Are there any rules for this floating around on the web anywhere?

An area of my long-running (Started with Moldvay-Cook Basic) campaign is full of 'em, and it seems odd to have something so human in the game and not have it available as a PC option. I wanted to see how others handled Neanderthal PCs before I tried my hand at my own rules.  

Thanks in advance for any advice.

Quote from: Just Another Snake Cult;865159Are there any rules for this floating around on the web anywhere?

An area of my long-running (Started with Moldvay-Cook Basic) campaign is full of 'em, and it seems odd to have something so human in the game and not have it available as a PC option. I wanted to see how others handled Neanderthal PCs before I tried my hand at my own rules.  

Thanks in advance for any advice.

Barbarians?
Orcs?
Barbarian orcs?

ahem.

Just make them a human offshoot with a bonus to STR and maybe a +1 to perception checks.

I agree with Omega.

We don't know a ton about them but Neanderthals were mostly human. Give them a +1 to strength and a -1 to intelligence and call it a day. If you really want to get fancy put a limit on what skills they can learn and maybe toss in a speech impediment.

They were close enough to human that we could mate with them and produce children, so how different could they be?

Now for real fun try playing with a Titanthrope race. This was a fictional race created by Philip Jose Farmer for his Riverworld books. The character Joe Miller was one. Flat footed, spoke with a lisp, not terribly bright but honest, loyal, big and strong.

Quote from: Doughdee222;865161We don't know a ton about them but Neanderthals were mostly human. Give them a +1 to strength and a -1 to intelligence and call it a day. If you really want to get fancy put a limit on what skills they can learn and maybe toss in a speech impediment.

Scientifically, there isn't any evidence that Neanderthals were dumber than modern humans. They may even have been smarter.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/8898321/Neanderthals-were-too-smart-for-their-own-good.html

Then again, it's a fantasy game. You can make Neanderthals whatever you want.

That would be my question to the OP:  What are you looking for in having a Neanderthal race?

My humans have +1 to their constitution modifier, Neaderthals have +1 to their strength modifier, and my Denisovians have +1 to their dexterity modifier.

OK, how does this look:

+2 STR, +1 WIS

Son of the Untamed Earth: Pick one of the terrain types from the Circle of the Land Druid path. When in that terrain, the Neanderthal PC may add his/her proficiency bonus to survival and perception checks, if they may not do so already. If they may do so already, in that terrain they have advantage on those checks and if guiding a group you can never get lost.

Brother to the Mammoth: Carrying capacity is x1.5 normal.

Grandfather of Mankind: Neanderthals are a type of human and are considered humans  for game effects involving race.

Peer to the Eldest: Neanderthals speak Primordial and and have proficiency with greatclubs, spears, and the pike.

The reason I granted a bonus to perception checks is that Neanderthals had larger eyes and a longer nose than most humans. Their perception range would be more accute. So a little bonus to spotting things or picking up on whatever sensory cues.

To keep it quick, and having studied this, I would go with the following:

+1 STR: Neanderthals are robust and strong
+2 CON: Neanderthals can withstand harsh environments and can recover from injuries quickly (many Neanderthal remains show signs of injuries that have healed)
+1 WIS: Surviving so long in harsh environments, having specialist hunting knowledge

-1 DEX: Neanderthals are not as agile as humans, preferring physical encounters
-2 CHA: Neanderthals have smaller social groups and prefer the quiet. Their bone structure also makes them less attractive than humans.

If that is too many I'd take the CON and CHA adjustments

And for 5th Edition:

Ability Scores Increase: Your Constitution score increases by 2 and your Strength increases by 1

Age: Neanderthals reach maturity quicker than humans and are fully grown by their early-teens.  They live less than a century.

Alignment: Neanderthals tend toward neutral alignment.

Size: Somewhat bulkier than humans, but small. Heights range from 5 to 5.7 feet tall. Your size is medium.

Speed. Your base walking speed is 30

Tough: You are resistant to Bludgeoning damage
Enduring: When you are reduced to 0 hit points but not killed outright, you can drop to 1 hit point instead. You can't use this feature again until you finish a long rest.
Natural Survivors: You gain proficiency in the Survival and Nature skills.
Languages: You can speak Common and Neanderthal. However, reading and writing is alien to you - you must acquire this skill.
Combat Training: You are proficient with the Club, Greatclub, Handaxe and Spear

Quote from: Doughdee222;865161I agree with Omega.

We don't know a ton about them but Neanderthals were mostly human. Give them a +1 to strength and a -1 to intelligence and call it a day. If you really want to get fancy put a limit on what skills they can learn and maybe toss in a speech impediment.

As Kim and others pointed out, there's not much evidence at all that Neanderthals were less intelligent than humans.  There's significant evidence, however, that they were MUCH less social.
Humans created social networks, even very early on, from beyond their own tribes; they engaged in trade, ideas were shared. Neanderthals didn't.

Charisma was our killer app, not Intelligence.  

So if you were making a Neanderthal, you should give them a Charisma penalty.  Or give humans a Charisma bonus, since they should probably be more talented in Charisma than any other species.

Neanderthals seem to have been a lot stronger, probably slower, poor throwers - +2 STR and -1 DEX (except 5e does not use penalties).
They had big brains, but apparently a lot of brain power was dedicated to smell - and they had big noses. Modern humans got dogs to do our smelling for us. I wouldn't give an INT bonus, but a Scent type ability maybe, or just Perception trained.
Charisma penalty seems reasonable, compared to modern humans. They were very robust - this goes along with having lots of muscle - so +1 or +2 CON.  

Neanderthals are about 600,000 years divergent from modern humans, arguably not a lot - but then chimps are only 4 to 5 million years divergent on the balance of evidence I've seen. Modern human races are no more than about 100,000 years divergent, most a lot less - Caucasian vs east-Asian only about 20,000 years, the time of the last Glacial Maximum; Bushmen (derogatory 'San') and Pygmies maybe 100,000. PNG Highlanders and Australian aborigines less, with some archaic introgression - 'Denisovan' we know about. All  non-Africans and many Africans show a few % Neanderthal, too. And there are signs of other archaic introgressions into various population groups where we don't know the source.

Point being that Neanderthals were not a different species from modern humans, but do fit quite neatly as a D&D 'race' - can interbreed with modern humans, but are substantially more different from modern humans than any modern human races are from each other.

As far as official/comercial designs for PC Neanderthals go, the 3.5 supplement frostburn is the only one I know of.

It mostly goe with the Pop cultural tandart. Increased Str and Con, decreased Int and Dex, perception bonu, illiterate and improved resistance to extreme Weather.

Quote from: jhkim;865287Scientifically, there isn't any evidence that Neanderthals were dumber than modern humans. They may even have been smarter.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/8898321/Neanderthals-were-too-smart-for-their-own-good.html

Actually, there is some evidence that indicates just the opposite. It is true that Neanderthals and modern humans mixed, but why didn't the trend go the other way? Why are we still left with modern human anatomy but not Neanderthal anatomy? There is evidence that as anatomically modern humans entered the scene, Neanderthals started to copy their tools, without ever being quite as capable with certain types of tools such as projectile weapons. A paleoanthropologist I know also knows a site in which they coexisted, but modern humans occupied the best hunting sites, indicating that Neanderthals, even though doing just fine on their own, were out competed in the presence of modern humans

Quote from: Trond;866150Actually, there is some evidence that indicates just the opposite. It is true that Neanderthals and modern humans mixed, but why didn't the trend go the other way?

Setting aside the fact that intelligence isn't a very well defined nor a simple concept, I doubt we will ever know for sure. Off the top of my head here are two reasons unrelated to intelligence.

• Better resistance to disease. Arguably this was one of the main advantages of Europeans over the peoples in the Americas.

• Faster reproductive rate. Rats don't outsmart us, they out reproduce us.

QuoteWhy are we still left with modern human anatomy but not Neanderthal anatomy?

Are we? Do we really have enough fossil and other remains to reach that conclusion? And even if that is true it could relate more to dominant and recessive genetics than to intelligence. I haven't seen any data that suggests that blue eyes, fair skin, and red hair are correlated to lower intelligence despite those traits being very uncommon compared to brown eyes, darker skin, and dark hair.

QuoteThere is evidence that as anatomically modern humans entered the scene, Neanderthals started to copy their tools, without ever being quite as capable with certain types of tools such as projectile weapons.

Despite the prejudices of Robert Heinlein, capability with projectile weapons actually doesn't correlate to intelligence.

QuoteNeanderthals, even though doing just fine on their own, were out competed in the presence of modern humans

Humans in warm regions are routinely outcompeted by cockroaches. That isn't due to the bugs being smarter though.

Quote from: Bren;866188Humans in warm regions are routinely outcompeted by cockroaches. That isn't due to the bugs being smarter though.

'Outcompeted' here means 'replaced', not 'has more biomass'.

We have Neanderthal DNA and it basically disproves your points; modern humans are only a few % Neanderthal, and the interbreeding seems to have occurred in the Middle East ca 100,000 years ago, not when modern humans entered Europe 40,000 years ago. Also it's mostly neutral DNA that's Neanderthal, in the case of functional genes the Neanderthal ones have often been selected against, indicating they were not as evolutionarily fit.

We can't actually prove Neanderthals had less general intelligence, but all the evidence on art, tool use/technology, ritual (or lack of it) etc points that way.