must be stronger than every Gnome.

That's your Character Identity.

Both should be preserved.

[Mandragola]

This takes me back to the idea of of fixing whatever the +2 bonus is, but letting the other +1 be assigned as the player likes.

So then all half-orcs would continue to be relatively strong, but rather than fixing their constitution score we would allow that+1 to go anywhere you liked.

Maybe instead it would be better to take one off the +2 stat, and allow that to be allocated anywhere (including right where it started).

So then all half-orcs would be stronger and tougher than average people, but some would also be dexterous, others would also be wise, and so on.

In so far as there's a problem at the moment, it's that some races are weaker than they ought to be at being some classes. I'd like to see the occasional charismatic half-orc, or intelligent dwarf.

A final way might be to do away with additive racial bonuses altogether, and instead just allow point buy up to 16. Then maybe allocate one stat to each race that they can buy cheaply, and possibly a second stat either to the race or to the class. Let that stat be raised at a cost of 1 point per increase all the way to 16. So a 16 would cost 11 points normally but 8 if your race was stereotypically good at it.

[Kryx]

This takes me back to the idea of of fixing whatever the +2 bonus is, but letting the other +1 be assigned as the player likes.

So then all half-orcs would continue to be relatively strong, but rather than fixing their constitution score we would allow that+1 to go anywhere you liked.

Maybe instead it would be better to take one off the +2 stat, and allow that to be allocated anywhere (including right where it started)..

I mentioned this idea earlier in the thread:

I did something similar: Set all races to have +1/+1 to specific ability scores and then left +1 on any ability score (including the +1's). It retained the expected while allowing for variation.

Though this thread makes me rethink that idea. +2/+1 or +1/+1/+1 as a general rule could be a bit nicer.

I did that for the races I use (http://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/edit/S1ggk1dm4).

[Theodoxus]

I see your point, Jelly - and in a generic PHB world, or a supported setting like FR or GH, I do keep the racial stats as presented.

I also assume you didn't convert an older ruleset to 5e - having gnomes who weren't particularly resistant to things (unlike dwarves who could shake off most magical effects) are suddenly laughing at all the spellflingers... that's gotta be a little jarring within the expected norms of racial identities...

Half-orcs getting smarter, dwarves getting more charismatic, halflings (and gnomes) getting stronger, elves healthier...

In that spirit, I'm just expanding - not only are halflngs and gnomes getting +2 stronger, they might even get +4! Of course, given the way heavy weapons interact with these two small races, going with strength prioritized builds might not be all that great, but I think having gnomish warlocks or clerics would be pretty nifty, and not just all wizards...

[Talamare]

I remember typing up in the past a simple alternate race system, basically you only get +1 Racial stat. However, you start with a Stat Increase/Feat

Helps a ton with character variety

It's in my signature