Good news everyone. There is now nore official flight support. The Favored Soul paragon path from the Divine Power preview grants non-overland, non-clumsy fly 6 as their lvl 16 ability, as long as you wear light on no armor. Compare this to the Scion of Arkhosia lvl 16 ability that grants overland flight 12.
So now we at least know that, officially, full-on flight is appropriate paragon path material.
Thinking about creating a race for 4e? Make things a lil' easier on yourself by reading my Race Mechanic Creation Guide first.
1) Is it balanced to give a class a +4 modifier in an ability rather than +2 in two? If it isn't, would it be if I traded one major/minor ability for that?
2) Giving a selectable +2 (like humans) is the same as giving +2 in two fixed stats?
3) What if I say "give +2 to one mental ability, give +2 to one physical ability"?
4) Talking again about Fly, which is better, overland flight or flight speed? (This is, if I want to give a race the flying ability as they level up, which one should I give first?)
5) I want to make a lycanthrope race. How would that work out? Change shape as the racial power, and the major ability to use bite/claws as natural weapons when in beast form?
I skimmed through the posts so im not sure if this has been answered or not.
I liked what you said in the sections concerning size category. My question is what would you say about the Bugbear's 'Oversized' racial? I know this isn't a PC race, and just one from the MM.
If i am understanding it correctly, it gives the player the option to take weapons that are considered large size, which would be a weapon too big for a medium or small character to wield 2handed. This could in turn allow an 'Oversized' character to wield a normal 2handed weapon in one hand couldn't it? And don't large creatures and large weapons have a base reach of 2? Doesnt this seem a little overpowered for the Bugbears?
To help illustrate: Small player: - can wield 1-handers - versatile can be wielded in 2 hands only - cannot wield 2-handed weapons - cannot wield large size weapons Medium player: - can wield 1-handers - versatile can be wielded in 1 or 2 hands - can wield 2-handed weapons - cannot wield large size weapons Medium player with 'Oversized': - can wield one handers - can wield 2-handers in 1 or 2 hands (the 2-handed weapon becomes a 'versatile' for oversized creatures) - can wield large size weapons
(i suspect even WotC saw that, which is why when they did the Minotaur in Dragon Magazine 369, they removed that, as it was originally part of a minotaur's racial in the MM. It is also missing in the CB)
Dunhill]This could in turn allow an 'Oversized' character to wield a normal 2handed weapon in one hand couldn't it?
Technically, no. Oversized just lets you use large-sized versions of a weapon. The ability does confer the ability to reduce the handiness of medium size weapons.
The PH does specifically state that Large and larger creatures can use two-handed weapons sized smaller than them as one-handed. However, the Oversized ability does not make you Large size, nor does it specifically grant the ability to use medium-sized two-handed weapons as one-handed one. Therefore, you can't.
This could in turn allow an 'Oversized' character to wield a normal 2handed weapon in one hand couldn't it?[/quote] Technically, no. Oversized just lets you use large-sized versions of a weapon. The ability does confer the ability to reduce the handiness of medium size weapons.
The PH does specifically state that Large and larger creatures can use two-handed weapons sized smaller than them as one-handed. However, the Oversized ability does not make you Large size, nor does it specifically grant the ability to use medium-sized two-handed weapons as one-handed one. Therefore, you can't.
Dunhill]And don't large creatures and large weapons have a base reach of 2?
Large creatures may have a reach of 1 or 2, depending on body shape (PH wrote:
And don't large creatures and large weapons have a base reach of 2?[/quote] Large creatures may have a reach of 1 or 2, depending on body shape (PH;pg282). Most weapon-wielding large size creatures will almost assuredly have a base reach of 2.
However, weapon size does not affect weapon reach. If there was some way to wield a Gargantuan-sized Greatsword as a medium creature, for example, your reach would still be 1 square.
Dunhill]Doesnt this seem a little overpowered for the Bugbears?
That's an understatement. *see below*
Doesnt this seem a little overpowered for the Bugbears?[/quote] That's an understatement. *see below*
Dunhill]suspect even WotC saw that, which is why when they did the Minotaur in Dragon Magazine 369, they removed that, as it was originally part of a minotaur's racial in the MM. It is also missing in the CB
That's exactly what happened.
The thing to remember about the PC racial stats presented in the monster manual is that they were not intended for use as PC races. Their primary purpose is to provide a base for DMs to create PC-stat'ed NPC versions of those monsters. This is not only mentioned upfront in the racial traits section, but it also mentions that the racial stats provided are more in line with monsters than PCs in terms of power.
While most of the stats in the MM are serviceable PC material as is, some lie below, or in this case, above the standard PC power threshold.
WotC has deemed Oversized too powerful to be PC racial material, which is why the official Minotaur writeup doesn't have it any more, why the Goliath never got it in the first place, and why it almost definitely will not appear in any official racial material in the wrote:
suspect even WotC saw that, which is why when they did the Minotaur in Dragon Magazine 369, they removed that, as it was originally part of a minotaur's racial in the MM. It is also missing in the CB[/quote] That's exactly what happened.
The thing to remember about the PC racial stats presented in the monster manual is that they were not intended for use as PC races. Their primary purpose is to provide a base for DMs to create PC-stat'ed NPC versions of those monsters. This is not only mentioned upfront in the racial traits section, but it also mentions that the racial stats provided are more in line with monsters than PCs in terms of power.
While most of the stats in the MM are serviceable PC material as is, some lie below, or in this case, above the standard PC power threshold.
WotC has deemed Oversized too powerful to be PC racial material, which is why the official Minotaur writeup doesn't have it any more, why the Goliath never got it in the first place, and why it almost definitely will not appear in any official racial material in the future.
Thinking about creating a race for 4e? Make things a lil' easier on yourself by reading my Race Mechanic Creation Guide first.
1) Is it balanced to give a class a +4 modifier in an ability rather than +2 in two?
No, definitely not.
If it isn't, would it be if I traded one major/minor ability for that?
No, definitely not.
2) Giving a selectable +2 (like humans) is the same as giving +2 in two fixed stats?
No. Relatively speaking, A selectable +2 to any one ability score is underpowered compared to giving a fixed +2 to two ability scores. The reason that Humans pull it off is Human Defense Bonuses, their +1 bonus to all three NADs.
3) What if I say "give +2 to one mental ability, give +2 to one physical ability"?
I think the better question whether you could even think of any racial concept for which such a setup would be appropriate. Because I know I can't. And even if I could, I think that would likely be overpowered; it's just too perfect for just about everything. Thinking about it, there's probably a big reason that this isn't what Humans ended up with. :P
4) Talking again about Fly, which is better, overland flight or flight speed? (This is, if I want to give a race the flying ability as they level up, which one should I give first?)
Flight speed, because a flight speed can effectively be used in combat while overland flight cannot. I'm really of the opinion that giving a race either is probably a really terrible idea though. I think that sort of thing should be deal with through features such as Paragon Paths and Feats...
5) I want to make a lycanthrope race. How would that work out?
Speaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha
Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further.
Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
1) Is it balanced to give a class a +4 modifier in an ability rather than +2 in two? If it isn't, would it be if I traded one major/minor ability for that?
No, it would not. Such a high racial modifier would not only break the standard balance conventions, but also make such a race the clearly superior choice in whatever classes use that stat as a primary.
And trading away a major ability wouldn't cut it. A +4 racial mod would almost assuredly go toward the one thing that most greatly affects you success of every round of every battle: your to-hit and damage. A +4 would simply be too good.
2) Giving a selectable +2 (like humans) is the same as giving +2 in two fixed stats?
Overall, I don't think you would run into too many balance issues if your race used a floating +2 instead of a preset set of stat bonuses.
Do keep in mind that, while the lack of a second stat is not ruinous, Humans are not entirely uncompensated for its lost. This is most noticeably so with their Human Defense Ability, which is very strong as for Major ability. It not only makes up for the effectively missing NAD bonus, but also helps to compensate for the lack of the secondary stat's boost to attacks, skills and the like, and holds its own weight as a major ability as well. If you do the same, you should likewise compensate for the missing stat in a similar manner.
However, if at all possible, I do suggest not to use the floating +2 on another race, but for a reason unrelated to mechanics. The floating +2 is not only one of the most defining aspects of Humans, it is the mechanic that cements them as being the goto "adaptable race". Giving that away to another race would take away would diminish the Human shtick and take away some of their uniqueness.
3) What if I say "give +2 to one mental ability, give +2 to one physical ability"?
Like above, I don't think you'll encounter any mechanical imbalances. Even less so in this case, as you don't have to try to compensate for a missing stat bonuses. And in fact, you could switch around just about any race's stats without causing balance issues, or at most, significant ones. But this option, again, takes way from the uniqueness that humans have by make them even more adaptable than humans.
Edit: On second thought, I think I'm going to agree with Crimson on this. Two floating stats would be ideal far too often. Not only does that step on the toes of Humans, but every other race as well. That's too good. It's in "you'd be stupid not to" territory.
4) Talking again about Fly, which is better, overland flight or flight speed? (This is, if I want to give a race the flying ability as they level up, which one should I give first?)
That would depend on several factors. How fast a speed are we talking about, at what level would they be available, at what cost (both directly and indirectly), and with what associate penalties and bonuses (like Clumsy or Hover, for example).
All these things being equal, regular Flight is clearly the stronger of the two. Overland Flight only allows you a single move action on your turn, and that action must to maintain flight. Most importantly, that means you can't use combat actions and fly at the same time. Regular Flight has no such restrictions, which is why it is so coveted.
With most creatures in the MM that have both, their Overland Flight speed is faster than their normal fly speed, but that's a trend, not a rule. I believe the original intention was that either Overland Flight was intended only for creatures that don't fight in the air (going by the wording in the DMG) and/or Overland Flight would be your default fly speed to use when doing long distance traveling and forced marches since it likely would take less energy to do so (since you have time to casually glide and take advantage of air currents and the like). However, the section on overland movement, forced marches and the like is completely missing from the DMG, so yeah. But I digress.
In short, Overland Flight is out of combat flight. Regular flight is combat flight. If you are going to grant them in order, again assuming all other things (like speed) being equal, Overland Flight would be a better fit for a first step.
5) I want to make a lycanthrope race. How would that work out? Change shape as the racial power, and the major ability to use bite/claws as natural weapons when in beast form?
There are at least dozens of ways of doing a lycanthrope, and many have already attempted homebrew lycanthrope rules and races. Mostly, however, it would depend on exactly how you would want the final result to work, as well as which mythologies in particular you are drawing your inspiration from. For example, the next time I get a chance to play, I plan on playing a werewolf sorcerer that's actually, on paper, a reflavored human. His claws are actually his dagger implements, and I plan on having him stay in "hybrid form" most of the time, and I plan on developing a few polymorph-type utility and daily spells to run by the DM. That's one method.
But for creating an actual race, perhaps these ideas might help as starting places:
For shape changing, you'll probably want to take a look at the Druid's Wildshape ability and the Changling's/PC stat'ed Doppelgangers Change Shape. Some merger of the two would give you a effective creature<->hybrid<->humanoid mechanic.
Natural Weapons are tricky. How you handle them would depend on what you want the final result to be. If you simply want them to be a burst of animal fury, you could simply make them an encounter power. Alternatively, you could make them some type of racial at-will attack. But, if you want your lycans to be able to use them like regular weapons so they could be use in conjunction with class powers, the easiest thing to do, IMO, would be to simply stat them as regular weapons. Perhaps as a type of weapon in the Unarmed Group (like the ones in this shameless plug). Then, for enchantments, either allow the natural weapons themselves to be enchanted, or create some sort of implement-like device to bestow enchantments upon the natural weapons.
Alternatively, another method I've suggested in other threads dealing with animal-like races is to simply allow the player to, at character creation, choose a melee weapon his character would normally be proficient with anyway. His "natural weapons," for all intents and purposes, including feats, powers, and the like, function exactly as that chosen weapon. So if the player wanted to play a wolfen fighter, he could choose, say, Greatsword, and all of his wolf's attacks function exactly like that 2H heavy blade. And again, just like with the monk, the "natural weapon" can be affect by magic item rituals.
Either way, I wouldn't make natural weapons take up a major ability slot unless they did something significant that a regular weapon could not.
For just about anything else, you might want to take inspiration from Shifters from the PH2, as they are decedent from lycanthropes, and have the thematic racial abilities and feats to support that heritage.
Thinking about creating a race for 4e? Make things a lil' easier on yourself by reading my Race Mechanic Creation Guide first.
Well, first I would like to clarify that I'm homebrewing a set of new races to replace the ones in the PHB for my personal campaign. That's why I needed a versatile race much like humans, but not quite the same. I was thinking in hybrids between animals and humans (like humans with animalistic features), which would give them the versatility depending in what kind of animal they are. So, a bear-human would have more Str and a cat-human would have more Dex.
Regarding the lycanthrope race, a shifter is not what I'm looking for, Crimson. I want a race that can shift from a human form to a bestial form. The idea of the Druid's wild shape + Change shape sounds good to me. How about this: the player can change between his human form, bestial form and animal form as an at-will racial power. He can assume human and animal any time, but he must be bloodied to assume bestial form. As a human and bestial, he can use weapons and such. In animal and bestial form, he can only use his claw/bite attack. The claw/bite attack is a natural weapon that has prof +3 and deals d8 damage, and has the off-hand property. In bestial form, the player gets +2 to all damage rolls.
So, would that work up?
Oh, regarding the oversized, wouldn't work a major ability that lets the player use two-handed weapons in one hand? (Like monkey grip feat in 3.5)
I don't want this conversation to take place both here AND in "New set of homebrew races", so where would you like this to continue? Because both threads need to be referenced in order for this following discussion to make sense... And Fireclave that question is directed at you too. Where would you like this discussion to take place? Because I heavily disagree with a lot of the suggestions you gave him for the race that he created...
EDIT: Also:
Magus_Stragus wrote:
Oh, regarding the oversized, wouldn't work a major ability that lets the player use two-handed weapons in one hand? (Like monkey grip feat in 3.5)
No, that idea is just as bad on a PC race as Oversized is.
Speaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha
Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further.
Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
