|
5 years ago ::
Aug 21, 2008 - 11:44AM
#101
|
Date Joined:
Mar 16, 2007
|
Your knowledge of the Tiefling history is weak. (I don't suppose that's like being weak in the force, is it?) They used to have +1 Int, +1 Cha, -1 Str, -1 Wis. They came from 2nd ed. Planescape. 3rd edition was the oddity. They weren't social outcasts, they were just mistrusted, but only to those who dealt with them regulraly. They were deceivers and manipulators, easily able to gain the trust of some unfortunate. They had the charisma bonus because they had to rely on themselves, and were fully confident with themselves. These show a direct correlation to a cha bonus. No. It shows a direct correlation to a bluff bonus.
As I've mentioned before (on the previous page, I think. Don't get me wrong, though, I don't expect anyone to have to read through all those posts. Gah!), the world that distrusts Tieflings is that world only. Other worlds may like them, or not. It's a social stigma. Why in the world would a social stigma reduce a races natural charisma? It doesn't make them less charasmatic, only not well trusted. If they were to meet someone who had no clue who they were, would that make them less or more charismatic? The only proper answer is neither. You are right that social prejudices do not and should not effect a charisma modifier. However, how a race reacts to that position is. Drow are mistrusted too, but drow decided to embrace the fear they project and are empowered by it. When a drow goes to the surface, he makes an impression.
Tieflings are not like that. Maybe they were in 2e, I didn’t play planescape so I don’t know. But the tieflings of today are not filled with pride in the fear that they inspire. They are reclusive, withdrawn, and fiercely independent; essentially a race of emos. Being emo should not give a plus to charisma.
… Also, by saying that elves make good wizards, and have a strong history of wizardry and magic, is a flavor towards the race, not a PC. Even if no PC ever plays an elven wizard based on the 3E rules, how does this take away from the culture of the elves? In the same way that so many good and neutral aligned drow PCs running amok deteriorated the perceptions that drow were to be feared. When players started playing good-aligned drow, it had a profound influence on how drow were perceived in future books. It started with the unfortunate decision to make a goddess of good drow, so PCs would have someone they could worship. This snowballed into whole communities of renegade drow, to the point that many DMs let drow PCs walk among the surface cities without reprisal, since they were given the benefit of the doubt.
Also, look at Halflings. Halflings were modeled after hobbits, so they were supposed to be simple quiet lawful-good folk who liked to smoke their pipes and not get into any trouble. However, as Pcs, thieves were the best fit. So most people played Halflings as roguish and daring, and today the entire Halfling race has been redesigned to fit with the kind of characters players chose to play.
PCs do shape the game’s notions of each race. They probably shouldn’t, but they do.
This also comes from a much deeper rooted problem: players playing characters for character power and advancement, instead of as a social gathering and role-playing game, which it is. When 3rd ed first came out, I had already been playing D&D for 10 years. I tried it, even involved myself in several campaigns for several years. From my experiences, the differences between 2nd and 3rd are thus:
In 2nd, you role-played, and if you knew the rules well enough, you could min-max. In 3rd, you min-maxed, and if you knew the rules well enough, you could role-play. I've yet to see how 4th looks, but so far, it's promising.
Hmm.. sorry for going off on a tangent.  This is about the single best description I have ever seen of 2e v. 3e. You wouldn’t know it from my previous posts, but I actually skipped most of 3e for that reason. In 2e, there weren’t all the feats and racial powers that consumed people’s time. If you decided to play a human fighter, that was it. You weren’t going to have to retool your character ever again, so all that you had left to do was enjoy roleplaying. Racial traits didn’t matter much either, as after about level 4 you didn’t even notice them anymore, you just chose a race based on one you wanted to roleplay.
Unfortunately, racial traits do matter now, a lot. It can be fun to play a halfling fighter, but it isn’t fun to suck so hard. But it is what it is.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Aug 21, 2008 - 12:52PM
#102
|
Date Joined:
Apr 27, 2006
|
The only reason that this argument is even here is because the infernal-pact warlock is based off con. If had been based off wis, we'd have that argument now. qft
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Aug 21, 2008 - 4:27PM
#103
|
Date Joined:
Jun 16, 2008
|
This is about the single best description I have ever seen of 2e v. 3e. You wouldn’t know it from my previous posts, but I actually skipped most of 3e for that reason. In 2e, there weren’t all the feats and racial powers that consumed people’s time. If you decided to play a human fighter, that was it. You weren’t going to have to retool your character ever again, so all that you had left to do was enjoy roleplaying. Racial traits didn’t matter much either, as after about level 4 you didn’t even notice them anymore, you just chose a race based on one you wanted to roleplay.
Unfortunately, racial traits do matter now, a lot. It can be fun to play a halfling fighter, but it isn’t fun to suck so hard. But it is what it is. That isn't so bad really anymore since racial ability penalties have disappeared. I'm pretty sure a halfling fighter in 4e will do just fine, maybe not optimum like say dragonborn or human maybe is. But fine none the less. In 3e, a halfling fighter would probably be hurting. Especially if they didn't go down some path that let them make use of Dex instead of Str.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Aug 21, 2008 - 8:41PM
#104
|
Date Joined:
Apr 14, 2007
|
That means they COULD learn to harness it, not that they universally would as a +2 Charisma would suggest. That be the case with any race really, since Charisma is completely based off how one acts. Since it has no physical connection anymore, it is all based off personality.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Dec 08, 2008 - 8:05AM
#105
|
|
|
Personally I'd have the Tiefling and Half-Elf swap bonuses - for fluff reasons, mostly.
The Tiefling is supposed to be the quintessential warlock (warrenting a bonus to primary ability requisites). They should be charismatic as hell (pun intended), because they negotiated the original contracts with the Infernal lords that created the hell-pacts. They should be tough (i.e. high constitution) to bind and force the the devils to part with their power (devils respect strength). As for the Intelligence bonus - nobody ever considered somebody making a pact with the Devil "smart". I'd give the +2 Int a miss.
As for the half-elf, their roles as messengers and go-betweens for elves and humans make them naturally charismatic. With their ties to the elven world, and thus to the fey, I'd consider them prime candidates for being the best fey-locks (requiring high Int/Cha).
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Dec 08, 2008 - 11:55AM
#106
|
Date Joined:
Aug 31, 2006
|
I don't mean to budge into this discussion here but I still don't get why it's a big thing that Tieflings get a bonus to Con. They aren't a hardy race therefore no reason to have a Con bonus. Before "you" say well they are supposed to be Infernal Pact, couldn't "you" just put your highest stat bonus in Con. I mean sure you'll have a Infernal pact Warlock that is as Hardy as "he" is Persuasive. I find it more reasonable for Tieflings to have to have a high Int and high Cha, it fits them better.
Plus this whole things smells of CharOp. I mean having an extra Con to do more damage or better attacks.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Dec 09, 2008 - 12:49PM
#107
|
|
|
Why would not having 20 Constitution be a deal-breaker? I mean, it's not even a negative modifier. People didn't avoid elven warriors in third edition because of -2 to Constitution. That's not a good comparison, Con was not a primary stat for warriors, but a secondary one.
On the other hand, i did not see a lot of half orc wizards in 3rd edition, did you?
I agree with the OP. +2 Con not only give them a flavor of infernal warlocks (which they now lack, becouse they are much better as fey, star, or dark locks, which does not make sense). Not having dual mental stats also help them to become better melee classes. Having Con might not be the best thing to have as a fighter or ranger, but is much better than Charisma anyways.
I think Tieflings make more sense being good infernal locks, or fighters, than fey locks or paladins.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Dec 09, 2008 - 12:56PM
#108
|
|
|
Tiefling Infernal Warlocks DO get +2 to con; it's called Hellfire Blood. Really? My tiefling does not get it when casting Vampiric Embrace. Is it some short of bug?
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Dec 10, 2008 - 4:50AM
#109
|
Date Joined:
Sep 25, 2004
|
Warning: fluff. May cause allergic reaction in crunch-addicts.
Archdevil: "Why would I enter into a pact with you? Everything I want from you, is already mine: Your immortal soul. Mwha. Mwhaha. Mhuhahahaha! Now, scurry along, little one. I'll be seeing you... in Hell!"
Fey Lord: "One who's soul is pledged to those tyrannical devils wishes to bond with me? Serve me well, little one, and we'll see about freeing you from that collar of yours... Fail me, and the Nine Hells will be the least of your problems!"
Eywa ngahu
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Dec 11, 2008 - 8:51PM
#110
|
Date Joined:
Jan 27, 2006
|
Cha is strangth of personality, be that intimidating of indearing. A truly charasmatic individual's skills can include both makeing frends and horrifying strangers witless, but nothing says the flavor must support both.
|
|
|