Topic: Racial modifiers for typical racial skills

[Falenthal]

Comparing the races according to some skills (specially combat ones), a friend and I found some problems with the racila modifiers "as is". I'll write the examples we found:

1st statement: "Dwarves are the best melee warriors of all races"
The statement can be argued, of course, but I think everyone should agree that normally they're or should be above average warriors regarding melee weapons.
But when you come to the racial stats bonuses and culture skill ranks (usually Deep Warrens), you find this:
Melee weapons use ST/AG, so a dwarf has a +2/-1 = +1 racial bonus for stats
+5 OB for the talent Dense Musculature
3 ranks for the culture (+15 bonus)
Total: +21 just for being a Dwarf

If you pick up a human fighter, who should be normally a little worse than a medium Dwarf, you get this:
You can assign a +3/+3 bonus to ST/AG, totalling +6
Racial special ability: Skill specialization -> +10 to one melee weapon
2 ranks for an average culture (+10 bonus)
Total: +26 for being Human
Additionally, you can add 4 of the 5 initial free ranks per race to your main weapon, reaching the maximum of 6 ranks at level 1 without spending DPs. The non-spent DPs can be used to buy Dense Musculature, and gain the same +5 OB that Dwarves have, reaching a +31 bonus, 10 points over what a Dwarf has.

2nd statement: "Elves are the best archers":
ST/AG is 0/+1, initial cultural ranks to bows are 2 (if you use the house rule of changing the silvan culture weapons ranks, otherwise is 1), and no more benefits per race.

A human, once again, has lots of extras that can be focused to the bow:
ST/AG can be up to +3/+3, cultural ranks also 2, possiblities of +10 bonus or free ranks (meaning DPs available to buy talents focused on bows).

This kind of things also happen with other skills, like Craft: Smith for Dwarves or Foraging: Woods for Elves, etc.

Has anyone else found this annoying?
I tried to make my own changes to amend this, but I'd like to hear other opinions.
Without entering into details now, I'll say that my house rule tends to follow this thought:
1) Not every elf is a superb archer, or dwarf a master craftsman
2) Therefore, there should be a racial bonus for those who work hard to excel at it (meaning: "spend DPs in the skill")
3) That translates into additional bonuses for certain Talents when bought by a member of a certain race:
For example, if a sylvan elf buys the Speed Loader talent (at the same cost as everyone else), he gets an additional +10 bonus only to Short Bows. A Dwarf that buys Master Craftsman gets an additional +10 bonus to one Craft skill among Smith, Armorer, Weaponsmith, Stonecutter.

Any ideas to improve this are really welcome.

[Thom @ ICE]

1st statement: "Dwarves are the best melee warriors of all races"
The statement can be argued, of course, but I think everyone should agree that normally they're or should be above average warriors regarding melee weapons.
But when you come to the racial stats bonuses and culture skill ranks (usually Deep Warrens), you find this:
Melee weapons use ST/AG, so a dwarf has a +2/-1 = +1 racial bonus for stats
+5 OB for the talent Dense Musculature
3 ranks for the culture (+15 bonus)
Total: +21 just for being a Dwarf

If you pick up a human fighter, who should be normally a little worse than a medium Dwarf, you get this:
You can assign a +3/+3 bonus to ST/AG, totalling +6
Racial special ability: Skill specialization -> +10 to one melee weapon
2 ranks for an average culture (+10 bonus)
Total: +26 for being Human

You are comparing a standard dwarf with a human who is of a max combat racial base (+3/+3).  An average human would have +3 total for ST/AG.  Also, you are assigning the +10 racial skill specialization to the weapon indicating that they are maxing it out.  The average human would not have that. Therefore an average dwarf and average human would be +21 compared to +13 in favor of dwarf.

Additionally, you can add 4 of the 5 initial free ranks per race to your main weapon, reaching the maximum of 6 ranks at level 1 without spending DPs. The non-spent DPs can be used to buy Dense Musculature, and gain the same +5 OB that Dwarves have, reaching a +31 bonus, 10 points over what a Dwarf has.

You gave the human Dense  Musculature (cost = 25) and ranks = 6 for no DP.  The Dwarf gets 3 ranks free and 3 more for 6DP.  That still doesn't balance out for the average human vs average dwarf.  If you want to max out the dwarf for fighting vs the human maxed out for fighting... yes - the human can exceed the dwarf, but then you are looking at Conan vs Gimli.

2nd statement: "Elves are the best archers":
ST/AG is 0/+1, initial cultural ranks to bows are 2 (if you use the house rule of changing the silvan culture weapons ranks, otherwise is 1), and no more benefits per race.

A human, once again, has lots of extras that can be focused to the bow:
ST/AG can be up to +3/+3, cultural ranks also 2, possibilities of +10 bonus or free ranks (meaning DPs available to buy talents focused on bows).

Elves are at +1 with 1 Rank and humans (again only +3 for ST/AG average)  with 2 ranks.
If you want an archer Elf I would recommend swapping melee and missile weapons which would balance the ranks, but the elf is still at only +1 due to +1 agility and no strength bonus. Using the Elf = Ultimate archer I can see why this doesn't make sense to you, however, this is how the original HARP was released and I have no recollection of issues with it being pointed out previously.

This kind of things also happen with other skills, like Craft: Smith for Dwarves or Foraging: Woods for Elves, etc.
Has anyone else found this annoying?
I tried to make my own changes to amend this, but I'd like to hear other opinions.

I'm not seeing it for the other skills. The way HARP depicts Dwarves is extremely high in Co and SD, certainly more than any comparable human.  For Elves they have a presence to them that makes them more awe-inspiring than any comparable human. 

Without entering into details now, I'll say that my house rule tends to follow this thought:
1) Not every elf is a superb archer, or dwarf a master craftsman
2) Therefore, there should be a racial bonus for those who work hard to excel at it (meaning: "spend DPs in the skill")
3) That translates into additional bonuses for certain Talents when bought by a member of a certain race:
For example, if a sylvan elf buys the Speed Loader talent (at the same cost as everyone else), he gets an additional +10 bonus only to Short Bows. A Dwarf that buys Master Craftsman gets an additional +10 bonus to one Craft skill among Smith, Armorer, Weaponsmith, Stonecutter.

Any ideas to improve this are really welcome.

I would adjust the cultural skills to fit your image of the races (crafts, foraging, etc.) and adjust the racial stats as you see fit as long as the total stat bonus doesn't increase. 

For your dwarf you can have the stoic dwarf with high SD, or you can have the wild warrior.... reduce the SD to +0 and increase ST to +6.

For your elf you can have the PR reduced to 0 and increase AG to +3 and ST to +1.

[Turbs]

I have to agree with Thom here,
you cant compare min/maxed characters of each race.
The statement says on average dwarves are better or elves a re better.
That also means an average human.

I did always hate the way that elves have such a bad Self Discipline bonus in ICE games.. I get why but it always seems to be odd considering how it affected certain skills like subterfuge and Mentalism spell casting  (In RM)

but thats a different topic.

I do agree though that if a race is more adept at combat they should not have a penalty to either Str or Agi. or at least have one of those stat bonuses at least double the size of the penalty

[dagorhir]

I would agree with Tom also. Dwarves, despite the penalty to Ag, generally excel at combats. Every Dwarf character I have ever had in my games were tanks. They didn't always have the highest OB, but their general toughness that comes from their endurance bonus really gives them an edge.

[Falenthal]

the human can exceed the dwarf, but then you are looking at Conan vs Gimli.

  Hey! Are you saying Gimli can't beat Conan?! Nonsense!     

I see the point in your arguments, Thom. First of all, I apologize because I see that I used the term "average" wrong here. I didn't mean a "normal person", but a "normal fighter". I mean, if a player wants to create a melee warrior or an archer, which race would be the best for him/her? Therefore I applied the +10 bonus to the main skill, etc.
In other words: with the modifiers we have, the best archer in the world (whatever world we are playing) can't be an elf.
As for the dwarf fighter, I have to agree with the point related to CO and SD giving them higher hit points and resistance to stuns (Stamina RR), which compensates for their lower OB compared to (maxed) human fighters.

A small argument I'd introduce here is a conception I have about what "X race excels at X skill" means:
It's not the same to give a race 2 ranks to Crafting (for example), as to grant it a +10 bonus to Crafting.
With the issue of "elves are the best archers", I prefer the second option. The difference is that, with the first option, either a human (or another race) or an elf have a maximum number of 6 ranks to begin with, and both can achieve it, only the elf would at a lower cost. But that doesn't make him a better archer.
But giving him a +10 means that, with the same number of ranks, the elf will always be +10 better than the human.
That's how I represent that undefinied sense that certain races seem to have a natural ability towards certain skills, as opposed to the fact that certain cultures are adept at certain skills because they need to, as for example Survival for an Artic or Desertic culture, Ride for Nomads or Climbing for Mountain cultures, etc.

That's why I prefer giving free bonuses if certain Talents are bought than just changing the cultural adolescence skill ranks.

And thanks to all for your quick answers!

[PhillipAEllis]

It is true that Gimli can bite Conan's kneecaps right off, then spit them out.... 

[Falenthal]

It is true that Gimli can bite Conan's kneecaps right off, then spit them out.... 

Yeah! I would like to see Conan trying to cut Gimli's head off... 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwvevInhipQ

[Thom @ ICE]

I see the point in your arguments, Thom. First of all, I apologize because I see that I used the term "average" wrong here. I didn't mean a "normal person", but a "normal fighter". I mean, if a player wants to create a melee warrior or an archer, which race would be the best for him/her? Therefore I applied the +10 bonus to the main skill, etc.
In other words: with the modifiers we have, the best archer in the world (whatever world we are playing) can't be an elf.
As for the dwarf fighter, I have to agree with the point related to CO and SD giving them higher hit points and resistance to stuns (Stamina RR), which compensates for their lower OB compared to (maxed) human fighters.

OK, first of all  no need to apologize. You stated your opinion and I presented a counter argument. Nothing was inappropriate an no reason for apologies.

A small argument I'd introduce here is a conception I have about what "X race excels at X skill" means:
It's not the same to give a race 2 ranks to Crafting (for example), as to grant it a +10 bonus to Crafting.
With the issue of "elves are the best archers", I prefer the second option. The difference is that, with the first option, either a human (or another race) or an elf have a maximum number of 6 ranks to begin with, and both can achieve it, only the elf would at a lower cost. But that doesn't make him a better archer.

A human focused on a single ability, skill, or aspect of their pesonality will be more powerful than any other religion.  This is intentional as it is intended to give great flexibility (and/or) great single focus.

As for the archer aspect... you are correct that an archer is more likely to be less power than individuals with their focus on archery. 

As for the +10 for Crafts or Foraging... feel free to eliminate one of the minor racial abilities and use that DP to grant them the talent for  bonus points.




But giving him a +10 means that, with the same number of ranks, the elf will always be +10 better than the human.
That's how I represent that undefinied sense that certain races seem to have a natural ability towards certain skills, as opposed to the fact that certain cultures are adept at certain skills because they need to, as for example Survival for an Artic or Desertic culture, Ride for Nomads or Climbing for Mountain cultures, etc.

That's why I prefer giving free bonuses if certain Talents are bought than just changing the cultural adolescence skill ranks.

And thanks to all for your quick answers!

[/quote]

[Falenthal]

A human focused on a single ability, skill, or aspect of their pesonality will be more powerful than any other religion.  This is intentional as it is intended to give great flexibility (and/or) great single focus.

As for the archer aspect... you are correct that an [elven?]archer is more likely to be less power than [human?]individuals with their focus on archery. 

Yeah, that's what I'm trying to modify in my home rules, at least to a certain aspect.
My conception of races is that non-human races excel humans at very specific stats and/or skills, but only at them.
It's the old dicotomy of specialist vs. generalist.
A sylvan elf who spends DPs to be an excellent archer, woodland forager, animal friend and/or stalker should always (in my opinion) be better than a human that spends the same amount of DPs (or equivalent). Thus the bonuses instead of just ranks.
The same goes for dwarves at melee fighting and metal or stone crafting. Or hobbits... errr, halflings at hiding and stone throwing, high elves and magic and knowledge, etc.

Their hindrance is that they cannot choose at which skills to excel.
A human can't beat a sylvan elf at short bow if both put the same effort (DPs for skill ranks and talents) to it, but the human can choose to excel at other skills, whereas a sylvan elf doesn't.

Just a matter of likings, and my intention is just to know if someone has a similar way of thinking and has made any adjustments to the racial stats or abilities.

[Thom @ ICE]

In that case swap out some of the racial abilities or buy some bonuses with talents.

[ReaperWolf]

A sylvan elf who spends DPs to be an excellent archer, woodland forager, animal friend and/or stalker should always (in my opinion) be better than a human that spends the same amount of DPs (or equivalent). Thus the bonuses instead of just ranks.
The same goes for dwarves at melee fighting and metal or stone crafting. Or hobbits... errr, halflings at hiding and stone throwing, high elves and magic and knowledge, etc.

As it stands right now, each of the races is a zero-sum design so an elf is matched against a dwarf who's matched against a human in terms of their power/balance. Another easy way to simulate some races being better/more powerful is to add the talents and whatnot required to be the race you envision. To be that race you then have to spend a few DPs so your specialist uber-elf might cost 10-15 DP (borrowing all the abilities in Middle earth for example: cold/hot immunity, immortality, magical sensitivity, 10 league sight, light step, etc.) so the specialist elf will have 10-15 fewer DPs to spend elsewhere than say a human who costs nothing.

>>ReaperWolf

[Falenthal]

@ReaperWolf: That's a good idea, and one that I also had in mind.
I'd only add that this spent DPs could come in "optional packages". I think that not all sylvan elves are superb archers, so a player should not be forced to pay a number of DPs to have a bonus to short bow if he, for example, just wants a Sylvan Animist with Herb Lore and Beastmastery.
But if he wants to, there could be some special talents (the optional packages said before) only available to certain races, with higher benefits than the usual for an also higher DPs cost.

Here we could see the Master Smith/Stonecraft of Dwarves;
Magic, Crafting and/or Lore of Noldo Elves,
Sea affinity and Singing skills of Sinda Elves,
...
and also Skinchanger for Beornings,
Riding and Mounted Combat for Rohirrims,
etc.

The major problem with Middle-Earth and balance is that Tolkien himself left no doubt that elves, specially Noldo, are superior to humans. I'm trying to come up with ideas that counter their benefits, like them being attracted to wilderness (sylvan), the sea (sinda) or power and dark knowledge (noldo).

[RandalThor]

But if he wants to, there could be some special talents (the optional packages said before) only available to certain races, with higher benefits than the usual for an also higher DPs cost.

Interestingly enough, this was one of the things I liked about the AD&D Options rules set; each race & class had a set of options it could choose from for fine-tuning. You could go with the "regular" spread and have the abilities they normally had, or you could do some mix-and-matching. Also, some abilities could be found in more than one race/class, and sometimes they were similar but a little different, which allowed one to feel the difference between the races/classes.

Also, interestingly enough, I have been feeling like you Falenthal , in that I have been wanting more difference between the races - the recent trend of homogenizing has made them way too much like aliens in Star Trek: humans with bumpy foreheads. But, I want a different feel for them, and just having a detailed culture is not enough for an RPG, the differences have to be in the rules somehow. In a way, I have been thinking that the old Basic D&D way of having the different races being their own "class" is a good way to go to get this feeling. I am just not sure exactly how to do this yet, as there are a few different ways to go.

[Falenthal]

Right now I'm trying to come up with some ways to counter the high abilities of elves in Middle-Earth: For example, they tend to stay in their havens while other races rise to arms (here I introduced the Call of the Wild (Silvan), Sea Longing (Sinda) and Lure of Knowledge (Noldo) hindrances said before. In a few lines, they consist of Will RRs I force the character to make every month (game time) to resist a certain racial lure. If they fail, they get a -10 to all actions for the next month, cumulative if they failed the month(s) before, until they heed to the call; that is, they return to the wood, sea or haven for at least one month).
Also, the most awesome doings of the Third Age are not made by elves, but by humans or hobbits. Therefore, I only give them 1 (Noldo) or 2 (Sinda and Silvan) Fate Points at the creation of the character with no option to buy more. Fate Points can only be gained by heroic deeds, not by spending DPs.

I'm also thinking of one or two extra abilities to the other races/cultures to compensate for the great number of free talents an elf has in Middle-Earth (half needed sleep, half time injury recovery, extra resistence to cold, magic sense, no fear to human undead, empathy with non-aggressive animals, difficulty to track them because of their no-trace step,...).
Still work in progress...

[ReaperWolf]

Right now I'm trying to come up with some ways to counter the high abilities of elves in Middle-Earth: For example, they tend to stay in their havens while other races rise to arms (here I introduced the Call of the Wild (Silvan), Sea Longing (Sinda) and Lure of Knowledge (Noldo) hindrances said before. In a few lines, they consist of Will RRs I force the character to make every month (game time) to resist a certain racial lure. If they fail, they get a -10 to all actions for the next month, cumulative if they failed the month(s) before, until they heed to the call; that is, they return to the wood, sea or haven for at least one month).

When I ran my 2+ year CODA Lord of the Rings game, I gave all elves a Grief & Longing disad. that worked sorta similarly. Just beware the roleplay only disads 'cuz this relies upon player performance and adherence so a lot of players end up getting something for nothing unless GMs pressure them then they get upset 'cuz the GM is stereotyping them and taking away their freedom to play their character the way they want to.

It's a slippery slope. Increasing the cost of elf Fate Points might be a good idea to 2 or even 3 each or, better yet, only allow them to have 3 or even 1 Fate Point at a time. If they receive a taken out result and run out of Fate Points, instead of dying they grow worldweary and depart for the West never to be seen again.

>>ReaperWolf