I'm going to take a different tack on this. Here goes.

I'm going to bid $1.

Specifically - from a GM's standpoint I don't think racial stat optimization is a player-issue. It is a GM-issue. Why? Because the GM should be enforcing the realities of the setting. If players are juvenile enough to think that just because playing an Elf in a setting where the Usual Fantasy Tropes(tm) are in effect - Humans dominate, Elves are a vanishing race, Marauding Orcs etc. - then enforce those conceits. Humans might look at the elf with suspicion, wonder etc. But in the end - they're going to prefer dealing with the humans in the party. Same is true with the other races.

By erasing this normal distinction and assuming everyone is the same except they're wearing different rubber prosthetics, by that silly standard Half-Orcs should rule the D&D-space, by simply beating the crap out of everyone. The races aren't the same. Not just by stats, but by cultural imperatives and social realities. That is how you balance the "issue".

Players that think they can "win" the game by having superior stats - might be true only in games where dungeon-crawling and murder-hoboing are the dominant methods in play. If you're running your setting with broader conceits, then these ideas of stat-differences being an issue go away. If you enforce the social realities of your setting, you'll sober those players up.

Yeah half-orc, you get to go sleep in the stable... if you're lucky enough to be allowed into town. Yeah human, you're going to get punked when you show up with your half-orc friend at his den of scum-and-villainy.

This is one of the reasons why I love Talislanta. The races are wildly unbalanced in terms of stats on *purpose*. The status-quo of reality should be established and reinforced by the GM.

Quote from: ShieldWife;1091010Has anybody thought of this issue and devised ways to miniseries this effect?

As someone who likes to do odd race/class combos, I say let 'em. You can drive yourself batty trying to come up with some solution that the min/maxer is just going to consider another challenge.
Let them have their fun.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;10910351. Play AD&D1e.
2. Roll 3d6 down the line.
3. You are human.
4. Choose fighter, magic-user, cleric or thief.
5. Roll for hit points, starting coin and choose gear.
6. Begin play.

Many problems are solved by this approach. How many Scottish dwarves, effeminate elven archers, sneaky thieving halflings and angry half-orc fighters do we really need to see to realise that the counterintuitive fact is that restricting choices actually enhances creativity?

And many more are created. I dropped this method for a reason. I got tired of players who rolled sub-optimal or downright terrible characters, and they didn't want to go through the obnoxious process of playing the shitty character until their inevitable demise, cut through the gordian knot, and announce "My character commits suicide."

Quote from: tenbones;1091070By erasing this normal distinction and assuming everyone is the same except they're wearing different rubber prosthetics, by that silly standard Half-Orcs should rule the D&D-space, by simply beating the crap out of everyone. The races aren't the same. Not just by stats, but by cultural imperatives and social realities. That is how you balance the "issue".

Players that think they can "win" the game by having superior stats - might be true only in games where dungeon-crawling and murder-hoboing are the dominant methods in play. If you're running your setting with broader conceits, then these ideas of stat-differences being an issue go away. If you enforce the social realities of your setting, you'll sober those players up.

Yes.  When I talked about filing the serial numbers off of the races, I'm talking about the same idea from a different direction.  That is, you the GM wants to play the races more or less as is, then enforce the cultural and other conceits behind how those rare are done, as you say.  OTOH, if the GM wants to play the races some other way, then the GM needs to identify the new cultural and other conceits that will take their place, and then modify the races to fit them.  Either way, the player has much less vested interest in focusing solely on mechanics.  

It's never a perfect solution, because in a game as wide-open as D&D, there are always mechanical edges to be explored.  But it isn't necessary to be perfect, only good enough to discourage and identify the rabid players that need to be booted and encourage the remaining players to develop better habits.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1091079Yes.  When I talked about filing the serial numbers off of the races, I'm talking about the same idea from a different direction.  That is, you the GM wants to play the races more or less as is, then enforce the cultural and other conceits behind how those rare are done, as you say.  OTOH, if the GM wants to play the races some other way, then the GM needs to identify the new cultural and other conceits that will take their place, and then modify the races to fit them.  Either way, the player has much less vested interest in focusing solely on mechanics.  

It's never a perfect solution, because in a game as wide-open as D&D, there are always mechanical edges to be explored.  But it isn't necessary to be perfect, only good enough to discourage and identify the rabid players that need to be booted and encourage the remaining players to develop better habits.

Sure!

Again the issue is enforcing the chicken or the egg. Races have stat-differences *because* of "reasons". Those reasons are the conceits of the setting. Those assumptions if ignored (which is often the case) is where players become inadvertently incentivized to go for "best stats", because there is no effective reason not to.

So sure - you either go by what the setting implies overtly. OR you change the setting conceits and therefore change the stats of the races to reflect those. In a homogenous society of many different races, I'd expect a life of leisure would drop high-physical stats and increase mental stats (at least from negatives to zeroes) etc.

But then what's the point of having all these different races in the first place? Unless you have something special cooked up that is, again, socially relevant. This is always going to be a GM-issue, not a player-issue.

Agree completely.

As somewhat of a tangent ...

For brevity, I may have hinted at a false impression of what I did and why I did it.  In fact, I started with the conceits of the campaign settings.  The only knee-jerk reaction I had against core D&D to start was that I didn't want the archetypes of tielflings, dragonborn, half-elves, or half-orcs.  In determining the best way to get the campaign conceits implemented with as little work as possible, I settled on needing 3 radically different elven cultures, 2 radically different dwarven cultures, 3 somewhat different halfling cultures, and at least 3 human cultures.  I could have done that with 4 mechanical races, and then handled the cultural difference some other way.  But the way 5E presented races, it was already halfway to where I wanted to go.  Then it wasn't hard to squint at a few of the other racial packages and get them to fit.  (I also had a vested interest in the information in the player's books not changing any more than necessary, and was willing to compromise quite a bit to make that work.)  

My biggest changes were to the drow, but even that was pretty light on what was in the books.  All I needed was a paragraph in the player handout explaining their radically different role.

In retrospect, the 4th halfling type was overkill.  I could have dropped the stouts entirely. And in fact, probably should since no one has played one.  I only went with it because after I had three, a 4th one didn't really hurt, either.  

Circling back around more on topic, someone else starting with goals similar to mine for a campaign could have also made it work by having 4 races with no ability score adjustments at all.  Perhaps pumping up the standard array (or whatever method is chosen) to compensate would have been warranted in that case.  Or maybe tweak racial proficiency option would work.  When I talk about separating race and culture mechanics in D&D in my preferred changes to the system, making these kind of changes easier and more obvious is part of what I envision.  After all, in 5E, elves having bonus proficiency in Perception is pretty darn defining.  If we want races to lead to less pigeon-hole tendencies by default, then the races shouldn't have so much attached to them.

Either all PCs are Human, or there are No Racial Bonuses.

Next problem?

I would agree with no racial stat bonuses. The problem as I see it is mixing *frequency* with *power level*.

Within the setting, say halflings are supposed to be less strong on average than humans. So halflings will more often not be front-line fighters. But then suppose a player does create a character who is less usual for the race and is a front-line fighter. By using racial stat adjustments, this character will be less effective than a half-orc fighter.

I think that's a bad incentive. Within the setting, we can recognize that half-orc fighters are more frequent and more effective than halflings - just as fighters and rogues are more common than wizards. But we shouldn't make more rare PCs less effective just because they're supposed to be rare.

Moreover, if one wants to put limits on halfling versus half-orc relative Str, you can do that by having the races set different maximums, instead of having an ability score adjustment.  It's even easier to make a character, too.

You could even say that in 5E, the current method is counter-productive:  A halfing and a half-orc both top out at Str 20.  A halfling fighter will need more ability score improvements to get to 20, but given how many a fighter gets, they can still easily get there.  All that happens is that the half-orc gets to bump some other stat or take one more feat than the halfling.  Whereas, if you set the halfling maximum at 18, they can progress relative to the half-orc, but the half-orc has an edge later.  

If that was all the racial packages did, it might be too much.  The 1st level half-orc has no advantage over the 1st level halfling whatsoever, which might be a bridge too far for many people.  But both races have other things that make them slightly better or worse in various circumstances.

Quote from: Razor 007;1091090Either all PCs are Human, or there are No Racial Bonuses.

Next problem?

All the PCs are Human or there are No Racial Bonuses.  :/

I just accepted that race was an optimization option for D&D (and related). In 5e it's not really such a big thing to me, especially as the (Variant) Human seems to be "optimal" for almost everything.

You could have the players roll their PC's stats and then decide their race based on their stats. Thus, if they have a high STR and CON, they can be a dwarf. I'd use 2D6+6 down the line. [Oooh, you have high stats! How cool! Oh look, the goblins brought an ogre. Roll initiative high stat boy!]

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1091073And many more are created. I dropped this method for a reason. I got tired of players who rolled sub-optimal or downright terrible characters, and they didn't want to go through the obnoxious process of playing the shitty character until their inevitable demise, cut through the gordian knot, and announce "My character commits suicide."

Which is why I do that, then add "If all stats are <9, raise STR to 9; you're a Fighter." and that's it. I don't permit metagame suicide; you play the hand dealt as best you can, like it or not, and do so in good faith.

Quote from: Bradford C. Walker;1091143Which is why I do that, then add "If all stats are <9, raise STR to 9; you're a Fighter." and that's it. I don't permit metagame suicide; you play the hand dealt as best you can, like it or not, and do so in good faith.

Do you force everyone to have fun too?

Give everyone a stat array to choose from.

If you want some racial differentiation give a minimum or maximum for certain stats rather than a bonus.

The issue is what to do to compensate humans who don't get any of the racial abilities.

I'd recommend giving them one of the +1 stat + something else feats rather than a free pick (possibly don't give them the benefit of the +1 stat).