House rule opinion

[stewstew5]

This is a house rule of mine that I want opinions on:

The maximum a stat can reach, usually 20, is increased by the racial bonuses to said stat. So, a Dragonborn with no other conditions could have a maximum strength of 22 and a maximum charisma of 21.


I use this because it just doesn’t make sense to me for the strongest ever halfling to be equal to the strongest ever half-orc

[nickl_2000]

Doing this will encourage players to rarely pick the non-optimal choice of races.

If I'm a strength based fighter, why would I pick a race that doesn't allow me to get to 22 in strength?

[stewstew5]

Doing this will encourage players to rarely pick the non-optimal choice of races.

If I'm a strength based fighter, why would I pick a race that doesn't allow me to get to 22 in strength?

Why not only play Goliath barbarians?

You could and there’s nothing wrong with it, but not everyone is playing for optimization.

[Man_Over_Game]

As a side note, Strength isn't the only factor that decides who's Strongest. Size, for example, plays a part when determining what you can lift. I'd actually say that Size is a bigger deal than your actual Strength attribute!

Additionally, the Half-Orc has a lot more support in terms of racial abilities that help him with his identity of being "Strong".

Lastly, while the Halfling is able to reach that point, the Half Orc is able to reach it first. When the Halfling was taking that last ASI, what was the Half Orc investing in? Constitution? Great Weapon Master? Tough? All things that contribute towards the narrative of "Strong".

I guess, my point is, the stats are an arbitrary value to reflect a general idea of the character's capabilities. It doesn't define exactly who's "strongest" or who's "Smartest". It's an abstraction designed to make sure that every player stands a chance.

[Belthien]

This seems like a really bad houserule to me. Just further encourages people into optimal class/race combos.

Personally, I'd like to see more gnome barbarians and dwarf warlocks, not less.

[stewstew5]

As a side note, Strength isn't the only factor that decides who's Strongest. Size, for example, plays a part when determining what you can lift. I'd actually say that Size is a bigger deal than your actual Strength attribute!

Additionally, the Half-Orc has a lot more support in terms of racial abilities that help him with his identity of being "Strong".

Lastly, while the Halfling is able to reach that point, the Half Orc is able to reach it first. When the Halfling was taking that last ASI, what was the Half Orc investing in? Constitution? Great Weapon Master? Tough? All things that contribute towards the narrative of "Strong".

I guess, my point is, the stats are an arbitrary value to reflect a general idea of the character's capabilities. It doesn't define exactly who's "strongest" or who's "Smartest". It's an abstraction designed to make sure that every player stands a chance.

Good points, but the narrative doesn’t really affect your rolls when you’re standing there in a bar, arm wrestling your compatriot, with your dungeon master wanting to give you advantage or some sort of bonus but not wanting the halfling across from you to complain it was unfair.

At least with this rule you can establish it at the start without having to go into the rulings for every little scenario



This seesms like a really bad houserule to me. Just further encourages people into optimal class/race combos.

Personally, I'd like to see more gnome barbarians and dwarf warlocks, not less.

The fact of the matter is if someone was going to optimize like that, they will, and if they were going to play a dwarf warlock, they will. I’d rather give people the tools to enjoy the character they make than restrict them to encourage diverse picks

[Contrast]

Doing this will encourage players to rarely pick the non-optimal choice of races.

This. It also actually narrows the list of optimal races given that a +1 is no longer just as potentially effective as a +2.

A single +1 isn't going to break anything. Just be conscious you're upping the power curve of higher level characters slightly.

If you think the benefits outweigh the costs crack on.

[Vogie]

Good points, but the narrative doesn’t really affect your rolls when you’re standing there in a bar, arm wrestling your compatriot, with your dungeon master wanting to give you advantage or some sort of bonus but not wanting the halfling across from you to complain it was unfair.

At least with this rule you can establish it at the start without having to go into the rulings for every little scenario

... that seems oddly specific.

If you're in a situation like that, ideally, your strength scores mean nothing more than strength score.

I'd see that situation as more of something like a contest of Strength (athletics) rolls, and then a little mental game. Kinda like a skill challenge, but the opponent rolls a mental skill vs their opponent's concentration.

So in the epic arm-wrestle between Tallman the Halfling and Scar the Dragonborn would look something like:

Both roll Initiative
Tallman goes first and says "This looks really important to you, I think I may just let you win"
Tallman's Charisma (Deception) Check vs Scar's Concentration (Constitution Saving throw)
Scar looks straight in his eyes and says "You talk a lot for someone with such a well-known losing streak"
Scar's Intelligence (History) check vs Tallman's Concentration
Both roll Strength(Athletics), each getting advantage if their opponent's concentration was broken.
Someone inevitably says "Um... Best of 3?"



The fact of the matter is if someone was going to optimize like that, they will, and if they were going to play a dwarf warlock, they will. I’d rather give people the tools to enjoy the character they make than restrict them to encourage diverse picks

You're not talking about optimization here though. If you'd genuinely implement this, ANY iteration that isn't 100% wholly optimized would be the power disparity equivalent of showing up to a Nascar Race with a minivan... with sugar in the gas tank. Or having the dwarf Warlock show up to session zero, realize they've been shot in the face *before they do anything* then scrapping their concept for ANOTHER half elf or Tiefling warlock if they want to be remotely competitive.

It isn't roleplay if your response to someone wanting to play a Barbarian is "Play Dragonborn or Goliath, or get -2 strength". That's just a bad situation to put anyone in, doubly so if they genuinely wanted to have fun.

[stewstew5]

... that seems oddly specific.

If you're in a situation like that, ideally, your strength scores mean nothing more than strength score.

I'd see that situation as more of something like a contest of Strength (athletics) rolls, and then a little mental game. Kinda like a skill challenge, but the opponent rolls a mental skill vs their opponent's concentration.

So in the epic arm-wrestle between Tallman the Halfling and Scar the Dragonborn would look something like:

Both roll Initiative
Tallman goes first and says "This looks really important to you, I think I may just let you win"
Tallman's Charisma (Deception) Check vs Scar's Concentration (Constitution Saving throw)
Scar looks straight in his eyes and says "You talk a lot for someone with such a well-known losing streak"
Scar's Intelligence (History) check vs Tallman's Concentration
Both roll Strength(Athletics), each getting advantage if their opponent's concentration was broken.
Someone inevitably says "Um... Best of 3?"


A clever idea, very clever in fact, but I more meant that this is easier to establish early game to prevent whining should a certain characterdeserve some sort of advantage (such as being a 300 lbs 6’2” Dragonborn vs. A 40 lbs 3’5” halfling with no other justification to his strength than game rules)




You're not talking about optimization here though. If you'd genuinely implement this, ANY iteration that isn't 100% wholly optimized would be the power disparity equivalent of showing up to a Nascar Race with a minivan... with sugar in the gas tank. Or having the dwarf Warlock show up to session zero, realize they've been shot in the face *before they do anything* then scrapping their concept for ANOTHER half elf or Tiefling warlock if they want to be remotely competitive.

It isn't roleplay if your response to someone wanting to play a Barbarian is "Play Dragonborn or Goliath, or get -2 strength". That's just a bad situation to put anyone in, doubly so if they genuinely wanted to have fun.

Having fun with an inoptimal build isn’t dependant on the +1 charisma bonus in the mid game, but the fun of playing a stupidly strong raging barbarian is somewhat diminished when gnome with the inexplicable proportionate strength of an ant is right next to you

[Man_Over_Game]

A clever idea, very clever in fact, but I more meant that this is easier to establish early game to prevent whining should a certain characterdeserve some sort of advantage (such as being a 300 lbs 6’2” Dragonborn vs. A 40 lbs 3’5” halfling with no other justification to his strength than game rules)

I think overall, it wouldn't be a big enough deal to cause any problems. This does mean that a Barbarian Half-Orc or Mountain Dwarf can get up to 26 Strength and Constitution, but I've seen better level 20 capstones.

I'd just be careful with managing Bounded Accuracy with something like this. Someone in Light Armor would get the same amount of AC as someone in Heavy Armor, and the person in Heavy Armor would have no means for growth without magic items.

[stewstew5]

I'd just be careful with managing Bounded Accuracy with something like this. Someone in Light Armor would get the same amount of AC as someone in Heavy Armor, and the person in Heavy Armor would have no means for growth without magic items.

Oh. Actually a really good point. That one ac difference can be huge, but a 17 ac versus an 18 ac in light armor look equally high to someone in full plate who wants to be untouchable

[DrowPiratRobrts]

This seems like a really bad houserule to me. Just further encourages people into optimal class/race combos.

Personally, I'd like to see more gnome barbarians and dwarf warlocks, not less.

Still, while it may seem bad to you, it's not inherently bad to build your characters for optimization. In fact, this is one of about 7 things I've started telling my players to rank at the beginning of a campaign in order of importance to them/how fun they find them. Among other things like exploring, storytelling, and instigating I've found some players just really enjoy making optimized characters and some people don't care at all about it.

Ultimately I doubt that it would affect anyone negatively, and for the players who want to optimize, they'll enjoy it.

[stewstew5]

Still, while it may seem bad to you, it's not inherently bad to build your characters for optimization. In fact, this is one of about 7 things I've started telling my players to rank at the beginning of a campaign in order of importance to them/how fun they find them. Among other things like exploring, storytelling, and instigating I've found some players just really enjoy making optimized characters and some people don't care at all about it.

Ultimately I doubt that it would affect anyone negatively, and for the players who want to optimize, they'll enjoy it.

Exactly my point worded much more eloquently

[Bjarkmundur]

If a DM uses a houserule but there's no one in the forums to comment about it, is it broken or balanced?

In other words: Try it out, and let us know how it affects the gameplay experience of your players.

We can help you see how it might affect your game, but no one really knows until you try it.

No one here has any right to say "do" or "don't". We can only say "if you do, remember that it might affect x, y and z"

[strangebloke]

If I were to do this, I would cap the max dex bonus of light armor to 5. No reason to make light armor better than plate.

Then, I'd allow people to point buy up to 16, as the 'cap' is higher. Some people will see this and start with a goliath and buy 16 STR, and those people will be effective...

But others will see that there's really nothing wrong with buying to sixteen and picking something with nice traits but bad stat mods. After all, getting to 22 STR is going to be a serious stretch goal that's only really worth it if you're going for a GWM build or something similar. So you'll have a tiefling fighter who starts with 16 and never pumps it up past 18, using his ASIs for ritual caster and other such things.

Ultimately, though, I wouldn't do this. I would rather just have small creatures have half the carry capacity of medium ones, and then also have small creatures make opposed STR checks with disadvantage. That gives you all the granularity you need without sweeping changes to the game.

[Sigreid]

I dont think it will break the game. As others have said, it will lead to people playing stereotypical races.

[Bjarkmundur]

Ultimately, though, I wouldn't do this. I would rather just have small creatures have half the carry capacity of medium ones, and then also have small creatures make opposed STR checks with disadvantage. That gives you all the granularity you need without sweeping changes to the game.

This is actually a god solution.
You are effectively weaker since you're smaller, based on the task at hand.

To see how stats affect the game, try doubling or tripling racial stat bonuses, and removing all capstones.
Write down the results.
That way you can clearly see what the most extreme case looks like, and thst helps you find a sweet spot.

[Wildarm]

Not gamebreaking by any means but could distort player initial choice. DM already has the option to break the stat caps by giving out manuals and tomes or certain magic items. Personally, I would work it into the campaign if you liked to use an effect like that. A set of racial exemplar quests would be ideal. Each player(with the groups help) gets a chance to complete a special quest to break the stat cap and boost their highest stat by 2. Fun to design as a DM and fun to do as a player. Could be a plot hook where the players are confronted with a difficult enemy and they need to bring their skills to the next level before the plot hook giver deems them worthy to confront this evil head on. Make it a deity who makes it all happen inside the players minds for simplicity. Make sure the quest/fight is reasonably short, challenging but difficult to fail. Make the final challenge something they each have to complete alone, perhaps while the rest are fighting off endless mobs/minions. In the end it was all a dream except they've unlocked something in their mind and each character who succeeded has gotten a divine boon with a +2 to their highest stat.

[47Ace]

A clever idea, very clever in fact, but I more meant that this is easier to establish early game to prevent whining should a certain characterdeserve some sort of advantage (such as being a 300 lbs 6’2” Dragonborn vs. A 40 lbs 3’5” halfling with no other justification to his strength than game rules)



Having fun with an inoptimal build isn’t dependant on the +1 charisma bonus in the mid game, but the fun of playing a stupidly strong raging barbarian is somewhat diminished when gnome with the inexplicable proportionate strength of an ant is right next to you

But their are people like me who could have fun playing a cool slightly off type character who would not have fun if they were inevitably a +1 behind because that feels wrong.

Perhaps you could better accomplish your goal by messing with the skill system. You could give people a bonus to skills equal to their racial stat bonuses for all skills that use that stat. So for you arm wrestling example the half Orc and halfling could both have a 20 in strength and profiancy in athletics but, the half Orc would still have a +2 in the check.

Besides does it site right with you that with your rules a high-elf arcane trickster would be harder to damage naked (19ac) then a fighter clad head to toe in 65lb of steel (plate ac18) with only their face and frame some angles their crotch and armpits practically able to be damaged?

Edit: strangebloke idea is good.

[Captain Panda]

People will already tend to pick the "best" race for a class. This just reinforces the fact that you should. I would be totally against it as a player.

[DrowPiratRobrts]

People will already tend to pick the "best" race for a class. This just reinforces the fact that you should. I would be totally against it as a player.

Why are you by default totally against that as a player? Is it because you feel pigeonholed into picking a certain race for what class you pick, or does it have to do with other players picking the "best" race for their class? That's a genuine question. Because if it's the first one I get it but would just say, who cares if you're not perfectly optimized. You'll still contribute plenty to the team. If it's the latter, then why do you care what other players in your party are picking, especially if it's helpful to you? If it's something totally different from either of these, I'd be interested to hear it.

[Anymage]

I'll note that by this houserule, the world's strongest halfling is still functionally equal to the world's strongest human. It makes +1 to a stat matter a lot less, while +2 becomes critical for the long game. It doesn't affect the low points (because stat penalties don't exist in a 5e world), just makes sure that the high points are cemented in.

If you want to institute a stat cap for smaller races that sounds a lot more in line with your vision. And while it'd suck for the guy who really has his heart set on a gnome barbarian, stat caps for races you see as particularly bad fits for things sounds a lot more specific and a lot less likely to interfere with player visions than saying that only very specific races can ever reach the real max of 22.

[stewstew5]

I'll note that by this houserule, the world's strongest halfling is still functionally equal to the world's strongest human. It makes +1 to a stat matter a lot less, while +2 becomes critical for the long game. It doesn't affect the low points (because stat penalties don't exist in a 5e world), just makes sure that the high points are cemented in.

If you want to institute a stat cap for smaller races that sounds a lot more in line with your vision. And while it'd suck for the guy who really has his heart set on a gnome barbarian, stat caps for races you see as particularly bad fits for things sounds a lot more specific and a lot less likely to interfere with player visions than saying that only very specific races can ever reach the real max of 22.

Granted, but with the feat human variant, any stat bonus provided by a first-level feat would be considered a racial bonus, so the strongest, strongest human could still reasonably stand up to a half-orc if built properly

[Rukelnikov]

I planned to implement this but my players never got to the point it mattered.


Granted, but with the feat human variant, any stat bonus provided by a first-level feat would be considered a racial bonus, so the strongest, strongest human could still reasonably stand up to a half-orc if built properly

This doesn't make much sense to me, though, its a feat not a racial ability modifier.

[stewstew5]

I planned to implement this but my players never got to the point it mattered.



This doesn't make much sense to me, though, its a feat not a racial ability modifier.

But it’s a racial bonus that gave the feat. That’s just my thoughts

[Rukelnikov]

But it’s a racial bonus that gave the feat. That’s just my thoughts

But the race gave you a feat, and the feat gave the bonus. If you are gonna give bonuses to everything a race grants you, then, for instance, skills you get from racial bonus should be allowed to be taken a second time for expertise.

[Ventruenox]

If players really want to exceed 20 in a stat, and if you are toying with house rules anyway, why not allow the Blood Hunter class? The Order of the Mutant can surpass 20 in an ability score via mutagens, which is probably the only mechanical reason to play one.

[stewstew5]

But the race gave you a feat, and the feat gave the bonus. If you are gonna give bonuses to everything a race grants you, then, for instance, skills you get from racial bonus should be allowed to be taken a second time for expertise.

But... a skill isn’t a stat...

(I understand where you’re coming from, but I’m saying the feat is a racial feature that raises a stat (presuming they take one that does) and would be counted as such)

[Contrast]

Having fun with an inoptimal build isn’t dependant on the +1 charisma bonus in the mid game, but the fun of playing a stupidly strong raging barbarian is somewhat diminished when gnome with the inexplicable proportionate strength of an ant is right next to you

I'd like to point out you're being a little inconsistent here.

The stupidly strong raging gnome player should just accept it and have fun despite being sub-optimal...but the stupidly strong raging half orc player has less fun if they're not more optimal?

I'd also point out that a half orc will always be a ASI/feat ahead of the gnome/halfling so they are already more optimal. A level 12 halfling/gnome (the earliest they can max by) who has focused solely on training their strength and martial skill is so far outside a typical example of their race that you're not saying 'lol you were beaten by a gnome' you're saying 'you were beaten by Hijax the Mighty, people say he once climbed a giant just so he could heatbutt it to the ground, while some whisper he may be half giant himself such is his strength'.

[Lunali]

I use this because it just doesn’t make sense to me for the strongest ever halfling to be equal to the strongest ever half-orc

The strongest ever of either of them is going to be someone who used a magical book or two to increase their maximum stat.

[stewstew5]

I'd like to point out you're being a little inconsistent here.

The stupidly strong raging gnome player should just accept it and have fun despite being sub-optimal...but the stupidly strong raging half orc player has less fun if they're not more optimal?

I'd also point out that a half orc will always be a ASI/feat ahead of the gnome/halfling so they are already more optimal. A level 12 halfling/gnome (the earliest they can max by) who has focused solely on training their strength and martial skill is so far outside a typical example of their race that you're not saying 'lol you were beaten by a gnome' you're saying 'you were beaten by Hijax the Mighty, people say he once climbed a giant just so he could heatbutt it to the ground, while some whisper he may be half giant himself such is his strength'.


The strongest ever of either of them is going to be someone who used a magical book or two to increase their maximum stat.

I have used the phrase "inexplicable" more than a few times in this thread,or at least words with similar connotations.

If magic is involved, things change. If the gnome has a reason to overpower a half-orc of impressive might he has a reason. But two flat, uninteresting players each playing a different race version of the same character are not going to have a such a reason for a gnome to be that mighty except "I got ability score increases from my class".

If said characters were to contest their mights against each other, and the gnome were to win because they were on level fields despite one being nearly triple the size of the other, the half-orc would feel cheated.
If he however got a tiny, little bonus, just enough to show that he was stronger, but still lost, this feeling of being cheated wouldn't be as strong, and were the half-orc to win, the gnome could merely think "he is a half orc and I am a gnome, the loss is fair" and as many people are least disappointed as possible.

This is of course heavy prose, and in no way a guarantee of what would happen. But it is the baseline, using simple people playing RAW (with the exception of the house rule) simple characters and most clearly demonstrates why this rule would be implemented

[Contrast]

If magic is involved, things change. If the gnome has a reason to overpower a half-orc of impressive might he has a reason. But two flat, uninteresting players each playing a different race version of the same character are not going to have a such a reason for a gnome to be that mighty except "I got ability score increases from my class".

He's mighty because he's a strength 20 level 12 barbarian - why does that somehow not make his mightyness count or for some reason count less than a half orcs intrinsic mightyness? :smallconfused:


If said characters were to contest their mights against each other, and the gnome were to win because they were on level fields despite one being nearly triple the size of the other, the half-orc would feel cheated.
If he however got a tiny, little bonus, just enough to show that he was stronger, but still lost, this feeling of being cheated wouldn't be as strong, and were the half-orc to win, the gnome could merely think "he is a half orc and I am a gnome, the loss is fair" and as many people are least disappointed as possible.

I would expect my strength 20 level 12 gnome barbarian to kick the ass of most of the people he meets, half orc or no thank you very much. This is the type of individual who confidently squares up against dragons. You're arguing it seems fair for a half orc to beat them in a fight when they can reliably solo giants in melee.

You should probably cap female characters strength lower than male characters as well.

It appears your aim is to make sub-optimal choices worse so I guess we agree your rule will make steps towards achieving your goal. We disagree that your goal is a good goal but as I said up thread, a further +1 at the cost of another ASI is hardly going to break anything substantial so don't worry too much about my dissent :smallwink:

[Lunali]

Keep in mind that many of the rules are less about balancing the game world to make sense and more about balancing the level of power players can get. This is the same reason it doesn't make sense to have different stats depending on age or gender. It may be that gnome barbarian NPCs are weaker than orc NPCs, but that shouldn't affect the PCs.

[stewstew5]

He's mighty because he's a strength 20 level 12 barbarian - why does that somehow not make his mightyness count or for some reason count less than a half orcs intrinsic mightyness? :smallconfused:



I would expect my strength 20 level 12 gnome barbarian to kick the ass of most of the people he meets, half orc or no thank you very much. This is the type of individual who confidently squares up against dragons. You're arguing it seems fair for a half orc to beat them in a fight when they can reliably solo giants in melee.

You should probably cap female characters strength lower than male characters as well.

It appears your aim is to make sub-optimal choices worse so I guess we agree your rule will make steps towards achieving your goal. We disagree that your goal is a good goal but as I said up thread, a further +1 at the cost of another ASI is hardly going to break anything substantial so don't worry too much about my dissent :smallwink:

A half orc barbarian of equal level, mind you.


I have gone in a bit of a tangent and forgotten my initial reason however. It’s always just bugged me that a character who’s naturally strong because of their race has the same maximum as someone who’s not, it’s not about optimization

[Xayah]

A half orc barbarian of equal level, mind you.


I have gone in a bit of a tangent and forgotten my initial reason however. It’s always just bugged me that a character who’s naturally strong because of their race has the same maximum as someone who’s not, it’s not about optimization
Well, I'd see it like this: adventurers/PCs are people who have trained for a long time to be the ultimate person they can be. And eventually, they get there. There is a difference between races, but after so much training, that difference is just negligible.

However, that doesn't mean that difference didn't exist. That Half-Orc you mentioned? He had a much, much easier time getting to where he is than the Halfling did, as reflected in him having taken less ASIs to reach his ultimate potential of 20 Strength.

Meanwhile, a Dwarf can teach himself to become extroverted and social, but he'll have a harder time than his Half-Elf buddy, who grew up in a very tight-knit community of Elves and Humans alike. A Gnome from a society where knowledge and Intelligence is reward will be able to more easily get to the point of knowing practically everything than a Wood Elf that isolated himself for years.

These people still reach the point of being absolutely incredible at what they want to be, but it takes them longer to get there. Keep in mind, at 20 in a stat, you're basically the strongest/smartest/most charismatic person that ever lived. At that point, your race and background don't matter anymore. Where they matter is in the journey to get there, which can be made that much easier or harder by them.

[Contrast]

A half orc barbarian of equal level, mind you.


I have gone in a bit of a tangent and forgotten my initial reason however. It’s always just bugged me that a character who’s naturally strong because of their race has the same maximum as someone who’s not, it’s not about optimization

A half orc barbarian of equal level will have a spare ASI to play around with compared to the gnome - they'll have boosted constitution and be tougher or have picked up additional tricks and abilities in the form of a feat. They will still be ahead. In a one on one fight a half orc barbarian will have the edge against a gnome barbarian because they've had an easier time training strength so have had time to focus on other aspects of their abilities.

Edit - Ninjad :smallbiggrin: that'll teach me to open a tab and come back some time later to respond without refreshing :smalltongue:

[47Ace]

I have used the phrase "inexplicable" more than a few times in this thread,or at least words with similar connotations.

If magic is involved, things change. If the gnome has a reason to overpower a half-orc of impressive might he has a reason. But two flat, uninteresting players each playing a different race version of the same character are not going to have a such a reason for a gnome to be that mighty except "I got ability score increases from my class".

If said characters were to contest their mights against each other, and the gnome were to win because they were on level fields despite one being nearly triple the size of the other, the half-orc would feel cheated.
If he however got a tiny, little bonus, just enough to show that he was stronger, but still lost, this feeling of being cheated wouldn't be as strong, and were the half-orc to win, the gnome could merely think "he is a half orc and I am a gnome, the loss is fair" and as many people are least disappointed as possible.

This is of course heavy prose, and in no way a guarantee of what would happen. But it is the baseline, using simple people playing RAW (with the exception of the house rule) simple characters and most clearly demonstrates why this rule would be implemented

I have to ask do you also have problems with High Elves being as smart as Gnomes? Because, well your change solves the problem of Half-orcs getting poolsharked by overly strong Gnomes in arm wrestling contests you now have Gnomes beating high elves in games of intilect. But, that is not that big of a problem as that sort of thing is a side show in most campaigns. The bigger problem is know by level 12 potentially the 600 year old High Elf who has spent his life studying wizardry just can't wizard as well as 300 year old Gnome. The elf has 1 less spell known (somewhat noticable), 1 less on spell attacks (not to important), and a one lower save (important and noticable every additional +1 to a save is better then the last).

My suggestion to solve the problem was to give a bonus to skills that use the racial stats equal to the racial bonus to that stat. So every skill check involving strength a Half-Orc would get a +2 to. This means that Gnomes would get a +2 and High Elves would get a +1 for history and arcana check in out of combat trivia games at their favourite pub witch can play out as a friendly rivalry. But, The High Elf doesn't feel like they are being punished for a very thematic, normally equally optimal, race choice every time they are asked what their spell save DC is.