Joined: 09 Jul 2014 Location: The Land of >9000 Lakes (GMT -6)
Since we're moving to EE, the team has decided the way we implement ECL is a tad screwy, and decided to remove level adjustments, in order for all races to be somewhat balanced, we have adjusted the statistical gains of certain subraces, notably those previously with +1 and +2 ECL adjustments.
However! This does not mean that all these stats are lost. As an alternative, the team has decided to implement "Heritage" feats, these will be feats that apply (most of) the missing stats taken away with this adjustment, but will require being taken as an epic feat, as well as reducing the saving throws of the PC, in line with what the level adjustment currently applies to them.--Specifics down below. These feats are Optional to take, and not required by any means, but we wanted to offer the ability to retain these features in such a way that made for a fair trade off, and this is what we came up with.
Our planned adjustments are as follows!
Modified Subraces with No Level Adjustment
Proposed Heritage Feats - All can be taken in epic and the requirement is just the subrace.
ADDENDUM
Alignment restrictions will be in place for our freely playable "true" monster races, except for the following:
Drow have a strong good-aligned community presence on Amia with the Shrine of Eilistraee.
Fey'ri are not included in this list because they will retain their Request-Only status at this time.
Tieflings remain flexible with alignments due to the variety of fiend ancestors one can have. Good-aligned Tieflings can expect that they will not be able to enhance their fiendish bloodline, however. Just as evil aasimar will not be able to enhance their celestial bloodline.
Our other monster races will need to follow these restrictions:
----------
We have also decided on this change, after receiving player feedback:
_________________ Occasionally seen as [DM] Raua, or playerside as...
I like the removal of ECL. That said, I feel like the really problematic non-ECL races were missed: Chultans and Genasi mostly. Also, I see the history of half-orc subraces getting the shaft continues. (Same concept applies to kobolds and goblins, but I only realised that now) I mean, okay. Half-orc as a base race, I suppose Amian lot has nothing to do with. But the subraces? Yeah, they're in line, 100%. With the Half-orc subrace. Compared to all other subraces, they're far worse.
One way I'd suggest looking at them is the total bonus you get from the subraces. Most subraces, the bonus evens out to a zero. After all, human, to an extent, is the base-line. That isn't to say "if it ends up a zero it's balanced", because there's more to it. Obviously, a +6 strength, -6 charisma is... a bit strong, on a meleer. But it's a decent baseline, especially when we're talking about a +/- 1 or 2. There's still stats generally more valued than others, like dex and str generally being valued over all other stats, due to the offensive qualities. That said, most races even out to a zero, some used to go to +1 total, but that seems to be reduced to only half elves. And then we have monster subraces. Duergar at -2, kobold at -2, goblin at -2, half-orc, ogrillon, orog, all -2. Orc, I suppose, it a bit unique, and in my opinion, less terrible, because it is unique as the only +3 subrace, and only comes down to a -1 net bonus. Orc is fine. All other -2 races, let's be honest, are terrible.
I can hear the argument for a few of them "it's only wis and cha, nobody cares about those". First off, yes, they do. Apart from a -2, or -4 in duergar's case, basically making that character crippled severely for any class that uses those stats, it also just is a harsh penalty, for no reason. Those races don't gain anything that relevant. You really can't tell me a +1 str, +1 con. -2 int, and -2 cha races is balanced, compared to other races. +2 dex, but a -4 str? Come on. Orog is an even worse spit in the face. +1 str? Okay, nice. +1 cha, hmm... maybe I can make a divine orc-type PC then. -2 dex... Clerics/some-other-class-as-surrogate-for-shaman don't really need dex. -2 wis: Well, that makes it pretty damn worthless. BG, I suppose. A BG who can't cast spells, but still gets a decent cha...
Especially, because, from a power standpoint, most classes have pretty exact copies, in better: Duergar -> Shield Dwarf, free +2 cha, no LA, at the expense of a few minor immunities, +4 MS, and +1 Spot/Listen. Kobold -> Halfling. You lose +2 Set Trap and Search. Half-orc, Ogrillom -> Earth Genasi. Only downside is being an outsider. Yes, it's a decently hefty downside, but you gain quite a lot for it. There's an argument to be had that int also is more valuable than cha, making EG an even better choice. Orog, at least, is somewhat unique, being cha/str.
In the end, I'm just curious. Why do monster races have to be weaker than normal races? If anything, I would think they should be stronger. After all, gaining friends as a monster is a lot harder, (for a good reason) and your shopping options are pretty heavily restricted. That said, if the team doesn't want monster races to be more powerful, I can understand that. But why should they be less powerful than the others?
Now, somewhat contrary to my point, I still think Air and Earth Genasi, and Chultan are too powerful, because those +2s are pretty damn powerful, and the -2s aren't really equivalent. If I had to suggst somethng, I'd suggest lowering all of those down to a +1, but I supopose there's some hesitance due to older characters thus needing a rebuild... +2 dex, at the expense of -2 cha isn't exactly an equal trade, and the amount of non-chultan chultans make that pretty damn clear. AG and EG, their main offense, in my opinion, is just having a bit too much. Most melee characters can completely ignore wisdom and charisma, making the -2s pretty small, compared to stats you generally want pretty high.
I think moving away from the ECL system is for the best - I've made no attempt to hide how much I believe it takes away from the game in the past and I can only be happy for the departure from it. What I do agree with robbi on is that the Genasi subraces are far too strong for no ECL currently and compared to other subraces they still shine as far and away some of the most mechanically strong options. Other than that small quibble, I'm excited to see the new system implemented!
I go by the premise that not everything needed to be 100% balanced, we are not a MMO with a competitive scene so some races can be a bit lackluster beside others in my opinion. The RP flavour should have heavy weight in this case. But to big imbalances are of course an issue.
_________________ Plays: Sylveera : Sun Elven fury packed in an Arcane Archer, not a Drow, promise. Tetrik : Greed incarnate in a Duergar. Budly : Has gone to a better place. Barrililath : Shadowy Drow, probably less Drow than Sylv ever be.
Correct, it's not an MMO with a competitive scene. Nevertheless, in general, balance is a thing for fun as well. I can only speak for myself, but if I know that I am disadvantaged in every single way, mechanically, due to having a poor subrace, socially, due to not being able to interact with a large part of the server, and in regards to items, because getting leveling shop gear and epics is a lot harder for monster races... I don't find the idea fun.
And I can't imagine many others find it fun, otherwise there'd be a more thriving open evil/monster race "community" on here. Obviously, the majority of folks don't want to self-flagellate.
I noticed, I forgot to mention the "heritage feats": Positive first: I like that, if I understand it correctly, you can choose which feat to lose. It finally would mean tiefling assassins are able to go EDodge, and still are able to be a decent build. I actually really like this, personally, if I understand it correctly. Losing one feat isn't so bad, but losing the 30th feat kind of hurt, in a lot of cases. The downside: Soemthing in me dislikes the wording, "heritage feats". I have to admit, I don't know what fits better, but, to me, heritage feat sounds like something a sorceror would take to explain what bloodline he got his powers from. Or the demon/fey heritage in NWN2. Things like that. You're human, 99%, more human than an Aasimar even, but you have that tiny drop of other blood that didn't manifest severely, just a tiny bonus. A tiny part of me almost wants to suggest to just call them what they are "subrace ECL feats", even though, that, too, is a terrible description for them... Heritage seems off, because, at least for a few of them. Drow, generally, come from a long line of Drow. And the "half-breed races" like Ogrillons, it would seem like their traits would be stronger if they didn't come from a long line of Ogrillons, but instead were born of an orc and an ogre. (which, if I understand correctly, is how orillons happen) An Aasimar whose great-grandfather was an angel would seem to be more charismatic than an Aasimar whose great-great-great-great-great-grandfather was an angel. Then again, apart from the name, I really like the system, as long as smaller kinks are ironed out.
Looking over these changes, I'm not sure I like them. It does open up more build flexibility for some races, but it also makes them significantly less distinct. The heritage feats seem rather clunky especially because they don't show up until epic levels, which I would think should be something intrinsic to the race. There are also quite a lot of the selections that are now clearly stronger/weaker than the others.
A few examples:
Compare Drow to Sun elves. Light sensitivity as implemented is quite a minor penalty. In exchange they get irreducible SR (which admittedly, is pretty low without the heritage feat, but still better than nothing), but they also have the option of taking the heritage feat while the other doesn't. This means that effectively, drow are now ALWAYS mechanically stronger than Sun Elves.
Fey'ri may not be problematic because they have to be requested, they're outsider instead of elf and all that implies, but they get a free spell/day and fire resist compared to regular moon elves, without giving up anything.
Svirfneblin didn't have a lot going for them before, but they had some nice defensive buffs with the DEX, WIS, free dodge AC, and the SR, though with a total stat loss they weren't a popular option. They weren't good by most measures, but they were distinct. But now they're very comparable to halflings. Essentially, for anything that doesn't need CHA, they're essentially halflings with free SR, and a +WIS option feat they can take, but I don't see many non-caster cleric builds taking it.
Orcs are now 100% superior to half-orcs, though that they have to be requested specifically lessens this a bit. Still, they're effectively half-orcs with +1 STR, otherwise there really isn't anything distinguishing them. (I also find it a touch odd they're evil-only while other majority evil races aren't rather inconsistent... but that's another topic). Ogrillons weren't a popular pick before, but honestly I don't see anyone playing them now. They're half-orcs with -1 STR and +1 CON. Since most STR builds either pump STR anyways, and CON tank builds get a decently high STR anyways, I don't see this working out too well. Not to mention just being inferior to dwarves. They also lost their natural armor. The heritage feat can be like +1 extra stat feat compared, but eh, it still seems awkward. I'm honestly surprised more people didn't make Orogs, but I thought they got a nice series of benefits for what they gave up. The +dodge AC, resistances, and stat distribution made them more distinct. Now, they're pretty much only there if someone wants an orc character with CHA. They're 2 stats down. The resistances are nice, and they do get a decent heritage feat, but it can make some awkward pacing for bard builds or the like given they'd have to wait until epic levels to even out their CHA with their heritage feat. Not in the worst shape, but it still feels kind of awkward.
In summary: I don't think the ECL system was bad. It did make certain build combinations less optimal, but a subrace build playing to their strengths could be plenty strong, and there have been several builds that could work around the ECL restrictions while working with the racial benefits. I do think this dampens some of the variety I've come to like from the server.
Alignment restrictions will be in place for our freely playable "true" monster races, except for the following:
Drow have a strong good-aligned community presence on Amia with the Shrine of Eilistraee.
Fey'ri are not included in this list because they will retain their Request-Only status at this time.
Tieflings remain flexible with alignments due to the variety of fiend ancestors one can have. Good-aligned Tieflings can expect that they will not be able to enhance their fiendish bloodline, however. Just as evil aasimar will not be able to enhance their celestial bloodline.
Our other monster races will need to follow these restrictions:
----------
We have also decided on this change, after receiving player feedback:
_________________
Login: The Copper Queen Cromlech - The Best Copper This Side of Ruathym Zelly Cys'dina - The Wounded Soul, Also Merchant Aelynthi Nor'alei - The Bubbly Winged Elf
I get the idea behind having the races be more mechanically distinct but I'd also like to levy the idea that the defining factor behind what makes X race different from X other lies more within the RP, as this is an RP server, not the mechanics and builds behind the races, yes it helps but the important part is how they're played. Ultimately I think not being restricted to a lower max level is far more beneficial to the playerbase than a few racials no one will ever really notice in-game.
_________________
Discord Daddy ;) Eli'wyl Valenfar:Heckin' Cute Arcane Ranger Elfling! Beatrix Addlebriar:She of many cute birbs.
I was just going to leave this, but I have a very big problem with the addendum.
Firstly, I'm not really sure what this change was designed to fix. Every single race targeted by that addendum was uncommon at best. Kobolds might have been a bit odd in the past, but even they for the large part were fairly appropriate to their own lore. And these days, you hardly see them at all. How many people are throwing together a happy-go-lucky daisy-picking puppy-saving orog on a lark? Is it even a problem if they do? The only reason I can think of for this is that I guess in-character racism is more justified - now we can unconsciously metagame that "this character probably is evil anyway!" which I guess is convenient for the largely good-leaning PC base, at the expense of an oft-struggling Evil side. I certainly do not see people shrugging their shoulders and saying "oh well, I guess I'll make an evil character" in response to this change.
Secondly, this change isn't even in keeping to the lore - Duergar for example are listed as "often lawful evil" (compare the exception of drow: "Usually Neutral Evil"). They are certainly stated to have a particularly boring society dedicated to slavery and toil, but based on that we should be evaluating every single society and throwing down alignment restrictions for the (oft-exploited) human subraces. This is taking the one-step rule and tossing it everywhere in the name of homogenising PCs who are, at the outset, meant to be exceptional. One-step rule is fine for clerics (who are constrained by their deity) and DDs I guess (because blood) - why should we add "society" to this list when leaving society is the very foundation of being an adventurer?
So we can make a request for this. Why should we have to? By the mere act of making a PC, we are making a character who is more exceptional than the population of NPCs. If someone wanted to bring back the Bloodbeards or something (CE), the request forum would need to be inundated. If someone wanted to make, say a goblin version of the Shrine of Eilistraee, they're facing the uphill battle of convincing their fellow faction members to go through the request process - which is absolutely more daunting for some people than others, because it means putting your work up for judgment (often before you decide whether or not you like the idea). Making a faction and getting people enthusiastic about it is hard enough already, now this ruling is basically saying "you need special dispensation to even try" in this case.
To summarise - this change is at best unnecessary, and at worst a ham-fisted curtailing of creativity. Most people who play these races use alignments in that range anyway - why punish those who choose not to? Why is this really needed? Not to fix a problem, not truly for lore... it seems to be red tape for the sake of red tape.
It's really not about red tape. To me, personally, it's about encouraging these norms and dispositions, and also reminding players about the traditions and lore. We're moving to EE, which will open us up to a broader playerbase which will hopefully see greater opportunities for these evil/neutral races. And with a fully-stocked DM team going into it, it's our hope that we'll be able to see many fleshed out monster races banding together for strength and classic conflict.
Other DMs may have other reasons for their preference, but those are mine. I would love to see more of these races for the opportunities they present which are so different from what the less monstrous races present.
There is a lot that can be done with a neutral alignment, also. Including growing IC and showing their kin a different path, if any of them truly want to take that route. Someone with ambitions to start a faction like that will likely have the drive to put together a little request with their intentions. They're not going to be like requesting a dragon or a vampire, after all. We're still going to have streamlined requests, which are rather quick and easy these days, and I don't see that changing.
With all that said, I don't have anything against the good-aligned monsters. So if that's what people wanna play, I don't plan on being a stickler for it. But there are certainly benefits that will go hand-in-hand with sticking with the racial lore. At least in my opinion!
_________________
Login: The Copper Queen Cromlech - The Best Copper This Side of Ruathym Zelly Cys'dina - The Wounded Soul, Also Merchant Aelynthi Nor'alei - The Bubbly Winged Elf
Joined: 20 Apr 2008 Location: The downeaster "Alexa"
Still digesting my thoughts on this, but at face value I think it's a very interesting move and actually opens up more diverse paths than it shuts down.
My longtime issue with the way our ECL worked was it ended up taking an additional +1 AB, Saves, and HP from some races, along with 1-2 feats which inevitably translated to epic feats. ECL is good to make sure all members of a party can advance at about the same rate, but that doesn't always directly translate to them being equal in "power." You can see this once you start trying to compare Drow SR or +2 ECL stat bonuses to things like Hellball and Epic Dodge. So yes, the way we implimented it was always a bit wonky if we were looking to say a lv 28 ECL +2 Race would be equal to a lv 30 +0 race, because ECL doesn't lend itself to that. It's something that, ostensibly, lets everyone else in the party feel like they're contributing even if someone's munchkin little bro insisted on rolling up a Minotaur.
The argument could be made that things like Drow and Aasimar who were getting +2's to multiple stats still won out vs missing out a Great X or two, but empirically those stats often had limited use towards certain builds. I.E. no Drow build really needs INT AND CHA, an Aasimar's WIS+CHA was great if you went Paladin or Cleric, but did say Bard, Sorcerer, Ranger, etc would only benefit from one. So you had a lot of added weight in the power of the subrace that they were being "charged" for unless they made 100% use of it. Anyway, allowing people to "buy in" into some of the more powerful aspects of the subrace if they choose to seems cool. Pathfinder already does as much. It's sort of a built-in way of having people increase their racial heritage like we do from spell widgets. So at the end of the day, I think you'll see more diverse builds from this chance, because races and their traits are more modular. You're not "wasting" stats or levels if you roll up an Aasimar ranger, for instance.
A few thoughts while they're fresh in my mind:
Light Sensitivity: I wouldn't call it minor. It's really more annoying than anything. Light Sensitive races receive no bonuses while in darkened areas, while Darkvision items and Light which will negate the negatives of being in darkness are ubiquitous and cheap. Weighing its "power" is kind of hard with the layer-cake design of 3rd Edition feats. How much is +1 AB worth? Depends. As a constant effect, it's an Epic Prowess feat. As a temporary effect, it's like an infinitely spawnable number of 50 GP Bless potions. Light Blindness means that half of your playtime, in a majority of the module's areas, you will have -1 AB. So it's somewhere in between the two. And certainly enough of a drawback that we won't just see Sun Elves up and disappear, not even considering the RP drawbacks.
Monstrous Races: I'd agree they seem to constantly get the short end of the stick. But that was baked into the setting between them being kill-on-sight in many "civilized' places. Playing a monstrous race, at least in my P&P experience, was basically opting to play "hard mode" if the DM followed lore to a T. There is and was no incentive to make them appetizing choices, because the PCs were supposed to be killing them, not playing as or with them. Thus the pigeonholing of their alignments as well; don't worry about wiping out that entire family of goblins. They literally cannot have been good creatures.
Anyway, sizable risks--RP and otherwise--constitute sizable rewards. Contextual rewards. Why not give monstrous races Nature Sense or Trackless Step? We know you're never gonna be allowed in most settlements, so here's a bonus from living out in the wilds. Hell, we could go the story route and give some sort of "Horde" or warband feat to our monsterfolk where they get like +1 AB/Saves for every nearby fellow monster. For me, some sort of asymmetric play mechanic is more fitting than trying to figure a balanced stat-combo that still won't make up for the fact most settlements and PCs will be hostile to them. Gobos alone, weak. Gobos together, strong.
Tiefling Penalties: It's a bit of a can of worms I realized, but the penalty to Charisma has never been well reasoned in the narrative of the game. There are different ways to interpret a CHA penalty, from have a lack of character(that partially being made up by your bloodline's tropes), to an overbearing cultural group-think like Shield Dwarves or Chultans. But people will always want to play a Tiefling Bard, Sorcerer, or Warlock, and it really seems weird that the great-great-grandson of a sweet-talking devil would be worse at his job for it. Maybe Wisdom to represent not being able to empathize with their surroundings? Eh.
Drow Heritage Feat: Even with it being irreducible, Drow will now have 5 less SR max. I'm not sure why it needs to have another -1AB on top of it, in addition to them having another -1 most times from Light Sensitivity. Their new "natural" spell resistance that would cap out at 28 is basically what you'd have anyway after a mage Mord'ed you(29 SR). The difference between 28 SR vs 34 isn't great enough to justify losing another Epic Prowess feat by epic levels, IMO. Even if it had to come down to 32 SR, +2 CHA/DEX and -1 Saves, that's still better for anything that's not a pure caster.
Edit: I'm bad at math after 5PM.
_________________
You think Magic is your ally... but you merely adopted the Art. He was born in it. Molded by it. Sometimes, an angel is simply a devil with better intentions.
Last edited by Dark Immolation on Thu, Jun 18 2020, 21:17 PM, edited 2 times in total.
I don't see the point of the heritage feats being available in the epic stages, mostly because it seems kind of ridiculous.
Let's take a tiefling for example. They get all the way up there to take this feat, and on an RP standpoint it's along the lines of "I've slain countless monsters, and I've traveled to places of great danger! I've tapped farther into my bloodline! I'm now as sneaky as my ancestors.. but fuck, now these mind spells are affecting me more easily (barely, but the point is still there), and I'm being knocked down more easily too."
If you ask me, these should be available only at level 1. Because it's like they're growing into their heritage. It's easy to justify a level one having these downfalls as opposed to a demi-god-like character. Sure, it's easy to call it a 'level one power spike,' but it's silly to imagine a being who can face hordes and hordes of monsters (or innocent bystanders, if they so choose) to suddenly get worse (to an extent) by deciding to be more like their fore bearers.
(It also makes it easier to get people to join low-level parties instead of being able to solo everything)
Joined: 20 Apr 2008 Location: The downeaster "Alexa"
I'd agree. If possible, having them available early would make a bit more sense. Not that you couldn't take them later(note, epic doesn't meant at the end of your journey, just 21+), but that you can start off as being more in tune with your heritage.
There shouldn't be that much of a power spike. Our ECL races already start with their bonuses to stats and whatnot coming in at lv 2. The feats also come with penalties, so it's actually more evened out in that respect. You don't hurt for your 29th and 30th levels until you get there. You feel those -1 to saves as soon as you start off with heritage feats.
_________________
You think Magic is your ally... but you merely adopted the Art. He was born in it. Molded by it. Sometimes, an angel is simply a devil with better intentions.
Joined: 28 May 2006 Location: That place with the green grass and that blue sky.
They are epic feats to counter the fact prior, ECL races lost the lvl 30 Feat and Saves. Now they can sacrifice those to get more power in the form of those heritage feats.
Drow & Svirf have the -1 AB on top of it because lvl 29 is 1 AB.
So to have similar power, you lose the epic feat you otherwise would have never had with the current system. But you have the option to not take it as well.
We can't implement them at level 1, anyway. Subraces aren't activated until you get in-game, so it would have to be a general feat to take anytime. But, yeah. What Mahtan said.
_________________
Login: The Copper Queen Cromlech - The Best Copper This Side of Ruathym Zelly Cys'dina - The Wounded Soul, Also Merchant Aelynthi Nor'alei - The Bubbly Winged Elf
Joined: 20 Apr 2008 Location: The downeaster "Alexa"
Apparently my brain is stuck in some previous version of Amia. Drow SR hasn't been reducible for some time, even though the penalty icon still appears. Consequentially, I read the SR change as making that SR unable to be reduced, rather than allowing it to be.
In that case 1) the SR definitely isn't worth as much as one might think by the time you're fighting anything worth its salt and 2) the Drow SR feat now seems undertuned to me. The difference between 34 and 28 still isn't that great, especially now that any caster is going to be able to take 10 off of that the first round of an encounter. The other heritage feats are a straight +2 Stat for -1 Saves. It's optional, yeah, but I just don't see how that's in the same ballpark once the SR is reducible.
Note: I'm not saying it shouldn't be. Now, it's a free SR cloak/armor stat and you can get to lv 30 like everyone else. It plays by the same rules. But I don't see tacking on -1 AB to the feat being worth 6 SR. Or a free slot on your equipment +2 SR if you were to compare it to the Tiefling, Aasimar, or Fey'ri feat.
In other words, personally as a Drow player, I'd rather just have a heritage feat that gave +2 Stat/-1 Uni like the other races at that point, rather than have it be lumped with the SR and the AB penalty. I could be in the minority on that, though.
_________________
You think Magic is your ally... but you merely adopted the Art. He was born in it. Molded by it. Sometimes, an angel is simply a devil with better intentions.
They are epic feats to counter the fact prior, ECL races lost the lvl 30 Feat and Saves. Now they can sacrifice those to get more power in the form of those heritage feats.
Drow & Svirf have the -1 AB on top of it because lvl 29 is 1 AB.
So to have similar power, you lose the epic feat you otherwise would have never had with the current system. But you have the option to not take it as well.
I don't mean to be a stickler, but this really makes no sense. If someone makes a build with one of these heritage feats in it, why does it have to be in the epic levels? If all characters are now reaching 30, why does it make a difference when the feat is taken?
Your argument is that they're making up for a feat they're going to get anyway (hells, possibly two if they build it so) so why is it that it has to be taken in the higher levels?
Joined: 28 May 2006 Location: That place with the green grass and that blue sky.
Well a "general feat" does not equal a "general epic feat". The point is they lose a general epic feat like they currently do.
The difference of them can be using a feat for weapon focus vs using one for Armor Skin. To keep things as similar as they are at the moment, then the price to get these once ECL Bonus, you pay a General Epic Feat, your +1 Saves, and potentially your 1 AB if you were an ECL 2.
I hope that clears up why it was put in epics. Yes it will make some builds harder and they will need tweaking, but it keeps many more functional and opens many other options.
The more I think about it, the less I find myself liking the addendum to restrict alignments. I do understand the rationale, but it is quite a departure from a long standing policy and server direction that the server has held over the years. Amia's oft held to allowing player freedom with concepts and while there is a balance to be held, I don't see this as helping. There's plenty of concepts I can think of for many of the affected races that would still be lore-appropriate and affected by the restriction. Not to mention requests would pile up, and it can become a nasty bottleneck if they pile up, and it's also discouraging.
The rule regarding the exception doesn't make much sense as well, because the new setup will actively discourage efforts to make IC changes for facilitation, which means that they're not likely to even try if they know it's just going to be a wasted effort. Expanding on this line of thought, if drow were included in the "non-good only" bracket, it would probably mean that the shrine of Eilistraee and the RP associated with it would erode and eventually die up entirely. If it was policy already, then the shrine would probably never have gotten off it's feet in the first place. Restricting character alignments at creation guides the flow of RP, not the other way around. Besides, even if PCs are allowed to be good aligned, then NPCs and PCs can still hold prejudiced views against them regardless of what their alignment is, as it's not something other characters know (or even really know it exists, save some, paladins, etc), and that can be the result of in character events.
Otherwise, I think Serbiris makes good points as well.
The more I think about it, the less I find myself liking the addendum to restrict alignments. I do understand the rationale, but it is quite a departure from a long standing policy and server direction that the server has held over the years. Amia's oft held to allowing player freedom with concepts and while there is a balance to be held, I don't see this as helping. There's plenty of concepts I can think of for many of the affected races that would still be lore-appropriate and affected by the restriction. Not to mention requests would pile up, and it can become a nasty bottleneck if they pile up, and it's also discouraging.
The rule regarding the exception doesn't make much sense as well, because the new setup will actively discourage efforts to make IC changes for facilitation, which means that they're not likely to even try if they know it's just going to be a wasted effort. Expanding on this line of thought, if drow were included in the "non-good only" bracket, it would probably mean that the shrine of Eilistraee and the RP associated with it would erode and eventually die up entirely. If it was policy already, then the shrine would probably never have gotten off it's feet in the first place. Restricting character alignments at creation guides the flow of RP, not the other way around. Besides, even if PCs are allowed to be good aligned, then NPCs and PCs can still hold prejudiced views against them regardless of what their alignment is, as it's not something other characters know (or even really know it exists, save some, paladins, etc), and that can be the result of in character events.
Otherwise, I think Serbiris makes good points as well.
I tend to be a person who argues mostly with people on the board, but I can simply put, say this : Yes, your points are in my eyes very valid!
_________________ Plays: Sylveera : Sun Elven fury packed in an Arcane Archer, not a Drow, promise. Tetrik : Greed incarnate in a Duergar. Budly : Has gone to a better place. Barrililath : Shadowy Drow, probably less Drow than Sylv ever be.
Joined: 26 May 2006 Location: Down Under, calculating your demise with blunt expressions.
Subjectively speaking, I'm not really a fan of what I'm reading. Being a pure underdarker, I'm coming off worse for wear with these changes Particularly the Drow ones: I'm forced to rebuild my characters and burn precious epic levels feats which I don't have to get 70% of my current abilities back. I'd rather just stay at level 28 with what I've got.
Objectively speaking, I'm not blind to the following:
1) we could be stuck with humans, half-elves, dwarfs, elves, gnomes, halflings and half-orcs as our only options, so any subraces (Even nerfed) are better then none.
2) I play a fair amount of d&d 5th edition and pathfinder where subraces literally have little to no powers whatsoever in comparison to 3.5 ed. This emphasises point number 1: any subrace is better then no subrace.
So in conclusion: I'm coming off second best in this. It will suck, and I will have to rebuild (which I can't be stuffed doing anyway) but objectively its better then the alternative (ie no subraces) and doesn't change my day to day routine when I log in.
Its not the first time I've come off second best from a nerf / change anyway. Whats another nerf in the grand scheme?
Joined: 28 May 2006 Location: That place with the green grass and that blue sky.
Some good news!
You will be getting a free rebuild with the transfer to EE so you will only need to plan your new build and not grind through anything for the new changes.
You will also only be spending the epic feat you normally lost from being locked out of lvl 30 to get back the DEX or CHA and the higher SR capped at what is now the accepted limit. Or you can ignore the feat and go with something else, but if you are CHA based you'll mostly likely want that option. Sadly DEX CHA focused folks have to choose here but that couldn't be avoided.
You now have extra HP and more Skill points. Higher class investment to get things like Hellball, Winterwight, and DragonShape. Plus the flexibility of building with those extra 2 levels which can't be underestimated. Especially things that go off Character Level.
That's good to hear! Though as a question for clarification: all drow PCs will need to level up from 28 to 30? Or will the free rebuild be from 28 to 30?
Joined: 09 Jul 2014 Location: The Land of >9000 Lakes (GMT -6)
Specifically to DI, the reason Drow and Svirf Heritage feats impart the extra AB penalty, is in relation to the current AB penalty they have, being only able to reach level 28.
We do understand the slight wonkiness that comes from having to take these feats in epics, however we decided that there needed to be a trade-off.
Overall, most of these races receive a buff in the form of greater build flexibility, which cannot be understated as very good. Yes, it costs an epic feat to regain most (or all) the adjusted stats that are removed by default, but again, the trade off exists in a manner that is similar to the current system (I.e. Spendin a feat you otherwise wouldn't have had with the old system)
Drow, unfortunately do have to pick between either Charisma OR Dexterity, but the team felt giving both would simply make them too powerful with the new system.
_________________ Occasionally seen as [DM] Raua, or playerside as...
Joined: 22 Jul 2015 Location: Lincolnshire, United Kingdom
Mahtan wrote:
Some good news!
You will be getting a free rebuild with the transfer to EE so you will only need to plan your new build and not grind through anything for the new changes.
You will also only be spending the epic feat you normally lost from being locked out of lvl 30 to get back the DEX or CHA and the higher SR capped at what is now the accepted limit. Or you can ignore the feat and go with something else, but if you are CHA based you'll mostly likely want that option. Sadly DEX CHA focused folks have to choose here but that couldn't be avoided.
You now have extra HP and more Skill points. Higher class investment to get things like Hellball, Winterwight, and DragonShape. Plus the flexibility of building with those extra 2 levels which can't be underestimated. Especially things that go off Character Level.
It isn't really a free rebuild though given that everyone has to rebuild their character moving into EE your just giving back what is taken away by the move in most cases. I'm curious to know though if you end up having to rebuild your character with all these changes and it simply doesn't work.. would you allow a second rerebuild to sort the character?
_________________ When it rains, look for rainbows. When it's dark, look for stars.
Joined: 28 May 2006 Location: That place with the green grass and that blue sky.
No its free in that even if you want to try the new classes coming you can within reason of course. It's free in the sense there is no DC cost to you and you can rebuild accordingly to the changes.
I am not sure on if secondaries will be allowed unless something was clearly broken. We'll discuss that more as we approach the transfer I am certain.
You are allowed to adjust your builds for EE. If you think any of the new PRCs will work then you are going to be allowed to take advantage of it. The rebuilds for old characters to EE are going to be very loose and flexible so players can adjust.
Joined: 26 May 2006 Location: Down Under, calculating your demise with blunt expressions.
I suppose its happening either way, and I understand that the intent is there.
Me personally? I'll likely retire my Drow characters with the server move and leave it at that. Solves the problem for me. I feel like I'm being traded a stock Lancer for my Mitsubishi Evo and being told its a good swap.
I personally dont see the issue. I also havent really played many ecl characters. your gaining a feat, ab, CL, possibly even 2 feats if you swing it. and if you want to go back to the old ways, you can take the heritage feat....
_________________ Andre'us Larson : "Too many people died, I'll not let that happen again. Ever." Tempest Rayne
I love the bloodline feats so much. It allows the subraces to reach their maximum potential without -ECL but also allows you not to take them. Build flexibility and variety is going to be an amazing part of the new meta. Also drow will stop being weak. FEAR THE UNDERDARK.
One thing I would recommend is making the drow bloodline feat evil only. Surface drow have turned away from that path.
_________________ Gerald Edmund Discord: Metal Viking Guy #5433
I suppose its happening either way, and I understand that the intent is there.
Me personally? I'll likely retire my Drow characters with the server move and leave it at that. Solves the problem for me. I feel like I'm being traded a stock Lancer for my Mitsubishi Evo and being told its a good swap.
I will personally help you turn whatever drow you're playing from a cool classic muscle car into the hyper optimized racing car of your dreams if you reconsider. Drow ARE better under the proposed changes. PM me if you're interested.
_________________ Gerald Edmund Discord: Metal Viking Guy #5433
Joined: 26 May 2006 Location: Down Under, calculating your demise with blunt expressions.
bobofwestoregonusa wrote:
I will personally help you turn whatever drow you're playing from a cool classic muscle car into the hyper optimized racing car of your dreams if you reconsider. Drow ARE better under the proposed changes. PM me if you're interested.
No thanks.
I've been through this all before with the cleric nerfs. Better to cut my losses before I make the situation worse.
Galenson, you literally lose nothing except a bit of SR and either dex or cha, I can't think of many builds that require both. In turn you get 2 more levels, it's not a Nerf, it's a buff. A massive one. Especially for meelee Drow. Casters as well, Granted, wizards to win the most but Sorcs are gonna be so much stronger because they can go for the good old 27/2/1 instead of 26/1/1 missing out on Evasion
Could you.. Explain how you think you're losing out? I'm actually curious if I'm missing something.
Joined: 26 May 2006 Location: Down Under, calculating your demise with blunt expressions.
No point really. Its happening regardless. Easier to cut one's losses.
If you're ok with the changes, great. Enjoy your characters at level 30. I'll be retiring mine though: they're no longer Drow anymore. I'll have to find something else to play.
Drow aren't being nerfed though. They're getting their full level range now, and you can choose but to take the bloodline feats if they don't matter to your build. Seriously. Its awesome. You get to do all sorts of cool new stuff and I know for a fact that drow can be proper shifters now with the FULL range of abilities instead of having to choose to drop important feats.
You're gaining an epic feat.
_________________ Gerald Edmund Discord: Metal Viking Guy #5433
You can take a feat to get the old SR if you want it. This just allows for more versatile build options. Its great.
Edit: Drow ARE stronger by any reasonable metric. SR, multiple stat adjustments if you take the feat and a full level range now. 34 sr is slightly lower than 38 just most casters aren't going past 24 so you're still pretty solid
_________________ Gerald Edmund Discord: Metal Viking Guy #5433
Hey Galenson, I know your bummed out, but don't give up. Folks are willing to try and help you. Server needs all the Drow it can get. Buck up camperoo. Hang in there! 8D You got this!
_________________ ImperialKnight of Ireland E'Milliah Emberwatch follower of Helm the Vigilant One Milly can run the Mino Maze in under 12 Parsecs
Joined: 20 Apr 2008 Location: The downeaster "Alexa"
Raua wrote:
Specifically to DI, the reason Drow and Svirf Heritage feats impart the extra AB penalty, is in relation to the current AB penalty they have, being only able to reach level 28.
Oh, I understand as much. I'm saying I feel it's being balanced against the previous version which it no longer stacks up to, though.
Case 1: +2 CHA, +2 INT, +2 DEX, -2 CON, Sensitivity and 39 SR that cannot be lowered IS most definitely a ECL +2 Class, thus the -1 AB from level loss.
Case 2: +2 INT, -2 CON, 28 SR that can now be lowered and Sensitivity seems in line with just about everything else. And that's essentially what is being said by allowing them to level to 30. So let's say Light Sensitivity is = to a 28-sometimes-18 SR. Fair enough.
Case 3: +2 INT, +2 DEX OR CHA, 34 SR that can now be lowered and Sensitivity is not an ECL +2 race IMO. The SR would either need to be higher to justify it, or they would have to be getting both Stat bonuses. They're not making the same jump to where they were before, so it makes little sense to penalize them like they are.
The team feels SR needs to be lowerable. Cool. It also feels that Drow shouldn't be getting +4 stats from their heritage feat, while others get +2. Also cool. But then that idea of Drow being balanced as ECL +2 just doesn't exist. More stats and a hunk of SR that just won't quit is exactly why they were limited to Lv 28. And that's exactly what is being removed from them. So let's instead take Case 2, which we've agreed is as balanced as anything else Lv 30, and given them the same option as everyone else. That is, +2 Stat for -1 Saves. All they're really getting now, compared to any other race taking a heritage feat, is 6 more reducible SR. And I don't think anyone wants that investment at that cost.
I hope that better shows where I'm coming from on this.
_________________
You think Magic is your ally... but you merely adopted the Art. He was born in it. Molded by it. Sometimes, an angel is simply a devil with better intentions.
Tell that to the monster races. If they remain weak, I have little sympathy for Drow, personally. Drow, at least, get a bit of SR and have a net positive ability bonus.
Tell that to the monster races. If they remain weak, I have little sympathy for Drow, personally. Drow, at least, get a bit of SR and have a net positive ability bonus.
At the end of the day, it is an RP server, We cannot balance everything perfectly. Its not an MMO with 5 races and 7 classes where it is easier to balance it. That would been a much easier thing to handle.
_________________ Plays: Sylveera : Sun Elven fury packed in an Arcane Archer, not a Drow, promise. Tetrik : Greed incarnate in a Duergar. Budly : Has gone to a better place. Barrililath : Shadowy Drow, probably less Drow than Sylv ever be.
I really do think that the half-orc line subraces do need some form of buff. As it is they're quite a lot weaker. Half-elf got a buff, now half-orcs are in similar straits.
Goblins and kobolds are also subpar, though that's always been the case for those races, who have to work hard to surpass their innate weaknesses. Still, with them, I don't see the additional alignment restrictions helping, especially if drow are unrestricted and mechanically superior in nearly every manner, I don't see them being a commonly picked character race.
Thinking about it, I was thinking:
Half-Orc: Change to +2 STR -2 INT (no CHA penalty) Ogrillon: Change to +2 STR, +2 CON, -2 INT, -2 CHA, -1 Will Save, -1 Reflex Save, +1 Fort Save, +2 Intimidate, remove the heritage feat Orog: Change to: +1 STR, +1 CHA, -1 DEX, -1 WIS, 5/- Cold/Fire Resist, +2 Craft Weapon/Craft Armor, Light Sensitivity. remove heritage feat
At the end of the day, it is an RP server, We cannot balance everything perfectly. Its not an MMO with 5 races and 7 classes where it is easier to balance it. That would been a much easier thing to handle.
By that logic, there is no reason why the Wish spell, Mind[word-I-am-not-allowed-to-use], Clone, or a huge amount of other spells should not be allowed. There is also no reason why Drow should, or should not be nerfed. Epic items, then, should have no restrictions. After all, why couldn't a deity provide my epic level character with a +6, +7, or +10 weapon?
I'm not asking that half-orcs are made better than all the other races. I'm asking that they aren't actively made worse for arbitrary reasons. Hell, the fact that it's an RP server argues against having them worse races, mechanically. An ogrillon is a cross-breed between pure orcs and pure ogres. It has zero bits of human "DNA" in it. Why, then, is only minimally stronger than a certain human subrace, or just as strong, physically as a human who happens to have an earthy ancestor? We're talking about a 6-7 foot, 200+ lbs chunk of muscle and savagery. From an RP-standpoint, it would be a subrace of orcs, giving a +1 str bonus above the orc race. By RP logic, they should be a +4 str. How to balance that? No idea. But then again, we're an RP server, we don't need to balance, right?
Re: Kobra's suggestions, they still feel a bit sub-par to me, personally, but it's a good step in the right direction, in my opinion. Half-orc still falls slightly short of other races, due to a lack of bonus features, ogrillon, all bonuses added up, has a net -1 save, and orog... 5/- cold/fire and +2 crafting skills, versus light sensitivity, which means -1 ab. I like ab, personally, but it's not that bad. I'd think about playing one now, personally, as opposed to earlier, where they actively provide a detrimental effect compared to just about any other race.
As mentioned, if we implent the heritage feat, I am afraid it needs to be epic. For one, it is supposed to "cancel out" the free epic feat you gain for the ECL loss. For another it is FAR too strong for a non epic feat. The only option to not make it an epic feat is to not implent it at all.
For tieflings, aasimar, fey'ri etc it is easily IC explained, that they have gotten closer/strengthened their heritage over time. I admit it is a bit harder an explanation for a "pure" race but still... I mean you cannot take Epic Ability feats until epic lvls either so really, no one complains about that either. And essentially, this is a "beefed" epic ability feat that compensates for the change and allowing basically to have the old build and skip the new free bonus feat.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum
FAQ
Search
Login
).
