Io-Rach Goblins: Balanced?

[Inevitability]

While paging through the BoVD for the current Iron Chef, I chanced upon the following passage:


After filling large pits with alchemical mixtures, the Io-Rach tribe lowers its warriors on harnesses into the brew for as long as the goblins can stand it. When a goblin is brought out of the pit, he spends the next few days undergoing an agonizing change. One-quarter of such warriors die a howling death. Each of the others grows to Medium-size and gains a +4 inherent bonus to Strength and Constitution and a –4 inherent penalty to Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma. These warriors become misshapen, lumbering mutants with twisted limbs, bulbous eyes, and festering sores.

That'd give an Io-Rach goblin the following stats:

Medium Humanoid (Goblinoid)
+2 strength, +2 dexterity, +4 constitution, -4 intelligence, -4 wisdom, -6 charisma
Darkvision 60 ft.
+4 to Move Silently and Ride
Automatic Languages: Common, Goblin. Bonus Languages: Draconic, Elven, Giant, Gnoll, Orc.
Favored Class: Rogue
LA: +0

This seems good, but not an instant pick the way things like anthropomorphic baleen whale or half-minotaur are. If I was playing a melee brute, I think I'd rather be a water orc. If I was playing a dragonfire adept, I'd rather be a mongrelfolk. If I was playing a rogue, I'd probably prefer a whisper gnome or strongheart halfling. Those are all strong races, but they're not gamebreaking: would Io-Rach goblins similarly be fine to allow?

[awa]

While paging through the BoVD for the current Iron Chef, I chanced upon the following passage:



That'd give an Io-Rach goblin the following stats:

Medium Humanoid (Goblinoid)
+2 strength, +2 dexterity, +4 constitution, -4 intelligence, -4 wisdom, -6 charisma
Darkvision 60 ft.
+4 to Move Silently and Ride
Automatic Languages: Common, Goblin. Bonus Languages: Draconic, Elven, Giant, Gnoll, Orc.
Favored Class: Rogue
LA: +0

This seems good, but not an instant pick the way things like anthropomorphic baleen whale or half-minotaur are. If I was playing a melee brute, I think I'd rather be a water orc. If I was playing a dragonfire adept, I'd rather be a mongrelfolk. If I was playing a rogue, I'd probably prefer a whisper gnome or strongheart halfling. Those are all strong races, but they're not gamebreaking: would Io-Rach goblins similarly be fine to allow?

I feel like their lore is the far bigger hang up, I probably would not allow them myself. But are they broken mechanically as in are they to powerful? well from a class neutral perspective their penalties are bigger than their bonuses so that works out, and taking classes into account they are pushed away from the most powerful classes. A mutant goblin barbarian wont make a human druid feel weak.

they get a big bonus to move silent but with such a big hit to int and wis they will make a lousy scout/skill monkey so that's a non issue. Dark vision 60 is nothing special, ride is not that valuable a skill and they have negative optimization with everything that grants a mount (off the top of my head).

[NontheistCleric]

LA +0 sounds about right. Honestly, for melee brute purposes alone, I might prefer this to water orc–but only marginally, and it's such a moron it hurts.

[Pezzo]

With the bonuses and penalties being inherent, I can see them good only in low level campaigns.

[remetagross]

It's not a bad deal. I'd 100% allow them in a game were I running one. I'm thinking about a more optimized process where one leafs through all possible goblinoid races and picks the best one to which this "template" can be applied.

Io-Rach air goblin: Str +2 Dex +4 Con +2 Int -4 Wis -4 Cha -4. You gain +2 to Dex and Cha in exchange for +2 to Con. A medium-sized race with a +4 racial bonus to Dex is nothing to sneeze at. It'd make a reasonable Setting Sun Swordsage, for the dex-based trip maneuvers off of a Medium chassis.

Slap dragonborn on top of an arctic or aquatic goblin:
Dragonborn Io-Rach arctic/aquatic goblin: Str +2 Dex -2 Con +8 Int -4 Wis -4 Cha -6.
LA +0 +8 racial Con modifier. Now, that's something. Actually, it might probably be some sort of a record. Still, the mental penalties are so annoying that this would not be an overpowered race.

[Inevitability]

Vril might be another fun application target in that case: +4 strength, +6 constitution, -6 intelligence, -4 wisdom, -6 charisma, with its innate abilities benefitting from the constitution boost - plus favored class (barbarian), which otherwise just kind of awkwardly sits there. These I'd arguably call better than water orcs (before Headlong Rush of course), assuming you don't want to enter any PrC with actual skill reqs.

[Beni-Kujaku]

Considering how bad regular goblins are, these are clearly not overpowered. A good choice if you don't plan on using your mental stats, but I don't see them as stronger than Water Orcs.

[SirNibbles]

While paging through the BoVD for the current Iron Chef, I chanced upon the following passage:




After filling large pits with alchemical mixtures, the Io-Rach tribe lowers its warriors on harnesses into the brew for as long as the goblins can stand it. When a goblin is brought out of the pit, he spends the next few days undergoing an agonizing change. One-quarter of such warriors die a howling death. Each of the others grows to Medium-size and gains a +4 inherent bonus to Strength and Constitution and a –4 inherent penalty to Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma. These warriors become misshapen, lumbering mutants with twisted limbs, bulbous eyes, and festering sores.

Book of Vile Darkness, page 22


That'd give an Io-Rach goblin the following stats:

Medium Humanoid (Goblinoid)
+2 strength, +2 dexterity, +4 constitution, -4 intelligence, -4 wisdom, -6 charisma
Darkvision 60 ft.
+4 to Move Silently and Ride
Automatic Languages: Common, Goblin. Bonus Languages: Draconic, Elven, Giant, Gnoll, Orc.
Favored Class: Rogue
LA: +0

This seems good, but not an instant pick the way things like anthropomorphic baleen whale or half-minotaur are. If I was playing a melee brute, I think I'd rather be a water orc. If I was playing a dragonfire adept, I'd rather be a mongrelfolk. If I was playing a rogue, I'd probably prefer a whisper gnome or strongheart halfling. Those are all strong races, but they're not gamebreaking: would Io-Rach goblins similarly be fine to allow?

Where are you getting your numbers?




Goblin characters possess the following racial traits.
–2 Strength, +2 Dexterity, –2 Charisma.

Monster Manual, page 134


They then get a size increase and an ability score increase.




Increased size also affects a creature’s ability scores, AC, attack bonuses, and damage values as indicated on Tables 4–2 and 4–3.

Table 4–2: Changes to Statistics by Size


Old Size
New Size
Str
Dex
Con
Armor
Attack



Small
Medium
+4
-2
+2
Same
-1



Monster Manual, page 291


After the size change:
+2 Strength, +2 Constitution, –2 Charisma

After applying the +4 inherent bonus to Strength and Constitution and –4 inherent penalty to Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma:
+6 Strength, +6 Constitution, –4 Intelligence, –4 Wisdom, –6 Charisma

I don't think it's terribly unbalanced. The penalties to mental abilities are significant and generally prevent the use of spells (which are much more powerful than a small increase to Strength and Constitution). Running them as LA +0 would be perfectly fine in most games.

[Telonius]

Yeah, I think it would depend on whether or not the ability changes were meant as in addition to or instead of the usual size increases.

Were stat adjustments for size supposed to be standardized in 3.0? BoVD existed in that weird place right as 3.0 was ending and 3.5 was starting.

[loky1109]

If you don't need mental stats get Bakemono from Oriental Adventures he already has Int 3 and Cha 7. I.e. -8 Int and -4 Cha. Total -12 Int and -10 Cha. Get base 8 point by and go to Primeval.


Were stat adjustments for size supposed to be standardized in 3.0? BoVD existed in that weird place right as 3.0 was ending and 3.5 was starting.
Checked 3.0 MM and yes they were. Page 12.

[AvatarVecna]

I don't think a race encouraged to end chargen with Int 4/Wis 4/Cha 2 will be overpowered, no.

[Inevitability]

Increased size also affects a creature’s ability scores, AC, attack bonuses, and damage values as indicated on Tables 4–2 and 4–3.

The context for that quote is as follows:


A creature may become larger when its Hit Dice are increased (the new size is noted parenthetically in the monster’s Advancement entry).

A size increase affects any special ability the creature has that is affected by size. Increased size also affects a creature’s ability scores, AC, attack bonuses, and damage values as indicated on Tables 4-2 and 4-3.

I think it's fair to assume these tables solely govern size change as a result of HD increase (or with templates that specifically mention it). There's other ways to change size (goliath barbarian, enlarge person, expansion, righteous might), are you suggesting these should all add +8 or so more strength than people believe they do?

And if your counterargument is that those effects already give ability modifiers, which presumably supersede the normal size changes... so does the Io-Rach transformation.

[SirNibbles]

The context for that quote is as follows:



I think it's fair to assume these tables solely govern size change as a result of HD increase (or with templates that specifically mention it). There's other ways to change size (goliath barbarian, enlarge person, expansion, righteous might), are you suggesting these should all add +8 or so more strength than people believe they do?

And if your counterargument is that those effects already give ability modifiers, which presumably supersede the normal size changes... so does the Io-Rach transformation.

It was my understanding that those size modifiers are to be used any time size change is mentioned without specifically giving values.

Regarding the Io-Rach pit, the text mentions a size change and then says "and gains a +4 inherent bonus to Strength and Constitution and a –4 inherent penalty to Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma." which I interpreted as being in addition to, not part of, the size change and its associated stat alterations.

[pabelfly]

I'd agree they look balanced. More on the weak side than the strong.

+2 STR and +2 DEX is decent but not powerful. You're better off focusing on one stat, so something like an Orc for +4 STR or an Air Goblin for +4 DEX.

+4 CON is really nice, but it's a stat of secondary concern.

-4/-4/-6 is rough for mental stats. You lose two ranks worth of class skills. You're 10% more likely to lose Will saves. Options with partial casting like Paladin, Psychic Warrior, etc are that much harder to do.

I'd only use one for flavour, or maybe trying to use an obscure race as an original ingredient in a contest.

[remetagross]

It was my understanding that those size modifiers are to be used any time size change is mentioned without specifically giving values.

Regarding the Io-Rach pit, the text mentions a size change and then says "and gains a +4 inherent bonus to Strength and Constitution and a –4 inherent penalty to Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma." which I interpreted as being in addition to, not part of, the size change and its associated stat alterations.

I definitely interpreted it the same way as Inevitability, but yeah I could see it go both ways. Though I still think the Enlarge Person example is telling enough: it says "increase one size and gets +2 to Str, -2 to Dex". Shouldn't you similarly interpret that the Str+2 Dex-2 happens in addition to the stat change associated with growing Large?

[ciopo]

I definitely interpreted it the same way as Inevitability, but yeah I could see it go both ways. Though I still think the Enlarge Person example is telling enough: it says "increase one size and gets +2 to Str, -2 to Dex". Shouldn't you similarly interpret that the Str+2 Dex-2 happens in addition to the stat change associated with growing Large?

well, typing in 3.5 is important, and enlarge person gives a typed +2 size to str and so on.

an inherent bonus to str isn't a size bonus to str, so I see where SirNibbles comes from.

[Inevitability]

well, typing in 3.5 is important, and enlarge person gives a typed +2 size to str and so on.

an inherent bonus to str isn't a size bonus to str, so I see where SirNibbles comes from.

Then what about goliath barbarian? It grants a size increase with no size-typed strength bonuses - does that mean there's a stealthy +8 strength attached to that ACF?

[Beni-Kujaku]

well, typing in 3.5 is important, and enlarge person gives a typed +2 size to str and so on.

an inherent bonus to str isn't a size bonus to str, so I see where SirNibbles comes from.

If there was a standard size bonus everytime one creature increases in size, then it would not matter that the spell gives you +2/-2, it wouldn't stack but wouldn't supersede the standard size bonus. Additionally, the bonus to Str you gain from gaining a size category through HD isn't a size bonus, it's an adjustment to the base score. An animal who gained a size category through HD can still fully benefit from Animal Growth and gain a size bonus to Str.