4th Ed: Racial Power Progression

[Person_Man]

So, by now you've probably seen this:

Spoiler

Show

In May of 2004, we started kicking around ideas like “the 20-level race.” In a 20-level race, at each level you gained, you’d get not only new class features, but also new racial qualities. Your race might predetermine which ability scores you increased at some levels, so a dwarf’s Constitution would always have an edge over characters of other races. It would grant you new special abilities as you advanced in level, always appropriate to your level, of course.

One key advantage we saw to this system was that it made it much easier to find room for new races without resorting to the kludgy and awkward mechanic of level adjustments. If we spread the tasty magical abilities of drow out through their levels, they could start at 1st level on a par with other character races. Races like the githyanki already anticipated some of that idea by granting new spell-like abilities at higher levels.

Well, over the next few years, things changed, as things are wont to do. We blew the game out to thirty levels, but put your most significant racial choices in the first ten. Above that, other choices started to crowd out room for special abilities coming from your race.

In the final version of 4th Edition, most of your racial traits come into play right out of the gate at 1st level—dwarven resilience, elven evasion, a half-elf’s inspiring presence, and so on. As you go up levels, you can take racial feats to make those abilities even more exciting and gain new capabilities tied to your race. You can also take race-specific powers built into your class, which accomplish a lot of what racial substitution levels used to do: a dwarf fighter with the friend of earth power can do something that other 10th-level fighters just can’t do.

The rules have changed a lot since that first idea of the 20-level race, but they still serve the same purpose: to make sure that your race stays not just relevant but actually important all the way up through thirty levels of adventure.

I abstain on voting on whether or not I like racial powers that progress.

I'm torn. On one hand, I'd like to be able to play a 1st level Drow or Ogre or whatnot, without having to screw around with LA or racial hit dice. But on the other hand, I think this may push optimization to the extreme. In 3.5, I can play a Gnome Fighter. Certainly, I'm not as powerful as a Human or Dwarf Fighter, but since racial differences are relatively small, it's not that big of a deal after early levels. So most of the focus is on fluff (what race I see my character being) rather then crunch (I'll play a Human for the bonus feat). But with racial class powers that progress, my 10th level Gnome Fighter might be at a huge disadvantage compared to a 10th level Dwarf Fighter, because all of the Gnome's racial abilities are geared towards spellcasting, and all of the Dwarf's special abilities are geared toward melee.

And what about the level of complexity that it entails? Will you need Dwarf Knight powers? Goliath Favored Soul Powers? Will every new supplement have to address every previous supplement?

Vote and discuss.

If you want to discuss 30 levels of progression, I've created this thread. Thanks.

[skywalker]

Well, it might be that a dwarf fighter is better off than a gnome fighter, because of the aforementioned ability switches. But I propose to you that this is creating a much more solidified D&D world, where dwarves make better fighters than gnomes because they should(most people agree that dwarves are better fighters, right?). On the other hand, I don't think they would let that happen, because they seem very interested in game balance, ya know?


But I think, overall, I will like this idea. There's my vote.

[Generic PC]

Hmm... On one hand, it makes choosing reincarnation over Revification important. I think... Making a Dwarf Fighter 10 who suddenly becomes a gnome fighter 10 makes me wonder if you will keep your Dwarven abilities. I think i will abstain, though it has a neat base of ideas.

[Jasdoif]

It reminds me of those racial/class progressions in the back of Complete Psionic, where you gain racial abilities alongside class levels. Granted, it's little more then a distributed "monster class" in a new framework, but I find it preferable to those monster classes, because you're getting class abilities without having to "pay upfront" in RHD or LA. And if they're doing the same kind of thing, along with getting rid of LA, that strikes me as a great improvement.

On the other hand...I don't like the idea of being forced in a particular direction with a basic race, through bonuses greatly favoring one style of play over another. It's OK for monster races, because hey: That's what they do. But I want the flexibility for basic races.

Hmm....Does this mean they're going to stop supporting PCs as monster races, or is every monster going to have its own racial quality list?

I have too many questions to put forth a vote.

[brian c]

I agree with Skywalker; some races are predisposed to be better at certain things, and though that doesn help optimization it also is "realistic", in a sense. However, I got the impression that you were given options for your racial abilities; for example, the quote says "a dwarf fighter with the friend of earth power", which to me implies that not every dwarf fighter has the friend of earth power. Perhaps it's something like a racial bonus feat every 5 levels, with a decent variety to choose from. Most dwarven bonus feats, or Ogre bonus feats, are going to be melee-oriented, and more gnome feats will be magical, but not all. At least, that's how I hope it will be.

[Matthew]

I have to admit I am none too interested in this element of the new edition. It sounds suspiciously like they are taking Racial Abilities and spreading them out over thirty levels. If that's the case, then it means that the higher level your Character is, the more differentiated he is by race, which strikes me as odd, even if it might be fun. On the other hand, it could be an interesting experiment.

[Falrin]

A lot will dpeend on the given abilities:

As a matter of fact you can already do this by breaking up the current races in different LvLs.

1) +2 Con, -2 Cha
2) +2 Saves Vs Spell effect.
3) +2 Vs poison, ...

This allows more races to be played and resembles the 'bloodlines' from UA.

If the race-powers are not to class-specific or powerfull I don't see a problem with this. You could point out that a Dwarf Tank will be better then a Gnome Tank, but when it comes to mobility fighting the gnome takes the edge. So in the end we can state: As long as Racial levels don't force you in specific roles, I'm okey with that. There is no problem with a Dwarf being Slightly better at Tanking then a gnome, that's already the case. Even more: the Gnome will almost 'always' be better sorceror.

Question: Why would a 20th LvL dwarf be different from a 1st LvL Dwarf? well, he would have better HP, AC, feat, ... , but that's beside the point. You could state it like this: Why would a 20th lvL dwarf be MORE dwarf then a 1st LvL dwarf?

[Lapak]

I have to admit I am none too interested in this element of the new edition. It sounds suspiciously like they are taking Racial Abilities and spreading them out over thirty levels. If that's the case, then it means that the higher level your Character is, the more differentiated he is by race, which strikes me as odd, even if it might be fun. On the other hand, it could be an interesting experiment.

Actually, that kind of makes sense to me: an elvish peasant isn't THAT different from a human peasant. But a High Lord of the Elves riding around on his forest deer is quite different from King Hugh the Human on his warhorse.

[horseboy]

Question: Why would a 20th LvL dwarf be different from a 1st LvL Dwarf? well, he would have better HP, AC, feat, ... , but that's beside the point. You could state it like this: Why would a 20th lvL dwarf be MORE dwarf then a 1st LvL dwarf?

Long beards? A young dwarf may be head strong, but an older/more powerful dwarf will be straight up a curmudgeon. I don't know. The jury is still out on 4th.

[Matthew]

Actually, that kind of makes sense to me: an elvish peasant isn't THAT different from a human peasant. But a High Lord of the Elves riding around on his forest deer is quite different from King Hugh the Human on his warhorse.

In what ways do you have in mind?

[SurlySeraph]

I have a strong reaction to this: whatever. I mean, it doesn't entirely make sense, it'll likely encourage too much race-based optimization, and it sounds like it'll be trickier to apply and calculate than simple level adjustment, but it could work well and be interesting. I don't know well enough to decide yet.

[Fax Celestis]

I like it, since it makes your race more important than prior editions, where an elf ranger and a human ranger were different in a few minor ways and one had pointier ears.

[Indon]

Question: Why would a 20th LvL dwarf be different from a 1st LvL Dwarf? well, he would have better HP, AC, feat, ... , but that's beside the point. You could state it like this: Why would a 20th lvL dwarf be MORE dwarf then a 1st LvL dwarf?

Well, they said the more common classes will have most of their abilities by 10'th level, max.

So, while a 10'th level Dwarf may be more Dwarf than a 1'st level Dwarf, a 20'th level Dwarf won't be more Dwarf than a 10'th level Dwarf...

While in contrast, a 20'th level Dragon will be more Dragon than a 19'th level Dragon...

[Fhaolan]

Being as one who plays non-standard races a lot, I can see the attraction of the idea.

However, I'll need to see exactly what the rules are for this one. I can think of several different ways they may have implemented what they just described, and half of those ways would be very, very annoying or confusing.

The idea of actually being able to play a Centaur from lvl 1, and not have to houserule a bunch of weird stuff to get it to work is definately appealing, though.

[Matthew]

I like it, since it makes your race more important than prior editions, where an elf ranger and a human ranger were different in a few minor ways and one had pointier ears.

There's a world of difference between mechanical and descriptive differences. Personally, I don't really want Elves, Dwarves, Humans, Half Elves and Halflings to be radically different from one another mechanically. I can see why people might, but it's not really for me.

[Lapak]

In what ways do you have in mind?

I was speaking in terms of the fantasy fiction/stories that D&D emulates, not in mechanics, but in general I would expect the two to be very different, even if both were fighter-types. Even if both were knights.

I'd expect the high-level elf to be able to awe his foes through majesty and power and to be agile and quick, bounding from melee to melee astride his seemingly-delicate steed while weaving a net of elvish steel and leaving his foes slain behind him.

I'd expect the human to be bold and brave, sturdier than the elf if not as quick, steadfast in the face of danger. Quick to adapt to the battlefield, to spot a momentary opportunity that might change the course of the battle and acting on it instantly, hammering down his foes with a weighty blade while taking their return strikes on the planes of his shield or plate armor.

I wouldn't expect Edwin Elf, Forest Farmer, to be able to awe the powers of darkness with his ancient heritage, even if he was 400 years old. He'd had the elvish grace and beauty, but not the superhuman quickness or terrible majesty.

I wouldn't expect John Human, Wandering Tinker, to be able to seize on a subtle change in circumstance to turn matters to his advantage. He'd have the human ability to turn his hand to any job that might fall to him, but not the ability to find his genius in it.

And so on.

EDIT: Seeing your latest post, I agree that this change would probably not be one that you would see as a good one. I like the idea, but I understand if you don't.

[Jasdoif]

There's a world of difference between mechanical and descriptive differences. Personally, I don't really want Elves, Dwarves, Humans, Half Elves and Halflings to be radically different from one another mechanically. I can see why people might, but it's not really for me.

I have a similar view. I wouldn't mind them being radically different through choice. But intrinsically, by level? This I do not like.

[Matthew]

Differences

EDIT: Seeing your latest post, I agree that this change would probably not be one that you would see as a good one. I like the idea, but I understand if you don't.

Thing is, I'm not particularly opposed to the idea either, but it looks a lot like the 'Elf Class' from Basic D&D, or rather a combination of Elf and Class X, which is interesting, but even more likely to yield a mechanical stereotype. If, on the other hand, there are choices within the Elven Racial Type, that might be quite good [i.e. at Level X you choose a new Elven Racial Trait].

[Fax Celestis]

I'm betting it's closer to Racial Sub Levels in conjunction with Racial Feats than anything else.

[Ichneumon]

It seems like races are something like an extra class, with new abilities as you grow in level, this seems cool.

I would love the idea that subraces (Yes, I am looking at you, drow) be different variants or choices you could make to the same racial class. that would be cool

[Person_Man]

Thing is, I'm not particularly opposed to the idea either, but it looks a lot like the 'Elf Class' from Basic D&D, or rather a combination of Elf and Class X, which is interesting, but even more likely to yield a mechanical stereotype. If, on the other hand, there are choices within the Elven Racial Type, that might be quite good [i.e. at Level X you choose a new Elven Racial Trait].

Yeah, the devil is in the details. Depending on how they execute it, I may love it or hate it.

From what they've written it seems as if every race starts with a racial power, like stability or evasion. You can then improve this power by investing feats into it. Sounds good. (Also, it tells us they're preserving feats, which I love. So that's also good).

In addition, you can take something very similar to racial substitution levels (or racial powers, or whatever they end up being called). They had such a fun time creating racial substitution levels for everything, they realized that the mechanic was crowding out regular class abilities. So they added 10 levels.

I don't quite follow this logic.

And I'm concerned that 4.0 has the potential to become very unwieldy, very quickly. In 3.5, there are over 50 different races and 175 base classes. That's over 8750 race/class combinations to theoretically create racial powers for. Obviously, that's not going to happen. So the end result is that if you want to play a Dwarf Knight or a Goliath Beguiler or whatnot, you may be screwed out of racial powers.

Or they simply won't add races, or won't add classes. I doubt that will happen, as it limits their ability to add new content (and thus sell more books).

I really hope they think this through before they do anything crazy.

[Subotei]

I've not kept up with the 4th ed development - not played much DnD recently as it happens, but this racial progression idea strikes me as just wrong. I can rationalise that a fighter, as he improves in ability, becomes a better fighter - that makes sense. But that a Dwarf should become more Dwarf-ish? Where the hell does that come from?

Seems to me this will just increase stereotyping of the races as racial progression will play to each race's strengths - Elves more magical, Halflings more inclined to roguishness etc etc. If any game need less stereotyping, its DnD.

But then I'm an old cynic.

[Starsinger]

As I see it, there's one of two ways these racial levels can work. Either they're mostly universal abilities that everyone likes... like Elves becoming more resistant to enchantment spells, and more dodgey. Or they go towards "favorite class" niches. So let's say dwarves become more fightery as they progress in dwarf.

So does that mean that a dwarven fighter is a better fighter than an elf? Maybe. But a dwarven wizard would be a more suitable gish than an elven wizard. Infact, this might help promote multiclassing since parts of your racial trait package help out.

[puppyavenger]

Also it makes homebrewing races so much harder

[DraPrime]

Hmm... On one hand, it makes choosing reincarnation over Revification important. I think... Making a Dwarf Fighter 10 who suddenly becomes a gnome fighter 10 makes me wonder if you will keep your Dwarven abilities. I think i will abstain, though it has a neat base of ideas.

Remaking all your characters because of reincarnation is going to cause soooooo ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo many headaches.

[Behold_the_Void]

This applies to my view of the 30-level system too, but basically there's just not enough information for me to make an informed decision on how I feel about it right now. I can see it being executed well though.

[Stephen_E]

As mentioned, the devil is in the detail.

I'm hopeful about the concept, and like the idea of racial difference meaning a bit more than it does currently.

If the racial abilities give you more of an edge in some classes over othewrs, that's fine with me (they already do that).

If the racial abilities constrain you to the extent that certain classes become very weak for certain races, I'd be very unhappy.

As to why racial abilities/difference develop over time/levels. The abilities are alwasy their, but as you gain experiance you learn to use them more.
i.e. All Elves have a natural evasive talent, but as they gain experiance they learn to refine and develop this natural ability.

Edit - Reincarnation - Yes, this may cause them to have to do some work on the spell. But then we don't know if such a spell even exists in 4e.

Stephen

[Matthew]

All that's been said so far is something like 'Dwarves advance Constitution at Level X', if I recall correctly, which has raised some hackles as it sounds like straight jacketing, but it depends what other aspects there are.

[DraPrime]

One major drawback I see is that you may be forced to play a certain class depending on your race. There may just be no way for an effective dwarf wizard to exist. And think of what will happen to templates! It's going to be VERY easy for WotC to screw this up.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Here's the problem I see with it...

Some races were just more powerful than others, hence the Level Adjustment. If you spread all their abilities out over several levels, but keep those abilities identical, then all you do is delay the point at which one race is considerabally more powerful than another. This will only bring about two possible conclusions... mudflation so that all races are equally powerful, or character optimization for dummies wherin some races are never used and others are used almost exclusively. Neither of which are optimal solutions.