Teifling Bonus

[selhan]

I would like to point out that... we're not actually playing Pathfinder either.

Some races I know, like half orc and half elves have been altered because their base 3.5 traits are utter trash, so that's a thing. But really, IMO, if you're going to use "In pathfinder they..." as a justification for a major change, go play Pathfinder.

As much as other things do sound nice and or interesting, IMO I will agree to this statement. This isn't Pathfinder. We start dipping some minor changes to mimic another game, we end up breaking what this one is suppose to be. Just my opinion.

[renshouj]

nwn2 mechanics are largely based on 3.5, but many are done poorly. Pathfinder is just a fancy name for D&D 3.75, its basically the same ruleset with some further improvements. If something is better for balance overall, I see no reason not to do it, "this is dnd and not PF" imo isnt a really good excuse. BGTSCC doesnt seek to emulate pnp perfectly, as much as some ppl claim thats what rhifox wants it just isnt, but BGTSCC is allowed to (and benefits a lot from) taking the best aspects from PnP - Mind, I'm NOT saying to change the races or whatever, honestly I'm really bad at mechanics and couldnt care less, I'm mostly addressing the few comments about how BG isnt PnP - yes, we all know it isnt pnp

[DaloLorn]

The Pathfinder statblocks do look appealing for being the cleanest way of balancing things better on a mechanical level. Other alternative as said is closing the faucet and making them application only. Or leaving it as we currently have it, with every single divine caster being an aasimar and most wizards and rogues being tieflings.

I feel like Paizo really dropped the ball on duergar, though. They got nerfed surprisingly hard, to the extent of losing most of their dwarven traits... but the actual dwarves get to retain those traits? Seems fishy, especially when other ECL+1 races universally got at least a token buff of a couple of skill ranks...

But yes, if we want to make this a thing, I'm all for it. Might be interested in offering the elven subraces a choice between INT and CHA instead of always assigning INT to moon/sun elves and always assigning CHA to drow, but I'll be the first to admit I'm being a little selfish there.

[Louvaine]

What you sent looks great, Dalo.

I am also all for incentives to play rarely picked classes and races. Look no further than UD to see how penalties affect playerbase. It's just a fact that players respond more positively to encouragement than a slap on wrist.

[Obvious_Illusion]

I would like to point out that... we're not actually playing Pathfinder either.

Some races I know, like half orc and half elves have been altered because their base 3.5 traits are utter trash, so that's a thing. But really, IMO, if you're going to use "In pathfinder they..." as a justification for a major change, go play Pathfinder.

As much as other things do sound nice and or interesting, IMO I will agree to this statement. This isn't Pathfinder. We start dipping some minor changes to mimic another game, we end up breaking what this one is suppose to be. Just my opinion.

This is true, but there's plenty of other features in NWN2/BGTSCC that do not stick to PnP 3.5. As I mentioned in an earlier post, bards as a class are the most egregious example, and they're very OP as a consequence, while plenty of other base classes were implemented pretty much exact to PnP (with the exception of skill options, which BGTSCC has pretty much rectified with enhanced skill system). We've honestly got a chimeric ruleset, and I think it's fair to embrace the hybridity, erring towards source material where possible, but also considering that NWN2 as a game creates a very different dynamic to PnP where you have a DM at at able who arbitrates all decisions. As another example, without turn-based combat, short-lasting buffs are basically useless (I've never used my character's Warpriest 'Inflame' because it lasts 5 rounds, which is basically nothing), whereas longevity is favoured. Balance is always tricky, but embracing some of the platform's affordances and the roleplay environment of the server could be helpful in design choices, but that's a separate topic.

The problem that's been identified in this thread is that people pick aasimar/tiefling far too often and it reduces immersion, given those races outnumber other ones that should make up the majority of those encountered along the sword coast. Further, aasimar are often chosen without actually really RPing aasimar either aesthetically or in terms of their temperament.

I'm supportive of making some of the other base races more dynamic to incentivise them to be chosen. It seems like a better way than creating RP penalties for planetouched. And given there's no applications for any classes at the moment, I don't think it's worth going down the application-only route.

[izzul]

My first toon was a tiefling cleric/SD that i played for 4-5 years since early 2010-2014

-It was the best time when people shunned you for being a tiefling
-Candlekeep allows you to fight with them to defend the outer compound(during event), but completely shuts you out after the battle
-Elves wont talk to you
-the only guild that allows you to even enter their hall was Pheonix Lodge
-Paladins wont even consider your presence
-everywhere you go, you only sits at the end corner of the crowd and act weird

That was the best time of my life playing in the server. Sure i got
-hips(DEX bonus allows me to get to 19 DEX easily and took SD)
-with 84 hide/ms(INT bonus allows me to pump HIDE/MS) and all clerical buffs
-took domain that allows me to cast camoflage (+10 Hide)
-with Mithral Breastplate +1 DEX(that cost 670,000 back then).

but the benefit comes with being treated like a surface drow.

[Rinzler]

Maybe it's worth looking at incentives to play those less picked races and classes, rather than trying to hinder those picked often?

This conversation went from discussing why no one chooses playing a human due to aasimar and tieflings essentially being superior versions of human to: WE MUST NERF DROW!

Also I agree with Dalo - Duergar being ECL +1 is hilarious. It’s by far the worst mechanical race.

[DaloLorn]

I didn't say duergar being ECL+1 was weird, I said Paizo's changes to duergar made no sense at all.

[renshouj]

This conversation went from discussing why no one chooses playing a human due to aasimar and tieflings essentially being superior versions of human to: WE MUST NERF DROW!

To be fair it was bloodriot that turned the discussion to drow-specific after the mention of ECL races in general

also yeah, poor duergar have nothing going for them

[BloodRiot]

For those lacking in the reading skill i mentioned I was merely using them as an example that i know better than the others.

What i said applies equally to any ECL+ race. The Drow as the middle ground ECL race of ECL2 was also good to illustrate the average loss. The Tieflings and Aasimar would suffer most if not all of those negatives, if only by half of the measure of the drow. the ECL3 races, don't remember which are, are by far the most penalized.

And last clarification, above all i attacked the notion that capping max level for ECL races was being "sold" as a fair solution. I contested that notion. I fully disavow my comments being used for any other purpose. It was disingenuous in my view and i contested it using a familiar example to me. That was all.

Carry on

[DaloLorn]

You're thinking svirfneblin. We nerfed them pretty hard, and dropped them to ECL2 to compensate a little.

On another note... there was a pretty heated discussion in Discord about how switching to Pathfinder statblocks would mean mandatory RCRs for everyone (will it surprise people if I say the main concern was about drow? ) to get them off the old statblocks. In hindsight, this is not actually true, for several reasons. Let me elaborate.

• For a lot of races, the changes are strictly additive, or at worst, remove some non-essential racial features (e.g. half-orcs losing Blooded isn't something a lot of people are likely to weep for, or halfling slingers losing 1 AB). It's almost never going to result in illegal builds, just shuffle around some stats. (It's a big enough change that I'd offer a universal 100% RCR; it's just not a situation where it would be made mandatory.)
• Most of the changes are automatic and retroactive: If we adjust the ability scores or ECL for a given subrace, that applies to all existing PCs of that subrace straight away. If we change what a feat does (Keen Senses nerf? ), that feat doesn't do anything anymore. Removing feats from a race without removing them from the game is a tad trickier, as is adding new feats (I think), but both scenarios can easily be automated without requiring RCRs. Choosing from a list of buffs (e.g. +2 ability score or any one Skill Focus feat) is something that couldn't be put into chargen anyway, so does it matter if the choice is made at level 1 or t level 30? No, it doesn't.
• For genasi and drow, and (highly unlikely) half-orcs, I'll concede that there is a mild possibility of making illegal builds by removing some of their ability score bonuses. Big whoop, they'll just have to fix it the next time they RCR. It'll never be so highly illegal that we can't afford to grandfather them into the system. (I have a similar stance towards half-elves losing the Skilled feat, but that change is actually not guaranteed even if we make the transition, IMO.)

[Ithrinael]

Sounds good. I'd like to see more humans and other non-planetouched on the server, as I think I saw more tieflings and aasimar than humans, halfelves and dwarfs combined. Or all races could be boosted to ECL+2-level instead, but I prefer the pathfinder solution.

[RoseMiriel]

If human had +2 to all stats i'd still not play them eww humans=^^=

[izzul]

If human had +2 to all stats i'd still not play them eww humans=^^=

i will play human with this!

[SneakWalker]

Aasimar having no negatives is what kills playing human.

Absolutely. Human race need fix with +2 and/or -2 custom att. bonus for playable.