'Balancing' Races?

[weasel fierce]

Well, all of this depends on the stats in question.

Using RQ as a base, elves were slighter and not as strong as humans, while dwarves lack size and dexterity.

So their edges were balanced out well enough against humans.

It also depends greatly on your game. If we are talking about a dungeon-hack, then combat strength is the balancing factor.. if we're talking about something else, then it gets more nebulous.

[frogspawner]

Originally Posted by Tywyll

I didn't know there were other creation methods (for skills) in BRP that weren't point buy.
Anyway, in theory, yes, this is true. The question is the specifics. How valuable is 4d6 in a stat versus 3d6?

The default system is random rolls for characteristics. But since there is a point-buy system for these stats, the BRP rules do have an answer to that question. (A complex one though, since some stats are worth more points than others. Either 3.5 or 10.5, I guess, on average).
With the points-buy system, non-human stats could be a non-problem if you ignore the suggestion that the GM "should adjust your starting points and/or initial characteristics appropriately" (or just decree that it's appropriate to give nothing extra). Then the only advantage they get is higher/lower racial limits to buy up/down to.

Originally Posted by Tywyll

So, what would be wrong with giving humans an advantage or extra Hero Points?

In principle, nothing. But, to be fair, shouldn't other races also get that option if they're willing to forego some stats or skills?

[SDLeary]

As someone earlier stated, this is as much an issue of setting as it is anything else.

If you are playing in a High Fantasy (generic DnD) setting, where anything is possible, Elves and Dwarves walk down the town streets of the town along with humans, Elder races accepted as equal or superior, etc., then I can see "balance" becoming an issue. In most fantasy worlds though, at least the ones I've played in, this has not been an issue. There are ways the settings can normally take care of this.

In Glorantha, there are elves, and you can play them. If you are out adventuring though, you are broken, an anomaly, shunned by your race. You don't get aid from them. In some extreme cases I've seen, GMs have imposed random illnesses of varying degree as the elf moved away from their forests. Dwarves are much the same; in fact they loose their immortality if they break the tenants of their race. Also, both races numbers pale in comparison to humans, though they have still been able to raise huge armies and march them out in the past.

In Pendragon, this isn't so much an issue as you are all playing humans, but the issue of what to do with The Brick is still handled. There is the Winter Phase, where the game turns from adventuring to Court and family. You go to feasts, dances, try to win ladies favors, build your family, and gain grants of land from your lord. This all in an effort to assure that your progeny will have enough to become a proper knight (and to gain Glory).

Both of these are cultural based solutions in the setting. Family obligations, Lord, etc should all play a part in the interaction of powerful with non-powerful. This should limit the min-maxing of the races to a certain degree.

Other options might be natural predators?

SDLeary

[soltakss]

Originally Posted by Tywyll

Sure it should, if there is no reason to play humans, then no one will.

If stats were the only issue then everyone would play Centaurs - strong, large and dextrous with an extra attack each round. Or perhaps Mistress Race Trolls.

It depends on the game setting. Look at Glorantha, most of the cultures are human, so most of the PCs are going to be human. But you can play the other species as well.

Originally Posted by Tywyll

If a race has all sorts of advantages, and few to no disadvantages, then why shouldn't you try to balance things out?

I don't start from the premise that all the species are equal. There is no way that a duck and a troll can be balanced. Trolls are big, tough and good in darkness, ducks are small and wiry and good in water. But balanced? No way.

Originally Posted by Tywyll

That's possible, the question becomes: what is a reasonable cost/balance?

That depends on your game and setting. I'd just let players choose the same level of experience and start from there. It isn't one of the things that I bother about.

Originally Posted by Tywyll

What are those weaknesses? Back in the day, playing d&d and ad&d, almost no one played humans, because there was nothing interesting or compensating for them to compare to the abilities/cool factor of the non-human races.

I always played humans in AD&D, I've never played a non-human. In RQ, I normally play humans, although I did play a centaur for a long while. Species stats were never really important to me. I looked at the background, the cults and the setting rather than thinking "Elves have Infravision, oh goodie".

What are the weaknesses?

In RQ terms, elves are stuffed outside their forests, dwarves are stuffed outside their mines, trolls don't like it in the daytime, centaurs are crap in caves, wind children can't take being underground and so on.

RQA is a game that has fairly well balanced species, more so that AD&D. By balanced I mean that there are no stand-out species, except for Mistress Race Trolls or Real Dwarves. So, trolls can see in the dark. So what? If I play a Yelmalian then I can get Catseye and see in the dark anyway, or I can cast Light or light up a torch. Elves are quick but Wind Children can fly. Trolls can see in the dark but centaurs can run fast.

Originally Posted by Tywyll

Luckily, I only have one power gamer in my group. However, he's also a good roleplayer. That's not my concern, I don't want players feeling cheated later on in play when they want to play a concept but someone who's simialr non-human concept simply always outshines them (like a Melnibonean in just about any SB game, etc, etc).

Yes, Melniboneans are the elite species in the Young Kingdoms setting, but they have their weaknesses. They are arrogant and take risks. They are a dying race and are doomed. They don't care for mortal pursuits and prefer the pursuit of pleasure in its various forms. They are roleplaying weaknesses rather than stats weaknesses.

[Tywyll]

A lot of the 'balancing' that is being mentioned is purely rp based. That is setting dependent. This is a new generic rules set that will hopefully attract a new set of players, maybe even D&D'ers. Since there aren't (that I'm aware of) and settings for BRP just yet, many new players will approach the game with a more 'traditional high fantasy' approach. Elves won't be stuffed outside their forests, nor dwarves outside their caves.

[TRose]

In old gloranth Rq Human where pretty much the best race. Trolls had better stats but then they where also allergic to Iron. Only the Agimore , who where primitive hunters , and Ogres , who where lynched if they knew who you where had better stats.
And a 200 year old Melibonean should have less skill points then a 30 year old human since he has spent the last 180 years in a drug induced haze.

[soltakss]

Originally Posted by Tywyll

A lot of the 'balancing' that is being mentioned is purely rp based. That is setting dependent. This is a new generic rules set that will hopefully attract a new set of players, maybe even D&D'ers. Since there aren't (that I'm aware of) and settings for BRP just yet, many new players will approach the game with a more 'traditional high fantasy' approach. Elves won't be stuffed outside their forests, nor dwarves outside their caves.

BRP Species are generally different than, say, AD&D races.

Elves are powerful in AD&D not because they have infravision or have slight stat bonuses but because they can be multi-class, which is a huge advantage. BRP Elves don't have this because in BRP anyone can be anything. So, an elf can be a fighter-mage as can a troll, an orc, a Melnibonean or a human.

[frogspawner]

Originally Posted by soltakss

Elves are powerful in AD&D not because they have infravision or have slight stat bonuses but because they can be multi-class, which is a huge advantage. BRP Elves don't have this because in BRP anyone can be anything.

But isn't a Jack-of-all-Trades the Master of None? At least, the truth of this should be the GM's campaign decision, not something forced upon them by the rules.

And over in the Non-Caster Incentives thread, I think we're close to solving that problem, for BRP at least. (The Other System, be blowed!)

[Tywyll]

Originally Posted by soltakss

Elves are powerful in AD&D not because they have infravision or have slight stat bonuses but because they can be multi-class, which is a huge advantage. BRP Elves don't have this because in BRP anyone can be anything. So, an elf can be a fighter-mage as can a troll, an orc, a Melnibonean or a human.

Which was balanced against the fact that they had level limits, while humans didn't. They could advance to any level and possibly dual-class. thus was a sort of balance achieved.

[sladethesniper]

Balancing races is like balancing character creation...why?

People are not equal, nor are races...a western heart surgeon is not "balanced" with a an afghan warlord, a somali pirate, a new york gang member or catholic priest...not better or worse, just not balanced.

Same with species...a bear isn't balanced with duck or a dragon or a human. Again, not better or worse, just different.

There shouldn't have to be some sort of enforced game balance, but instead have rules balance and setting balance, both of which are enforced by the GM. The GM sets the level/power limits of the game, sets the type of characters and has more than enough power to say "we are playing Call of Cthulhu in 1928 Boston...so your half Melnibonean, half demon, half dragon, 4th edition, 35th level monk assassin IS NOT going to play in my game."

Then slap them and play with your non-twink, non-power gamer friends.

Just my opinion

-STS