# Holiday Present - The Elf PHB entry



## Glyfair (Dec 21, 2007)

They have up a "holiday present," the elf entry from the PHB (it seems a bit truncated, but time will tell).

Lots of interesting bits, and some things confirmed (for example, no racial penalties).

More as I look deeper.


----------



## Zurai (Dec 21, 2007)

Elves move 7 squares. That's 35 feet in 3E terms - is this the new base movement (unlikely as it's an odd number), or are elves a bit quicker of step?

The feat seems very weak, too. Doesn't get my hopes up about 4E's feat selection.


----------



## Angel Tarragon (Dec 21, 2007)

Nerts. I was hoping elves would be a bit more urbanized for 4E.  :\


----------



## Rechan (Dec 21, 2007)

I wonder if this is the "Friday thing that will blow people away" that The Rouse was talking about.



			
				Frukathka said:
			
		

> Nerts. I was hoping elves would be a bit more urbanized for 4E.  :\



Eladrin. Elves are wood elves.


----------



## Glyfair (Dec 21, 2007)

Zurai said:
			
		

> The feat seems very weak, too. Doesn't get my hopes up about 4E's feat selection.



It has been strongly hinted that feats will be weaker, but more uniform in power.  Some have suggested you will get more feats over time (but nothing definitive that I recall).


----------



## Kintara (Dec 21, 2007)

"Shifting" sounds like what you do when you take five-foot steps.


----------



## darkbard (Dec 21, 2007)

I'm sure we'll see more urbanization with the eladrin.


----------



## Jack99 (Dec 21, 2007)

5' step is a stupid name for an action, even if said action is just a step of 5 foot , I will be glad to be rid of it.

However, even though the elven feats are arguably on the weak side, they definitely look like they will help distinguishing a bit more than now, between the different races.


----------



## Wormwood (Dec 21, 2007)

Consider me blown away.

More tomorrow, when I've had a chance to digest this impressive data dump---and when I'm sober.


----------



## tsadkiel (Dec 21, 2007)

"Elves mature at about the same rate as humans but show few effects of age past adulthood."  This makes me happy.


----------



## Lackhand (Dec 21, 2007)

Looks Very Good To Me.

I worry about stat inflation -- if 4d6 drop lowest to taste and point buy are assumed equal, a character with this base race just has more _stat_ than anything from 3.x or earlier. This guy is 4 points up over a pre-4th edition elf!

I wonder whether the point-buy somehow takes that into account? I assume not. Stylistically, I'm offended. Practically, I don't really care.


What a christmas present!

Edit: Eladrin live 300 years, R&C said, right? (my FLGS sucks monkeys, and doesn't have any copies for me. I _tries_ to supports them, I does...)

Woah, characters die quicker now. I sort of like that, since it puts some oomph in "I knew your grandfather when he was a boy", since the speaker no longer needs to be thinking "and I was already 500 then! ha-HAH!".

On the other hand, perhaps there are elven glades where those who dwell age not, and mark the passing of time in the outer world with the ease of long practice.
And maybe there are some power hungry wizards, scheming adventurers, and aged kings who want to cheat death, each for their own reason?

Hmmm.


----------



## Stalker0 (Dec 21, 2007)

Kintara said:
			
		

> "Shifting" sounds like what you do when you take five-foot steps.




Yep, my guess is well.

In 3.5 you can't take 5 foot steps in difficult terrain (which isn't one of the most commonly known rules out there mind you). Likely this rule continues in 4e, with the elf being the exception.

The elven racial power certainly seems nice, but the feat does seem weak. Then again, its a +2 to an attack roll every encounter, and likely if your using your racial power its an attack you definitely want to hit.


----------



## Glyfair (Dec 21, 2007)

Lackhand said:
			
		

> I worry about stat inflation -- if 4d6 drop lowest to taste and point buy are assumed equal, a character with this base race just has more _stat_ than anything from 3.x or earlier. This guy is 4 points up over a pre-4th edition elf!



Stat inflation is really irrelevant unless you are converting from a previous edition (and even then you can take that into account).  As long as the internal system is consistent, I see no problem.

I do expect that future races without stat bonuses (or with only one) will have compensating racial abilities, though.  I wonder is there will still be certain stats worth more than others in 4E (from a design standpoint).


----------



## architect.zero (Dec 21, 2007)

Thank you, WoTC!

It's about time we started to see what's behind the curtains.  This is great.  A whole race write-up, a bit of related art, and a peek at some mechanical bits.

I like it too.  I'm still cautiously optimistic, but this is looking very promising. (From a guy who hasn't played a non-human in... over 24 years. I reserve excitement for the human write up.  )


----------



## Rechan (Dec 21, 2007)

I'm guessing Nature is Survival/K:Nature?


----------



## Lackhand (Dec 21, 2007)

Glyfair said:
			
		

> Stat inflation is really irrelevant unless you are converting from a previous edition (and even then you can take that into account).  As long as the internal system is consistent, I see no problem.
> 
> I do expect that future races without stat bonuses (or with only one) will have compensating racial abilities, though.  I wonder is there will still be certain stats worth more than others in 4E (from a design standpoint).




Yup, I agree: the next paragraph was my real, albeit badly put, point: The obsessive half of me cares. The part that likes to have fun said "buh. Okay." 

I suspect stats are all worth the same, now, because strength always adds to the damage you deal without a power / with a base power.
But consider the paladin's smites we saw... And depending on how many of these you get, you might only make a small number of unenhanced attacks per combat, and never with quite as cool an effect.

However, despite all the stats being equally worthy now, you could definitely design a race that "cheated" -- bonus to strength, bennies when using (say) wizard powers; it's not as synergistic as this elf is (bonus to dex and wis and archery == it all works together!), so you could probably give more strength and greater benefits than we see here, since they really don't cross.

Which I have no problem with. Ogre magi are scary.


----------



## Sammael (Dec 21, 2007)

The only thing I don't like is that "Nature" is an actual skill name. Everything else looks interesting.


----------



## Merlin the Tuna (Dec 21, 2007)

Ooh, a Wisdom bonus.  Intriiiiguing.  Especially since the Eladrin are the magicky (and by association, smartypants) of the two.

I like that the 3.5 iconics appear as sample names.  It's a nice little throwback now that they're leaving us (right?).

And it's good to see personality traits appear in the book.  I expect it'll be a lot like the PHB2, which I found extremely useful for PCs and NPCs alike.

That "never cut living trees" line is still a bit bothersome, but eh.


----------



## A'koss (Dec 21, 2007)

Looks good. Nothing there really shocking or surprising but looks to me like a good foundation.


----------



## Cadfan (Dec 21, 2007)

Very interesting.

Notice the height/weight ratio.  They're about the same height as humans, almost, but they weigh significantly less.

+2 wisdom makes them better survivalists, and synergizes nicely with tracking, spot, listen, and so forth.

7 square movement implies that movement is different based on race.  Even if 7 squares is typical, they wouldn't bother to point it out unless it was different for different races within the same size category.  I appreciate this.

+2 wisdom and +2 perception = +3 total.

Shift probably equals the old 5' step, except now it may be more than 5' sometimes.  Sounds good to me.

Note that the "Group Awareness" grants a typed bonus.  That's a loose end we know about now.

I wonder if every race gets a per encounter ability.  Elven Accuracy is an ok one, but either it only works for combat characters, or "attack roll" is a term which encompasses spellcasters these days, or a lot more spells require attack rolls.

The feat Elven Accuracy... not sure if it is weak or not.  Its designed for low level play, and you do get to use it once per encounter.

A lot of the elf entry from 3e has been dropped, and I honestly don't miss it.  I like this version of the elf.


----------



## A'koss (Dec 21, 2007)

Merlin the Tuna said:
			
		

> Ooh, a Wisdom bonus.  Intriiiiguing.  Especially since the Eladrin are the magicky (and by association, smartypants) of the two.



I'm guessing the Eladrin then will have bonuses to Int & Cha.


----------



## Glyfair (Dec 21, 2007)

Merlin the Tuna said:
			
		

> Ooh, a Wisdom bonus.  Intriiiiguing.  Especially since the Eladrin are the magicky (and by association, smartypants) of the two.



Remember, since 3E (at least), Wisdom has been the stat of perception.  Since Elves are focused on perception (probably even moreso in 4E), it makes perfect sense.


----------



## A'koss (Dec 21, 2007)

Shift is all but certain to be the new 5' step and I'm sure I've heard somewhere already that elves were faster than humans already...


----------



## Obscure (Dec 21, 2007)

A'koss said:
			
		

> I'm guessing the Eladrin then will have bonuses to Int & Cha.




Or Dex and Int?


----------



## Kobu (Dec 21, 2007)

Sideburns?

"Springleaf, I told you to shave those sideburns!"


----------



## A'koss (Dec 21, 2007)

Obscure said:
			
		

> Or Dex and Int?



Possibly, but as they are the "high" elves, I would expect Cha over Dex.


----------



## Obscure (Dec 21, 2007)

This version of the elf would easily have a +1 LA in 3.5e, if not +2. I guess this is healthy power creep?


----------



## Mad Mac (Dec 21, 2007)

Niiice. 

They aren't kidding when they said they were making race important. If we take the Elf as a template, than most races are going to offer a hefty attribute adjustment, a free encounter power, synergenic bonuses for everything from movement to skill checks, and access to a whole tree of racial feats. 

  The Racial Feat seems a little weak, but it might not be too bad. It's availible at low levels, it boosts a power you'll probably use once every fight anyways, and your base attack bonus does scale pretty slowly. (1/2 level).


----------



## Baron Opal (Dec 21, 2007)

Wonderful! Finally, some hard data.

Very interesting. I like it on the whole. A little disappointment that they live to be 200 years rather than 2000, but I can deal. Surprised to see two attributes given bonuses; this makes me wonder what the human write-up is going to look like. Perhaps a +2 to the attribute of choice?

Thanks for the (substantive) tidbit.


----------



## Obscure (Dec 21, 2007)

A'koss said:
			
		

> Possibly, but as they are the "high" elves, I would expect Cha over Dex.




That would mean that elves have better racial stat boosts than eladrin; but this could be balanced out by giving eladrin better racial powers, such as their nifty "feystep" teleport ability. So maybe Int and Cha does make more sense mechanically.

I'm itching to play an eladrin "fey pact" warlock....


----------



## A'koss (Dec 21, 2007)

Yeah, we're getting a little more sense of what they were talking about when they said the low levels were getting a boost in power (fairly strong racial bonuses & 1st lvl. classes), but flatten out the power curve from there - if the weak-ish feat (by 3e standards) is anything to go by...


----------



## Gloombunny (Dec 21, 2007)

Cadfan said:
			
		

> Elven Accuracy is an ok one, but either it only works for combat characters, or "attack roll" is a term which encompasses spellcasters these days, or a lot more spells require attack rolls.



"attack roll" probably includes both physical attacks and spells.  Remember that in 4e the spellcaster rolls against a static Fort/Ref/Will defense, rather than the target rolling a save.  So Elven Accuracy will probably work for any spell that in 3e had a saving throw.


----------



## A'koss (Dec 21, 2007)

Obscure said:
			
		

> That would mean that elves have better racial stat boosts than eladrin; but this could be balanced out by giving eladrin better racial powers, such as their nifty "feystep" teleport ability. So maybe Int and Cha does make more sense mechanically.



Exactly. They have more avenues now to balance this against that... Also, we don't know what additional capability they might be giving to Cha in the game. We already know that different classes can apply different ability scores towards their special attacks.


----------



## Gloombunny (Dec 21, 2007)

Baron Opal said:
			
		

> Surprised to see two attributes given bonuses; this makes me wonder what the human write-up is going to look like. Perhaps a +2 to the attribute of choice?



I hope they move away from the uniformity-of-net-attribute-modifiers thing.  Some races get +2 to two attributes, some get +2 to one, some get no bonuses.  That can be balanced with other benefits.

That said, a freely-assigned +2 - or just a higher point value, since they're going with point buy as the default - would be pretty cool for humans.


----------



## Obscure (Dec 21, 2007)

A'koss said:
			
		

> Exactly. They have more avenues now to balance this against that... Also, we don't know what additional capability they might be giving to Cha in the game. We already know that different classes can apply different ability scores towards their special attacks.




Hmm, that's true. All of the Paladin smites that were previewed a while back seem to use Cha to modify both the attack and damage rolls (in place of Str).


----------



## Voss (Dec 21, 2007)

Overall interesting and largely good.

Only major sour note is that we're still tracking stacks of insignificant bonuses.  (which, with proper care and grooming, become a huge number that allows you to just win at whatever roll you're making.) Boo.


----------



## Pygon (Dec 21, 2007)

Mmm, that's crunchy.

I think after waiting this long for something substantial, I'm failing to see what I do or don't like about the elf at this point.


----------



## starwed (Dec 21, 2007)

Is anyone else a bit bothered by the "aura" style bonuses that are appearing all over the place in 4e?  It seems like these would be a pain to keep track of...


----------



## Kobu (Dec 21, 2007)

Voss said:
			
		

> Only major sour note is that we're still tracking stacks of insignificant bonuses.  (which, with proper care and grooming, become a huge number that allows you to just win at whatever roll you're making.) Boo.




How do you get to that conclusion?


----------



## pawsplay (Dec 21, 2007)

Kobu said:
			
		

> How do you get to that conclusion?




Spells, feats, class powers, elf bonuses...


----------



## outsider (Dec 21, 2007)

These elves are pretty awesome.  I've always been a fan of the nature focused/ranger style elves(not so big on the wizardly type ones).  This collection of abilities is great for a ranger or a rogue.  Dex, accuracy, speed(seems probable that they have a higher than normal base speed), and mobility.  What more could a striker ask for?

One interesting thing to note is that they seem to have lost their good old sleep/charm resistances, I wonder if the Eladrin will have them?  Probably pretty minor in the grand scheme of things, as sleep is really only a threat in low levels, and the wisdom bonus would give them a +1 to all will saves, rather than the +2 vs enchantment they had last edition.

One final thing I noted is that there's apparently no favored class anymore.


----------



## Irda Ranger (Dec 21, 2007)

What I am struck by is just how few rules there are.  Most of that is "fluff."  The actual rules could be crammed into just 2-3 lines of text.


----------



## Voss (Dec 21, 2007)

Kobu said:
			
		

> How do you get to that conclusion?




Because we've already seen 'feat' bonuses.  This is a 'racial' bonus.  Even if their are only 5 distinct types of bonuses in the first books, this sort of thing tends to creep.  And once you're adding +5 or so to your basic bonuses, you're pretty much past the randomization limits of a d20 roll, all the time.

Its also just annoying to keep track of something a specific as
if there is an elf
and I am not an elf
and I am with 5 'squares' of said elf
and the elf is a friend
and I am making a perception roll
I get a +1.

or I can just ignore the whole thing and not care that there is a whole 5% variance.

The level of annoyance far outweighs the actual benefits.


----------



## A'koss (Dec 21, 2007)

starwed said:
			
		

> Is anyone else a bit bothered by the "aura" style bonuses that are appearing all over the place in 4e?  It seems like these would be a pain to keep track of...



Depends how many there are really. 

I agree that if you have several classes with overlapping aura effects it could get messy, especially if you have a slightly scattered party. Eg. The Paladin is radiating an Holy War Aura, the Warlord an Aura of Battle and the Cleric an Aura of Zealotry each affecting only some of the characters with overlapping effects (or characters moving into and out of auras with their increased combat mobility)... Yeah, I could see that getting ugly pretty quick.


----------



## TwinBahamut (Dec 21, 2007)

I _really_ like the look of this. I don't really know what else to say.

I especially like the idea of having three sample elves in the racial write-up.

Also, am I the only one who noticed that Mialee and Soveliss are sample elf names? I think that is a nice nod to old iconics (who are probably not around anymore).


----------



## The Grackle (Dec 21, 2007)

Voss said:
			
		

> Overall interesting and largely good.
> 
> Only major sour note is that we're still tracking stacks of insignificant bonuses.  (which, with proper care and grooming, become a huge number that allows you to just win at whatever roll you're making.) Boo.




Yeah.  A +1 racial bonus? More auras?  *cringe*

It seems impossible that that they'd miss such frequent complaints and leave stacking rules unchanged.  I'll bet they've done _something_, but we haven't seen it yet.


----------



## Imperialus (Dec 21, 2007)

Yeah, I expect that that will quickly change to "allies within a reasonable distance" in my game.


----------



## Incenjucar (Dec 21, 2007)

I loved it until I noticed they gave them GENETIC WEAPON PROFICIENCIES again.

Grrrr.

They are also horribly anorexic.


----------



## A'koss (Dec 21, 2007)

Imperialus said:
			
		

> Yeah, I expect that that will quickly change to "allies within a reasonable distance" in my game.



Agreed.


----------



## Delta (Dec 21, 2007)

The Grackle said:
			
		

> Yeah.  A +1 racial bonus? More auras?  *cringe*
> 
> It seems impossible that that they'd miss such frequent complaints and leave stacking rules unchanged.  I'll bet they've done _something_, but we haven't seen it yet.




Well, I was surprised, sort-of, I guess. It's a bad idea. But then I'm a "don't believe the hype in the first place" kind of guy.


----------



## Bishmon (Dec 21, 2007)

I love the elf entry. Absolutely perfect for what I want out of elves.

My only concern is the +1 to allies within a certain distance thing, and I'm only concerned because those type of abilities could be annoying to track if there's a lot of them. But my small concern about that is vastly overshadowed by my happiness at the racial entry.


----------



## Incenjucar (Dec 21, 2007)

Perception bonus... works even if you don't know the elf is there, or the elf is unconscious...?  Maybe even dead....?

*rubs temples*

I like the overall thing, but the genetic feat and the vague language are ill-considered.


----------



## Mistwell (Dec 21, 2007)

Incenjucar said:
			
		

> Also:  Expect long, drawn-out arguments about whether the Racial Feat is +2 total, or +2 in addition.
> 
> :\
> 
> ...




I doubt the language is vague.  We just don't have the context.  For example, whether or not something is total or in addition is the kind of rule covered in a general section on bonuses, not an individual entry like this.  I'd not worry about that issue.


----------



## Incenjucar (Dec 21, 2007)

The Feat is a non-issue simply because I imagined a bonus in the original one, ignore that.


----------



## Frostmarrow (Dec 21, 2007)

Elves don't live for thousands of years anymore! Yay!

As Dragon Magazine put it "How do you play a character who could have been babysitter to Billy the Kid?" Now they can live amongst men for most of their lives and then stay at the retirement home for an extra one hundred years. This is great.

Feat grants re-rolls! Nay!

I hate re-rolls. It's sloppy design and at the table it adds minutes to the decisions of slow people. Luckily its just a 'per encouter' ability so it will mostly be forgotten. (Unless people realize re-rolls should be used as soon as possible to maximize its use).

No racial penalties, what will human bonuses be? Say!

In light of no racial penalties I think humans will have two +2 stats too. Which will it be? Humans are resilient plains people; +2 Con and +2 Cha (humans make great leaders).


----------



## Frostmarrow (Dec 21, 2007)

Bishmon said:
			
		

> I love the elf entry. Absolutely perfect for what I want out of elves.
> 
> My only concern is the +1 to allies within a certain distance thing, and I'm only concerned because those type of abilities could be annoying to track if there's a lot of them. But my small concern about that is vastly overshadowed by my happiness at the racial entry.




Everyone will bring something to the table (guess). Party composition will be interesting.


----------



## Flobby (Dec 21, 2007)

Looks pretty cool. I figured that they would have went the SWSE and got rid of the racial skill bonuses (you know went for rerolls instead). Wonder why the dumped that?


----------



## Falling Icicle (Dec 21, 2007)

I too am concerned by the "aura" bonus. It will be a major nuisance to keep track of, and for that reason will most likely just be forgotten most of the time. And the ability doesn't even make sense. How does an elf make his friends more perceptive? Other than that, the rules look pretty good to me. I'm glad they got rid of the "find secret doors" thing. I always thought that was a stupid racial bonus. That kind of thing should be something anyone can do. I am pretty disappointed with the nerf to elf maximum age, but then, I really am not fond of the fluff changes they've made to the races in general. The feat looks very, very weak, but that's from a 3rd edition perspective.


----------



## Incenjucar (Dec 21, 2007)

I think the idea is that the elf is acting like a watch dog or something... and people notice the elf's ears twitch or somesuch....it's a rather odd ability.

If it was some kind of new race which created stillness around itself, which made things more noticable... or some other reasonably-automatic ability...

Fortunately, there's rather few times you're going to be in a position to USE this ability, so it's not really worth caring about unless you're having a back to back buddy combat with your friendly elf against some invisible stalkers.


----------



## Scholar & Brutalman (Dec 21, 2007)

I generally like it - spliiting off the wizard part has allowed them to produce a more focussed race. 

I agree the aura is a bit of an irritation: if we have to keep track of something, it should be a significant bonus, not a tiny +1. Little bonuses like that should be a permanent thing on a character sheet.

The Accuracy power as a free (rather than immediate) action allows the Elf to use it whenever they use any other per-day or per-encounter attack and it misses. Since these are usually decisive abilities, the Elven Accuracy feat becomes a bit more powerful. I still think it doesn't sound that great. Compare it to the other two heroic level feats we've seen:



> Toughness
> Tier: Heroic
> Benefit: When you take this feat, you gain additional hit points equal to your level + 3. You also gain 1 additional hit point every time you gain a level.
> 
> ...




I'd rather take either of them.


----------



## Scholar & Brutalman (Dec 21, 2007)

Incenjucar said:
			
		

> Fortunately, there's rather few times you're going to be in a position to USE this ability, so it's not really worth caring about unless you're having a back to back buddy combat with your friendly elf against some invisible stalkers.




It's within 5 *squares*, not within five feet. I made that mistake when I first looked at it.


----------



## Incenjucar (Dec 21, 2007)

Ah, 5 SQUARES.  Okay, then maybe elves create some kind of aura of serenity... or maybe everyone just feels the need to prove themselves for the damned elf.       Safe to assume this doesn't stack, I think.

--

I'm pretty sure the main point of this power is sniping and such.  If you have some kind of long build up, once-per-encounter super deadly trick, you want it to stick.  It could be pretty powerful for assassins and such.


----------



## Frostmarrow (Dec 21, 2007)

Scholar & Brutalman said:
			
		

> I agree the aura is a bit of an irritation: if we have to keep track of something, it should be a significant bonus, not a tiny +1. Little bonuses like that should be a permanent thing on a character sheet.




I think its nice. It allows the elf player to remind the rest of the party of this little bonus every so often. It also serves as a way of saying "You guys remember I'm an elf, don't you?". The game is made up of what you say and this is just a free line.

I interpret it to mean an elf will influence his comrades to be more aware and make less noise by being a good example. If I hang out with graceful people I will emulate that to a certain extent.


----------



## JohnSnow (Dec 21, 2007)

Okay, great preview!

Two comments:

1) I imagine that Group Awareness requires the elf to be conscious and communicative. Basically, I would assume the elf is helping people to be more observant.

2) Rerolls are statistically the same as granting a +3 bonus to the average score - without raising the maximum result. Less abusive stacking = Good Thing.

More tomorrow, but it's bedtime now.


----------



## Beckett (Dec 21, 2007)

tsadkiel said:
			
		

> "Elves mature at about the same rate as humans but show few effects of age past adulthood."  This makes me happy.




Oh, yes! No more having to justify why the 126 year old elf has fewer skill points than the 15 year old human


----------



## Raduin711 (Dec 21, 2007)

The re-roll ability sounds cool and useful.

The perception aura sounds kind of annoying, though.  Most perception rolls occur without miniatures on the board, so I don't think it will be all THAT bad.  You'll have to remember to put everyone down within 5 squares of the elf.

The free weapon proficiency thing does sound annoying though.  Pretty soon there will be a phb 2 and they will have some option in it to trade their proficiency for a new ability that gives an additional +1 to their perception aura so long as you roll an even number on the die...


----------



## ptolemy18 (Dec 21, 2007)

I like the entry. It reads well, and I like what they're doing with elves. Too bad they're using "squares" as the measure for movement, rather than "feet" (go simulation-style RPGs! w00t!), but I suppose it'll be easier to parse on the game table.



			
				Zurai said:
			
		

> The feat seems very weak, too. Doesn't get my hopes up about 4E's feat selection.




It does seem a little weak... but I don't know if that's a bad thing... maybe players are going to have zillions of feats but a lot of those feats will be weaker?


----------



## Sound of Azure (Dec 21, 2007)

Very cool!

I was wondering how they'd implement elves after divorcing the magic flavour from them, and it looks good to me. The "fluff" parts include some welcome changes (lifespan decrease, upsized elves), and I liked the nod to the 3e iconic names.

Now I'm even more curious about what they've done with Dwarves!


----------



## Incenjucar (Dec 21, 2007)

With the free weapon prof... I'm thinking of replacing it with the ability to choose one non-exotic weapon that the elf was exposed to that they get free proficiency with.

It's much more believable that a species could imprint itself on an object type as a child than it is for them to naturally be able to point two very very very different missile weapons at people.

Also I'm giving every one of them a sammich because they should eat more.


----------



## Frostmarrow (Dec 21, 2007)

ptolemy18 said:
			
		

> Too bad they're using "squares" as the measure for movement, rather than "feet" (go simulation-style RPGs! w00t!), but I suppose it'll be easier to parse on the game table.




In 40KRP one square equals 1 meter. Metric.


----------



## The Human Target (Dec 21, 2007)

Looks pretty good, it gets a thumbs up.

The only thing that made me groan are weapon proficiencies and feats that add numbers to situational rolls.

Like the flavor a lot, even the simple stuff like Elves having more than one hair color.


----------



## Spatula (Dec 21, 2007)

Frostmarrow said:
			
		

> Elves don't live for thousands of years anymore! Yay!



They haven't lived for (a) thousand years since the 2e days...


----------



## cr0m (Dec 21, 2007)

*elven accuracy*

Why do you think they require you to take the 2nd roll, even if it's lower?

I like the new elf. Very neat. I don't understand why people care whether elves are immortal or just very old, but I have a feeling that's one of those emotional issues like whether you think you should roll attack and damage at the same time or separately. 

edit: or why anyone at all cares about skin and hair color... seriously, has any DM ever said "sorry, I know you want to play an elf with burnt umber hair and purple skin, but the PHB doesn't allow it".


----------



## Spatula (Dec 21, 2007)

Frukathka said:
			
		

> Nerts. I was hoping elves would be a bit more urbanized for 4E.  :\



These are the wild elves (grugach? forgot the old name, or like the Mirkwood elves/Legolas if you want to go by Tolkien terms).  Eldarin are the "magic" elves.

Really good race writeup, I think, aside from the aura thing.  As others have mentioned, keeping track of lots of little bonuses is a pain in the ass.  The elven accuracy ability feels very... right.  It just fits, and seems like a cool little perk that isn't really that powerful.


----------



## Incenjucar (Dec 21, 2007)

Cr0m:  It's basically second-guessing yourself, I think is the idea.

The age issue is simply a matter of being able to accept it as realistic within the context.  So very hard to ignore that many immortals in a prime world.

Elven abilities are essentially tied to skin and hair color.  Remember, in fantasy, racism is accurate.


----------



## The Human Target (Dec 21, 2007)

cr0m said:
			
		

> Why do you think they require you to take the 2nd roll, even if it's lower?
> 
> I like the new elf. Very neat. I don't understand why people care whether elves are immortal or just very old, but I have a feeling that's one of those emotional issues like whether you think you should roll attack and damage at the same time or separately.
> 
> edit: or why anyone at all cares about skin and hair color... seriously, has any DM ever said "sorry, I know you want to play an elf with burnt umber hair and purple skin, but the PHB doesn't allow it".



Really, the only reason to have the power be like that is to prevent a player who roles high (say an 18, enough to hit the orc he's fighting) use the power to try to go for a critical hit since he can;t get any lower than an 18. Its to ensure the player will use it to make a horrible roll better instead of a great roll greater.

Being long lives just helps elves be a little more different than the other races. I kinda hope Eladrin still live a long time, just for that sake alone. I liked that Half-orcs aged faster and died much younger. It generally doesn't come up a lot in games, but it helps make the races a little less like humans.

Thats never happened to me either. But saying elves can only have dark hair and green eyes is just kinda silly and theoretically limiting. Its easy to house rule out of course, but why was that kinda stuff there in the first place?

However, I probably would make a player give me a good reason to let them be an elf with burnt umber hair and purple skin.


----------



## Stalker0 (Dec 21, 2007)

Another vote for not liking the aura perception bonus. It doesn't make a lot of sense, and it WILL be a pain in the butt to remember.

Remember the lessons of dodge everyone, people have enough trouble remember a nice +1 to AC against a single target, and its their feat, no way are they going to constantly remember a +1 from someone else.

I will say one good thing about it though, its a racial bonus!! One thing I really hope for in 4e is that class and racial abilities always stack with magic. One thing I really do not like is when an innate bonus gets overwritten by magic. It just encourages high level characters to be the same.

Dwarf: I have 60 feet darkvision!
Human with googles of night: Me too!

Hope for 4e/

Dwarf: I have lowlight vision!
Human: So do I!
Dwarf: Let me try those on! Sweet, now my lowlight works twice as far!!


----------



## Sitara (Dec 21, 2007)

I'm of a mixed bag. Overall I have to say I don't much like the way the races, or at least this one has panned out.

First, racial ability is cool, since its useful at all levels. However, its kind of bland. 

The feat is AMAZING! I can't believe people are basing something that can be used every battle and thaqts the equivalent of weapon focu and improved weapon focus. Guys remember, in this game magical weapons are rarer, so you need all the attack bonusii you can git.

But over all it doesn't mesh for me. I wish they had done away with the racial power all togather and made them into racial feats, giving you the option of selecting one at 1st level. (so this way all 1st level people of the same race wont have the same power)


----------



## fuindordm (Dec 21, 2007)

I'm just happy that the "search for secret doors automatically" ability has finally gone away.


----------



## epochrpg (Dec 21, 2007)

Well I for one like it-- and have been somewhat of a curmudgeon regarding a lot of the racial stuff of 4e.   It really helps to emulate a "Legolas" type.


----------



## Mr. Wilson (Dec 21, 2007)

This is a much tighter race then the previous elves, so that's a plus.  It also has a significant power boost from previous races.

That said, with no racial negatives, I'm interested in seeing where WoTC is taking Humans.  Two feats?  Three feats? Finally, a racial bonus?

The more I see of 4e, the more I like.  Except for what I've seen of FR.


----------



## Simia Saturnalia (Dec 21, 2007)

Well, I like the hell out of that. Not totally sold on the Group Awareness, but it's a small enough bonus I can adjust it without too much trouble. Everything else is excellent.

The eladrin teleport must be pretty short range if it's only competing with a to-hit reroll, though.

Still don't have a problem with racial weapons, since any given PHB entry is as much cultural as it is racial. Swap it out easy as you like, though bow plays to their strengths so well I can't say I'd do so.


----------



## Zurai (Dec 21, 2007)

Sitara said:
			
		

> The feat is AMAZING! I can't believe people are basing something that can be used every battle and thaqts the equivalent of weapon focu and improved weapon focus. Guys remember, in this game magical weapons are rarer, so you need all the attack bonusii you can git.




1. Weapon Focus is significantly better (+1 to every attack in every battle vs +2 to a single attack per battle).
2. Weapon Focus is considered a weak feat.
3. Magical weapons in general aren't any rarer. Even magical items don't seem to be rarer. Magical items just don't define the character any more.


----------



## vagabundo (Dec 21, 2007)

I really like it, clear concise. Bodes well for 4e IMO.

I like all the abilities, although the aura one might be hard to track, but it seems like the traits are easy to remember. As a DM i'm pretty sure I could remember all the standard race traits within a month or two and could then remind my ever forgetful players.

LOL at the name Lucan (it is a small village in Dublin).


----------



## Kintara (Dec 21, 2007)

Zurai said:
			
		

> 1. Weapon Focus is significantly better (+1 to every attack in every battle vs +2 to a single attack per battle).
> 2. Weapon Focus is considered a weak feat.
> 3. Magical weapons in general aren't any rarer. Even magical items don't seem to be rarer. Magical items just don't define the character any more.



Every weapon attack with one sort of weapon. One nice thing about this accuracy ability is that it will likely find use for every kind of attack one can make.

And I don't see why we should automatically assume that there is no way to use this racial ability more than once in an encounter. There may be ways to quickly recover powers, and you may even be able to "prep" something for more than once an encounter.

Also, we just don't know how common attack bonuses really are, nor how persistent they are.


----------



## Sitara (Dec 21, 2007)

Zurai said:
			
		

> 1. Weapon Focus is significantly better (+1 to every attack in every battle vs +2 to a single attack per battle).




Yes but this feat STACKS with weapon focus and other bonusii. Trust me, feats and abilities like this are prevalent in SAGA, which I have read, played and analyzed the heck out off. This is a fantastic feat, especially when you consider that it can  be taken every level.



			
				Zurai said:
			
		

> 2. Weapon Focus is considered a weak feat.




It will be better now,  (see blow as to why) but I can see why some ppl might yet call it weak.



			
				Zurai said:
			
		

> 3. Magical weapons in general aren't any rarer. Even magical items don't seem to be rarer. Magical items just don't define the character any more.




Yes they are, from what we have been told. See in the earlier ed's, esp 3ed and Adnd 2e mosters and encounters were designed to require pc's with magic weapons; this will not be the case anymore, at least not to such a large extent. I am persoanlly hoping the Heroic Tier will be built completely with a non magic weapon style of play in mind.


----------



## Merlin the Tuna (Dec 21, 2007)

Sitara said:
			
		

> Yes but this feat STACKS with weapon focus and other *bonusii*.



Oh come on now, honestly.


----------



## Kirnon_Bhale (Dec 21, 2007)

I think that I am in the minority here, I like the Racial Aura - I think that you forget that the power creep from magical items etc. has been retarded, I also always find it funny that people turn their noses up at a 5% increase but seem more then happy with a 10% increase - either way it is an increase and shouldn't be sniffed at.

I also like the Racial Ability.


----------



## Frostmarrow (Dec 21, 2007)

Merlin the Tuna said:
			
		

> Oh come on now, honestly.




Bonusiiae. Plural.


----------



## Sitara (Dec 21, 2007)

Bonzai!

:|

Oh and for the record I dislike the aura type ability; it is another way for wotc to boost mini sales. A rather cheap way, and does not make much sense in game.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Dec 21, 2007)

"Perception Aura":
I am not sure how often other players will need reminding of that. I think it has one major advantage - it's always on (unlike a Dragon Shamans Aura, which changes around), and its range is long enough that it should usually cover the typical party "cofiguration". For groups searching a room it's an automatic "+1 for everyone".

Age: I don't care much how old they can get, but I really like that they become adults at around the same age as humans. Much better now.

Racial Ability Modifiers: Finally, no need to force balanced ability scores modifiers. I like it a lot better. I wonder what humans will get.

Elven Accuracy: I like reroll abilities. They shouldn't be overdone (we don't want to end up with a nd20 system  ), but they are better than just stacking another bonus - they increase the likelyhood of success without forcing modifiers between focused and unfocused characters outside the d20 range.

Elven Precision: It looks a bit less powerful then (the stronger) 3.5 feats, but it doesn't look bad, either. It seems to work good in conjunction with Elven Accuracy.

As a side note, I wonder if there will be ways to make an "per encounter" power an "at will" power. 





			
				Frostmarrow said:
			
		

> . Plural.



Bonusiiaeta.


----------



## Mathew_Freeman (Dec 21, 2007)

I'm very happy with the write up.

I know that I'm in the minority, but it seems that the 4e designers have been listening to us all. No ability score penalties - yay! Different races have different movements - yay!

Also liking the aura thing - it will mean that players have to pay a bit more attention, but that is their problem. Hopefully each PC will only have one aura running at a time, and they'll all be different.

A great early Xmas present, and now I can't wait to see the rest!


----------



## delericho (Dec 21, 2007)

Ah, a really solid and crunchy preview. More of these, please!

As for the elves themselves:

- End of stat penalties and two stat bonuses, looks like some significant power creep here. Not sure that's a terrible thing, but it is a thing.

- I really don't like the "Group Awareness" power. Because my buddy is an elf, suddenly I can see better?

- Not keen on the implementation of "Elven Accuracy". I would have preferred a flat +2 (or whatever) bonus with bows. A lot of my opinion of this will depend on how many 'reroll powers' characters acquire. As long as they only ever have one or two, I suppose it's fine, but more than that is likely to become a bookkeeping nightmare.

I like much of the cleaned up terminology in 4e: "combat advantage" instead of "flat-footed", "shift" instead of "five-foot step".


----------



## Frostmarrow (Dec 21, 2007)

delericho said:
			
		

> Ah, a really solid and crunchy preview. More of these, please!
> 
> As for the elves themselves:
> 
> - End of stat penalties and two stat bonuses, looks like some significant power creep here. Not sure that's a terrible thing, but it is a thing.




It's power creep at first level in order to push characters into the sweet spot. Then it will dry up in order to keep characters init. 

Sweet is +10 attack against chainmail.


----------



## Bagpuss (Dec 21, 2007)

Glyfair said:
			
		

> It has been strongly hinted that feats will be weaker, but more uniform in power.  Some have suggested you will get more feats over time (but nothing definitive that I recall).




Also it's a heroic tier feat. I expect that Paragon and Epic feats are stronger.


----------



## Sitara (Dec 21, 2007)

Yah maybe an epic  level feat allows it to be made into a will power.

However, they did say racial feats only go up to level 10. 

ANd are people sure Shift does not refer to some form of teleportation, like the Eladrin's racial ability?


----------



## Bagpuss (Dec 21, 2007)

delericho said:
			
		

> - I really don't like the "Group Awareness" power. Because my buddy is an elf, suddenly I can see better?




That and you now need to know where everyone is standing to even make an Perception check are they within 5 squares of the elf or not? So you need to have a map out even if folks are just overhearing a conversation in the street. I can imagine a lot of the time players will forget this bonus as it isn't recorded on their character sheet, but somebody elses.


----------



## Bagpuss (Dec 21, 2007)

Sitara said:
			
		

> ANd are people sure Shift does not refer to some form of teleportation, like the Eladrin's racial ability?




If it was teleportation.

a) Why would terrain matter normally?
b) Why would it only be one square normally?


----------



## Bagpuss (Dec 21, 2007)

Not sure about some of the fluff either.



> Elves revere the natural world. Their connection to their surroundings enables them to perceive much. *They never cut living trees*, and when they create permanent communities, they do so by carefully growing or weaving arbors, tree houses, and catwalks from living branches.




Yet they are archers? So what do they make all their bows and arrows out of? I guess bows could be bone, so they respect natural animals less than natural trees? But the arrows, I doubt there is enough dead-fall wood to keep a race of archers stocked?


----------



## Pinotage (Dec 21, 2007)

Bagpuss said:
			
		

> That and you now need to know where everyone is standing to even make an Perception check are they within 5 squares of the elf or not? So you need to have a map out even if folks are just overhearing a conversation in the street. I can imagine a lot of the time players will forget this bonus as it isn't recorded on their character sheet, but somebody elses.




I had a quick scan through it, and this was the first thing that bugged me. And, as others have mentioned on this thread, it's going to be a pain to keep track of. Couple this with the seemingly large number of immediate actions in a game, and I can see the Attack of Opportunity being the least of anybody's problems in 4e combat. Is it just me or does 4e seem to have far too many bookkeeping?

Pinotage


----------



## Pinotage (Dec 21, 2007)

Bagpuss said:
			
		

> Yet they are archers? So what do they make all their bows and arrows out of? I guess bows could be bone, so they respect natural animals less than natural trees? But the arrows, I doubt there is enough dead-fall wood to keep a race of archers stocked?




Nah. They just herd the local elephants into pushing the trees over.

Elf: "What? I didn't cut it. The elephant did."
Elf: "I swear it was the owlbear that did it!"

 

Pinotage


----------



## Bagpuss (Dec 21, 2007)

They don't have any elephants they killed them all to make bows our of their ribs.

I also guess Elves must be coal miners since they can't chop logs except for dead-fall and that isn't going to provide enough wood to burn during the winter.


----------



## HeavenShallBurn (Dec 21, 2007)

Pinotage said:
			
		

> Nah. They just herd the local elephants into pushing the trees over.
> 
> Elf: "What? I didn't cut it. The elephant did."
> Elf: "I swear it was the owlbear that did it!"
> ...



A caste of untouchables from other races.  _Elves_ can't cut down a tree, the very idea is abhorrent to them.  But they still need wood, so of course they'll use the wood those uncouth X cut down after all _they_ didn't do it and would want it to go to waste.


----------



## Pinotage (Dec 21, 2007)

HeavenShallBurn said:
			
		

> A caste of untouchables from other races.  _Elves_ can't cut down a tree, the very idea is abhorrent to them.  But they still need wood, so of course they'll use the wood those uncouth X cut down after all _they_ didn't do it and would want it to go to waste.




Possibly.

Elf: "He was 6 squares away from me. Completely walked into that tree, I tell you. Failed his Perception check by a whole +1.

Pinotage


----------



## bgaesop (Dec 21, 2007)

I don't think the aura will be any trouble. As a DM, I'll just implement it as "everyone in the party who is with the elf gets +1 to perception." As for how it works, there's a ton of ways to do it and if you can't think of any you're not getting creative. The elf could be radiating an aura of calm that seams to clear the fog from your eyes and let you clearly see the natural world as it truly is, or he could be giving good advice ("rogue! I know you like to look at the ground for traps but if you would look up every now and then you'd notice X. Wizard, if you'd stop looking in your spellbook all the time you'd have seen Y. Fighter, you don't need to polish your shield while we're walking, you almost tripped on that Z") or whatever you want.



			
				Bagpuss said:
			
		

> I also guess Elves must be coal miners since they can't chop logs except for dead-fall and that isn't going to provide enough wood to burn during the winter.



Peat?

edit: I love basically everything about this entry, though the feat does sound a tad underpowered. It may not be, though, given that we're getting a grand total of +15 BAB before class individuality is factored in. A +2 could be significant there.


----------



## One Horse town (Dec 21, 2007)

As far as the perception bonus goes, i would simplify it so that these little bonuses don't add up (if indeed we do get stacking). It's a nice little atmospheric touch IMO, but i'd beef it up, simplify it and make it more specific.

Allies of an Elf may take 10 at any time on Perception checks whilst in woodland if they are within 5 squares. The elf himself is always considered to be taking 10 whilst in woodlands.

This ability represents learning from the elf as far as i can see, rather than an 'aura'. He's pointing things out to you, you're learning from his example etc. Make the racial 'aura' effects all along the take 10 line on skills and there's nothing to remember and nothing to stack. It might be a tad too powerful for some, but if you make it specific, then it fits the niche of the race and doesn't interfere with play all the time.


----------



## delericho (Dec 21, 2007)

Bagpuss said:
			
		

> Yet they are archers? So what do they make all their bows and arrows out of? I guess bows could be bone, so they respect natural animals less than natural trees? But the arrows, I doubt there is enough dead-fall wood to keep a race of archers stocked?




Presumably, they have genetically modified a special oak to produce acorns that are coincidentally bow-shaped.


----------



## Bagpuss (Dec 21, 2007)

Personally I think I'll have them more as sustainable foresters than _never cut living trees_. They use the natural environment, but they don't go felling huge sections to make arable farm land, like humans.


----------



## tecnowraith (Dec 21, 2007)

I also notice that Bonus Languages are now gone as well.


----------



## Lord Xtheth (Dec 21, 2007)

Horay! they finaly let me back on the site!

About freaking time!

The re-roll thing is new... so is the suggested ways to play an elf, but nothing realy unexpected.

Didn't see how it's supposed to gain "racial levels" though, and thats all I'm realy interested in seeing when it comes to races.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Dec 21, 2007)

Decent.  Other than monkeying with the gods for fluff, this seems like a fair racial writeup.

There are some unusual decisions (35' move?) but I expect they will make more sense in context.  The "group perception" thing seems particularly hard to adjudicate in practice, unless for simplicity you just ignore the range thing and simply give a +1 to everyone in the party with an elf (which doesn't explain _why_ the elf's ability applies to everyone, of course).  "Group perception" looks like it could turn into the Dodge of 4E.


----------



## Green Knight (Dec 21, 2007)

Lord Xtheth said:
			
		

> Didn't see how it's supposed to gain "racial levels" though, and thats all I'm realy interested in seeing when it comes to races.




Reread that article. In the very same article where they bring up the idea of racial levels, they say that they discarded that idea. There are no racial levels, but instead Racial Feats which one can take as they level.


----------



## Scholar & Brutalman (Dec 21, 2007)

One thing I just noticed about the Elven Accuracy power: it would appear to be most helpful for strikers, who spend time trying to set up devastating attacks that they really want to succeed. Of course, elves are recommended as a good race for rogues and rangers. I don't think that this is an accident.

I wonder if you have the option to buy more uses of a racial power? If an elf could buy 3 or 4 uses of Elven Accuracy, the feat becomes more useful.


----------



## vagabundo (Dec 21, 2007)

I think you could get enough wood from deadfalls and old dead trees to make bows and arrows. They are probably very conservative with them. 

Although they dont use much magic I'd guess that there would be a number of utility Arcane/divine spells that could mend broken arrows/bows, help to use wood that is unsuitable, possibly "ask" the tree to shed some branches and so on.


----------



## Bagpuss (Dec 21, 2007)

Arrows perhaps, but bows generally require long straight pieces of wood that come from the trunk. It also needs to dry correctly which isn't going to occur with deadfall.


----------



## delericho (Dec 21, 2007)

Green Knight said:
			
		

> Reread that article. In the very same article where they bring up the idea of racial levels, they say that they discarded that idea. There are no racial levels, but instead Racial Feats which one can take as they level.




Probably the right decision, I think. However, a couple of racial talent trees for each race (similar to the same for classes) might also be a good thing to have. Maybe.


----------



## Green Knight (Dec 21, 2007)

They're going with Racial Feats, rather then Talent Trees. The idea being that they don't want players to lose out on their class abilities.


----------



## Wulfram (Dec 21, 2007)

Fluff is fairly meh.  I'm glad they're getting rid of the long childhood, but they're too shortlived for my taste - I like my elves immortal, it's their most interesting aspect.  Otherwise it's fairly standard wood elf fluff, but then innovation is not what I want from the core fluff, particularly in so established and well explored a race as elves.

Also concerned that it appears there won't be any urban elves - if the Eladrin are defined by a tie to the feywild, then they would seem even less likely to appreciate city life.

The stats seem a clear improvement on the 3e ones, though I share some scepticism about the perception aura.


----------



## Keefe the Thief (Dec 21, 2007)

Wulfram said:
			
		

> Also concerned that it appears there won't be any urban elves - if the Eladrin are defined by a tie to the feywild, then they would seem even less likely to appreciate city life.




It has been said that they have cities there, and that some of them can shift in and out. Yay to stealing from Elfquest.


----------



## Nightchilde-2 (Dec 21, 2007)

Bagpuss said:
			
		

> That and you now need to know where everyone is standing to even make an Perception check are they within 5 squares of the elf or not? So you need to have a map out even if folks are just overhearing a conversation in the street. I can imagine a lot of the time players will forget this bonus as it isn't recorded on their character sheet, but somebody elses.




Or you can do it the easy way...

"You're all hanging out close enough to the elf." or "You're all not hanging out close enough to the elf."


----------



## Dr. Strangemonkey (Dec 21, 2007)

Bagpuss said:
			
		

> Arrows perhaps, but bows generally require long straight pieces of wood that come from the trunk. It also needs to dry correctly which isn't going to occur with deadfall.




Well, they could make laminate bows out of a bunch of composite pieces.  Or, as someone else has said, trusty bone and sinew composites.

Or, or, they are real actual tree herders and can actually garden trees so that they die in the right way to become good bow material.

With a 200 year lifespan and good enough forestry you can perform miracles of resource managment.


----------



## Zweischneid (Dec 21, 2007)

Bagpuss said:
			
		

> Personally I think I'll have them more as sustainable foresters than _never cut living trees_. They use the natural environment, but they don't go felling huge sections to make arable farm land, like humans.





QFT, that'd be the direction to go.. plant a new seed for every tree you fell, add the odd special tree that's revered and not to be touched (and fiercly avenged by the elven community) and have them use woodcraft normally (or even exceptionally) otherwise.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart (Dec 21, 2007)

I don't know if this article so much blew my mind as made me have an elfgasm.


----------



## Zweischneid (Dec 21, 2007)

Dr. Strangemonkey said:
			
		

> Or, or, they are real actual tree herders and can actually garden trees so that they die in the right way to become good bow material.
> 
> With a 200 year lifespan and good enough forestry you can perform miracles of resource managment.




But even herders kill from their herd. That's the entire point of herding it in the first place, though of course you'd have to ensure sustainability by not killing more of your flock than what is born to the herd (and lives to a reasonable age).


----------



## Zweischneid (Dec 21, 2007)

I'm not too excited by the stat-creep.

What's the point of havin a rogue with Dex 18 or a Barbarian with equally exceptional strenght, if every wizard and his dog clock in at 14 to 16 in those stats aswell. Ultimately, it'll just lead to less diversity among players in stats and makes it an overall less usefull tool in character design and development. 

If you don't intend to use the entire bandwidth of 1 to 20 (or 2 to 18) on a regular basis, why not redo the whole thing to a scale thats actually meaningfull or alternatively take out the whole thing and mimik differences in strenght, resiliance and similar things through feats and talents (re-rolls, bonuses, etc..)?


----------



## Green Knight (Dec 21, 2007)

Dr. Strangemonkey said:
			
		

> Well, they could make laminate bows out of a bunch of composite pieces.  Or, as someone else has said, trusty bone and sinew composites.
> 
> Or, or, they are real actual tree herders and can actually garden trees so that they die in the right way to become good bow material.
> 
> With a 200 year lifespan and good enough forestry you can perform miracles of resource managment.




Well, there's that and the likelihood that Druids make up a respectable portion of the Elven populace. There's probably some low-level Druid spell that helps in the creation of bows and arrows without cutting the tree. After all, Elves "build their homes in close harmony with the forest, so perfectly joined that travelers often fail to notice that they have entered an elven community until it is too late". That's something they likely do through the use of Druid magic. And if they can build entire communities like that, then making a sizeable quantity of bows shouldn't be a problem.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart (Dec 21, 2007)

Zweischneid said:
			
		

> I'm not too excited by the stat-creep.
> 
> What's the point of havin a rogue with Dex 18 or a Barbarian with equally exceptional strenght, if every wizard and his dog clock in at 14 to 16 in those stats aswell. Ultimately, it'll just lead to less diversity among players in stats and makes it an overall less usefull tool in character design and development.
> 
> If you don't intend to use the entire bandwidth of 1 to 20 (or 2 to 18) on a regular basis, why not redo the whole thing to a scale thats actually meaningfull or alternatively take out the whole thing and mimik differences in strenght, resiliance and similar things through feats and talents (re-rolls, bonuses, etc..)?



You do use the whole range, though.  Just not for player characters.  But they never have really.

If the point buy system stays the same, then it is still possible to have an elven fighter with a con of 8 using this new system.  With rolling is is possible to have a con of 3 even.

I don't see how it could have less diversity.  If you are a rogue, you play a halfling to get the pluses to dex and put an 18 in dex giving you 20 total (or more for all we know in 4th).  If an elf is a fighter, they might put a 12 into dex and get 14 total.  There's still a difference though.

Especially if they use the same stat bonuses as you get from Saga Edition, where you get +1 to TWO stats at every 4th level instead of just one stat.


----------



## Intrope (Dec 21, 2007)

Interesting: a quick copy-paste into Word shows that the new write up is _longer_ than the old one (by about 50%!). Of course, the old write up had zero whitespace and is kind of hard to read because of it. 

This is also better, because the crunchy bit that you'd be trying to look up on the fly is at the front of the writeup, and has enough whitespace to be distinct from the body of text.

Elven Accuracy is a neat little power; if used 'blindly' on initial rolls of 1-10, you'd get an average of a +5 bonus. Of course, if you've already gotten an idea of how high you need to roll, you may get more use out of the power. The feat expands this range to 1-12, so it's a pretty decent feat. If you have a good, 1/encounter attack this would be a very nice piece of insurance:

PC: Fear my Arrow of DOOOOM!
Rolls: *1*
PC: Blast!


----------



## Pssthpok (Dec 21, 2007)

> Average Height: 5' 7"-6' 0"
> Average Weight: 100-130 lb.




6' tall, 130 pounds?! Anorexia nervosa should also be a 'racial power'.   

On another note, I'll bet the Eladrin short-range teleport jumps the character up to 5 squares. I  also bet that they have +2 Intelligence/+2 Charisma, +2 to Arcane and Knowledge skills, and a lifespan greater than the Elf (but I might have heard that somewhere).


----------



## Zweischneid (Dec 21, 2007)

Intrope said:
			
		

> Interesting: a quick copy-paste into Word shows that the new write up is _longer_ than the old one (by about 50%!). Of course, the old write up had zero whitespace and is kind of hard to read because of it.
> 
> This is also better, because the crunchy bit that you'd be trying to look up on the fly is at the front of the writeup, and has enough whitespace to be distinct from the body of text.
> 
> ...




I can see the rational behind all this. But since it so drastically reduces the chance of failure, the question arises if it is economical to still roll dice at all. Might just do..

Elven Accuracy + Perception: Once per encounter, by using this ability one of you're arrow hits!

.. and get on with the story.


Also, it seems a strange tie to make this racial. Why not include this feat in some archer talent-path for the warrior/ranger/whatever. By tying this so closely to elves, you've just made archers from all other races a whole lot less attractive.


----------



## Pbartender (Dec 21, 2007)

*Racial Traits:* Fine by me.

*Elven Accuracy:* I like it. The reroll won't show often enough to be annoying...  "Augh! I rolled a 2 for my Sneak Attack! I reroll!" would be the typical scenario, I'd suspect. That aside, it's nice to see a racial ability that isn't just unique, but also isn't a simple bonus or Spell-like ability.

*Group Awareness:* It doesn't bother me. First, in general, whenever character are this close, they seem to share the "Perception" roll of whoever rolls the highest -- if one character notices, he warns the rest.  Second, it's only a +1 bonus, which only rarely makes a signicicant difference when rolling a d20. Third, most games will simplify the range of the power to "with the elf", or "without the elf".

*Fluff:* "They never cut living trees" is the only problem I see, since effective bows and arrows cannot feasibly be made from deadwood, it being typically too brittle for the purpose. Fortunately, it easy enough to fix the fluff by allowing them careful husbandry of forest resources, as suggested by Bagpuss above.


----------



## Jedi_Solo (Dec 21, 2007)

Bagpuss said:
			
		

> Personally I think I'll have them more as sustainable foresters than _never cut living trees_. They use the natural environment, but they don't go felling huge sections to make arable farm land, like humans.




I agree.  Sure, with magic they may be able to help mold the tree into whatever shape/style they want but "to never cut living trees" seems... extreme and causes problems of its own.

What if a treant goes nuts and causes trees to attack the village?  Does the treant itself count in this (or are there other monsters that would classify as "trees")? What if a tree becomes ill and can't be cured (thus spreading the disease or falling over on the village when it dies)?  I'm sure there are a bunch of other issues as well but I'm not thinking clearly on this Friday morning.

"Sustainable Forester" is definately the way I would want to go with this.


----------



## Anthtriel (Dec 21, 2007)

Very nice. Glad to see that most of my wishes have come true, i.e. no 1000 year old elves, no easy attack boni (No one wanted to believe me that BAB is evil).
Not so glad to see that aura in.

By the way, for statements like "Reroll is about +3 or +2 to attack": No, it isn't. The math works very differently. I made an Excel file to illustrate the difference. Rerolls, as long as you don't have too many (which makes them annoying), work a lot better than straight attack boni because they have a stronger effect when in small quantities, but a weaker in large quantities.
So rerolls are not as often insignificant, and not as often overpowering. Their downside is that they require additional time, so they are perfect for racial powers.


----------



## Clavis (Dec 21, 2007)

I hate the new elves.

I hate their short life spans. I hate the suggestion that elves now make "good clerics". I hate how they've lost their resistances to charms and paralysis. I hate how, given the new height and weight, every Elf would look like a Holocaust survivor. 

I can't tell from the illustration whether or not they're still the ugly bug-eyed aliens of 3rd edition. Given what I seen so far, I have little hope.

About the only thing I can stand is the description of elven personality, which is close to how I always played them anyway.

I also hate listing movement in "squares", but that's another issue.

If this is 4th edition, consider me gone, WOTC. And I know I'm far from alone.
I hope you're satisfied with the "New Coke" you've made.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Dec 21, 2007)

delericho said:
			
		

> - End of stat penalties and two stat bonuses, looks like some significant power creep here. Not sure that's a terrible thing, but it is a thing.
> ...
> 
> - Not keen on the implementation of "Elven Accuracy". I would have preferred a flat +2 (or whatever) bonus with bows. A lot of my opinion of this will depend on how many 'reroll powers' characters acquire. As long as they only ever have one or two, I suppose it's fine, but more than that is likely to become a bookkeeping nightmare.




In Races and Classes they explain that they have given all the standard races a bit of a boost in power to make it easier to include other races which in 3e might have had a +1 or +2LA penalty.

Effectively it is a design decision to up the base effectiveness of all races, which is a good thing when across the board IMO.

re: that second point, they used rerolls vs flat bonuses extensively in SWSE for two very good reasons.
1) it dramatically reduces the chance of having a really poor roll
2) it prevents them busting the 'expected' DC cap for their level. They can't do 'better than their best' but they are much more likely to get close to their best. It also helps prevent masses of small bonuses stacking up so that impossible feats are regularly achieved.

Cheers


----------



## Driddle (Dec 21, 2007)

Love the elf entry info! Pure elfgasm goodness! 



			
				Jedi_Solo said:
			
		

> What if a treant goes nuts and causes trees to attack the village?




Fortunately, you'll be able to predict pretty easily which trees will go nuts in which seasons. I say this from experience -- we've got a big pecan tree over our house...


----------



## DaveMage (Dec 21, 2007)

Clavis said:
			
		

> I hate the new elves.
> 
> I hate their short life spans. I hate the suggestion that elves now make "good clerics". I hate how they've lost their resistances to charms and paralysis. I hate how, given the new height and weight, every Elf would look like a Holocaust survivor.
> 
> ...





Don't worry - 3.5 works just fine AND you can get the books really cheap these days!

It's all good!


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Dec 21, 2007)

Pinotage said:
			
		

> I had a quick scan through it, and this was the first thing that bugged me. And, as others have mentioned on this thread, it's going to be a pain to keep track of.




I think 90% of the time, if you're not in a combat situation, your party members are going to be withing 5 squares of the elf.  So my default assumption will be "you're close enough" unless something specific seems to counterindicate that.


----------



## Anthtriel (Dec 21, 2007)

Kid Charlemagne said:
			
		

> I think 90% of the time, if you're not in a combat situation, your party members are going to be withing 5 squares of the elf.  So my default assumption will be "you're close enough" unless something specific seems to counterindicate that.



By itself it's not much of a problem, I agree. It starts to become a problem if you have a dozen similar auras. Given the insight the designers have shown so far in regards to BAB and ridiculos elven age (which will probably only be widely considered a problem once people see the game work without them), I'm confident they will avoid the pitfall of giving every character lots of small, barely significant auras and boost spells, but we don't know that for sure yet.


----------



## StarFyre (Dec 21, 2007)

*house rules*

I like the longer life span thing since we've changed how the aging works anyways...

I wonder if I will bother house rule the resistance to sleep, etc...

I think not having it kinda makes more sense anyways....same with the detect secret doors.

Sanjay


----------



## KarinsDad (Dec 21, 2007)

Incenjucar said:
			
		

> I think the idea is that the elf is acting like a watch dog or something... and people notice the elf's ears twitch or somesuch....it's a rather odd ability.




Except that it only works for non-elves. Other elves cannot see his ears twitch. Neither can enemies who know about elves.

Except that it only works for those within 5 squares. Allies outside 5 squares, even sharp eyed ones, cannot see the elves ears twitch.

This is the problem with trying to explain or rationalize an illogical ability. There is no explanation that is satisfactory. The ability exists because a designer thought it was cool and for no other reason.


----------



## Anthtriel (Dec 21, 2007)

StarFyre said:
			
		

> I wonder if I will bother house rule the resistance to sleep, etc...
> 
> I think not having it kinda makes more sense anyways....same with the detect secret doors.



Most of these minor boni were artifacts anyway. They don't appear in any other fantasy I'm aware of, and even in D&D fantasy they are usually too minor to ever matter. For my groups, they were usually stuff you would write on your character sheet and then forget about. It's hard to imagine that anyone but a hardcore grognard would be outraged about this change.

For the life expectancy, I can understand how people don't like it, but then I will and already have, in another thread, strongly defended that choice. Simply because I'm convinced that the standard D&D setting doesn't work with 1000 year old elves. At all. Once you look closely at elven communities, the inner logic that makes the setting believable breaks apart.


----------



## Green Knight (Dec 21, 2007)

KarinsDad said:
			
		

> Except that it only works for non-elves. Other elves cannot see his ears twitch.




They don't need to. Their own racial Perception bonus is better. 



> Except that it only works for those within 5 squares. Allies outside 5 squares, even sharp eyed ones, cannot see the elves ears twitch.




Would anyone really be able to notice something like that from 30 or more feet away?


----------



## Zweischneid (Dec 21, 2007)

KarinsDad said:
			
		

> Except that it only works for non-elves. Other elves cannot see his ears twitch. Neither can enemies who know about elves.
> 
> Except that it only works for those within 5 squares. Allies outside 5 squares, even sharp eyed ones, cannot see the elves ears twitch.
> 
> This is the problem with trying to explain or rationalize an illogical ability. There is no explanation that is satisfactory. The ability exists because a designer thought it was cool and for no other reason.





Is it? I think twitchy ears are quite satisfactory. It may not be perfect... true... but than again, it's only a game and hence it doesn't need to be.


----------



## Dausuul (Dec 21, 2007)

Voss said:
			
		

> Because we've already seen 'feat' bonuses.  This is a 'racial' bonus.  Even if their are only 5 distinct types of bonuses in the first books, this sort of thing tends to creep.  And once you're adding +5 or so to your basic bonuses, you're pretty much past the randomization limits of a d20 roll, all the time.
> 
> Its also just annoying to keep track of something a specific as
> if there is an elf
> ...




Seconded (thirded, fourthed...).  I take a very dim view of _any_ situational bonus that just gives you +1 to something.  If it's not an absolutely constant, all-the-time thing like Weapon Focus, it's not worth the trouble of tracking it.

The rest of the race looks very solid, though.  Especially the Elven Accuracy--that's how one _should_ handle minor bonuses.  Instead of a +1 that you have to keep track of all the time, you get to re-roll every so often.  Probably comes out to the same thing statistically, but it's soooooo much less bookkeeping, and a lot more fun to use.

(Oh, put me in the "elves should be immortal" camp.  But I plan to do some re-fluffing of all the races anyhow--what I'm doing to elves is peanuts compared to what I'm doing to dragonborn--so that's not a big deal.)


----------



## Green Knight (Dec 21, 2007)

Clavis said:
			
		

> I hate the suggestion that elves now make "good clerics".




What's wrong with that? 



> I hate how they've lost their resistances to charms and paralysis.




Aren't those things which one avoids with a Will Save? And aren't Will Saves improved by a higher Wisdom score? 



> I hate how, given the new height and weight, every Elf would look like a Holocaust survivor.
> 
> I can't tell from the illustration whether or not they're still the ugly bug-eyed aliens of 3rd edition. Given what I seen so far, I have little hope.




Here're a pair of pics, so you tell me.


----------



## Imaro (Dec 21, 2007)

Okay, read over it and will say this...

Group Awareness...
Don't know about this one.  As others have said it will be a pain to keep track of if this type of bonus if they are widespread, and/or stack.  I also think another aspect that may be problematic is that combats are suppose to be with larger numbers of opponents in bigger areas and encourage more movement.  If this is the case it could easily become a situation where different PC's are steadily moving in and out of the areas of each other's aura like abilities...and that just seems way too problematic to keep track of in a combat that's suppose to be flowing and fast.  

It also is kind of a headache because it depends on another character to be aware and coignant of what each PC is doing, and if he/she is occupied with something else in combat the player may not even remeber to inform the other PC's of this ability.  I can see alot of..."Oh wait my Group Awareness should have gave him a +1 to perception, so he shouldn't have been surprised." type exclamations.  It puts a DM in a bad position because it wasn't the player who missed the rolls fault, it was another PC with the ability who should have announced it before the rolls were made.

I usual only comment on the things I don't like about 4e (doesn't mean I don't like 4e but I see no reason to discuss something if I've already made up my mind I like it.). But I just want to say "THANK YOU WotC.".  Finally elves have the same range of skin tones as human beings.  I always loved this about Earthdawn (where you could actually have an elf that had the skin tones of a black/native american/asian/etc.).  I know it may seem insignificant or trivial to some but I, being a black gamer, am truly happy that the only dark-skinned elves are no longer regulated to the Drow.  Way to go WotC.


----------



## delericho (Dec 21, 2007)

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> In Races and Classes they explain that they have given all the standard races a bit of a boost in power to make it easier to include other races which in 3e might have had a +1 or +2LA penalty.




A good reason for the change, IMO. The power creep doesn't bother me much, if at all. I just thought it was worth noting.



> 2) it prevents them busting the 'expected' DC cap for their level. They can't do 'better than their best' but they are much more likely to get close to their best. It also helps prevent masses of small bonuses stacking up so that impossible feats are regularly achieved.




Interesting point. My preference would still have been for a +2 (ish) bonus, and the elimination of a lot of the _other_ minor bonuses from the system, but this implementation isn't too bad... as long as each character only picks up one or two 'reroll' abilities. YMMV, of course.


----------



## ForumFerret (Dec 21, 2007)

Two minor things: 

Perhaps the ally-perception-bonus only affects non-elves because they've kicked stacking to the curb and you only take the highest bonus to any particular roll? I can see where that would alleviate a lot of 3.5's issues with myriad small bonuses adding up to very significant bonuses.  In this case, as noted above, an Elf's own  +2 to perception would trump the +1 he received from an ally. As this is -always- the case, they just account for that in the racial write up and say that elves are unaffected by this ally bonus. (This is pure conjecture, I can't remember anything at all about stacking in 4e being discussed from official sources.)

On another note, for the 'never cuts living trees;' maybe elves are treesingers, a la Lioal? Some kind of magic that allows Elves to cause trees to spontaneously grow the items they need while still alive? I'd like to see a mention or write up of -some- kind of explanation for it from WotC, but if they don't I'll be instituting something along these lines.  Otherwise there's no way an arboreal city could function.


----------



## Hussar (Dec 21, 2007)

Something to remember about the "squares" bit.  That ties in very nicely with the DDI.  And, if you play on a VTT, you have a map all the time.  Everything will always be in squares.  I'm fairly sure, as well, that you will be able to overlay templates of auras right onto the virtual tabletop, and/or set the die rollers to automatically detect the auras.


----------



## KarinsDad (Dec 21, 2007)

Green Knight said:
			
		

> They don't need to. Their own racial Perception bonus is better.




Who said that the skill bonus is *racial*? Maybe it is (maybe anything acquired due to race is considered a racial bonus). But, the text we have so far doesn't actually state that yet. A general racial section of the book might state that. But at the moment, this is just an assumption that you are making (shy of hard data). It's probably a reasonable assumption, but we just do not know yet.

Not only that, but why would elves develop (i.e. evolve) an ability that helps non-elves? It seems a bit unusual.



			
				Green Knight said:
			
		

> Would anyone really be able to notice something like that from 30 or more feet away?




Semi-blind allies at 25 feet see the ears twitch. Sharp eyed allies at 30 feet do not.

My only point was that this type of explanation does not make sense. It is a bandaid to try to explain why an inexplicable ability exists.

And, it does not explain why an enemy cannot notice the same thing.


Group Awareness: Is it psionic? Does magic stop it? Does it occur when the elf is unconscious? Does it work through cover? Does it need line of effect, or does it work like a spread? Can the allies use it to find the elf if he is nearby and hidden? How about if he is invisible? When is a newly met creature considered an ally and can gain the benefit?

The problem with "aura-like" abilities is that they create game questions. It's fine if the rules handle most of these questions, but if they do not, it just opens up a Pandora's box of posts on the rules forum forever.


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Dec 21, 2007)

Now all we need is a sample Class writeup from the PHB, and we can all start playing   Of course, we'd all be Elf Warlords, but who cares?


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Dec 21, 2007)

One thing to note about using squares versus feet - its  simple way to make the game easily portable within the US and overseas - it eliminates most issues about feet-versus-meters.


----------



## med stud (Dec 21, 2007)

I like it!

*The length and weight seem OK; there are perfectly healthy humans who are 6 ft tall and weigh in at 130 lbs. For another species, I can't see the problem here.

*Only positive ability scores. I don't care one way or another. This is mainly psychological, that players tend to not like low ability scores. As long as the game is balanced with these assumptions it doesn't matter if the ability scores are all -4 or all +4. It will be interesting to see humans. I would be happy if humans finally got a bonus to strength, considering that humans have always been the biggest of the D&D races (except half orcs).

*I like accuracy. Most of the time it could be considered "meh", but things like paladin smites and arrows of slaying make it more useful.

*It's hard to say anything about Wild Step since I don't know how shifting works yet.

*Group awareness might be a bit wonky. But I have heard that Perception works like a defense now so that it's enough if the DM knows if other PCs are close to the elf or not.

*I don't care about the estethics described. It looks good as is and if I want to change it it's the easiest thing in the world.

*I like how the elves are now described as playful and emotional. It rhymes well with both the elves in The Hobbit and how elves are described in the folk tales of my country. It also provides a nice explanation why members of a race of that age generally don't rack up levels as NPCs.

All in all, I like the write up in the sense that I want to create an elf PC now .

EDIT & PS: I don't mind the use of squares much. I have always had to convert from feet to meters anyway so converting from squares to meters won't be any difference. I also think that the only time you need to know exact distances is if you use a battlemat and in that case you might as well use squares.


----------



## Green Knight (Dec 21, 2007)

KarinsDad said:
			
		

> Who said that the skill bonus is *racial*? Maybe it is (maybe anything acquired due to race is considered a racial bonus). But, the text we have so far doesn't actually state that yet. A general racial section of the book might state that. But at the moment, this is just an assumption that you are making (shy of hard data). It's probably a reasonable assumption, but we just do not know yet.






> Skill Bonuses: +2 Nature, *+2 Perception*




All elves gain a +2 Perception. 



> Not only that, but why would elves develop (i.e. evolve) an ability that helps non-elves? It seems a bit unusual.




Just because it's a racial ability, it doesn't mean that it's genetic. Elves are proficient with bows, too. Is that genetic? It may be as simple as the elf making hand signals to his party. 



> Semi-blind allies at 25 feet see the ears twitch. Sharp eyed allies at 30 feet do not.




Now you're just splitting hairs. Do you really expect them to make the rule 10 times more complicated to account for characters with worse eyesight? Since when has D&D ever been an exact simulation of real-life? 



> And, it does not explain why an enemy cannot notice the same thing.




What are they supposed to notice? That the elf noticed them? If they're within 25 feet of the elf, then why in the world would they get a bonus to Perception checks to detect themselves? Nor should it help them against any of the elves allies who may be hidden from the enemy. You think the elf is gonna do anything to give away any hidden allies to an enemy? 



> Group Awareness: Is it psionic? Does magic stop it? Does it occur when the elf is unconscious? Does it work through cover? Does it need line of effect, or does it work like a spread? Can the allies use it to find the elf if he is nearby and hidden? How about if he is invisible? When is a newly met creature considered an ally and can gain the benefit?




We haven't seen the rest of the rules, so complaining about this is pretty silly. 



> It's fine if the rules handle most of these questions, but if they do not, it just opens up a Pandora's box of posts on the rules forum forever.




That's the thing, though. You don't know that they don't, yet here you are complaining about them. How about waiting for the rules to come out before you complain about rules which may or may not be badly explained?


----------



## Fifth Element (Dec 21, 2007)

Incenjucar said:
			
		

> I loved it until I noticed they gave them GENETIC WEAPON PROFICIENCIES again.



I don't know why people assume they're genetic rather than cultural. The idea is that all little elves learn to use these weapons as they're growing up. Nothing genetic about it.

On the other hand, weapon proficiences as a whole are a sloppy system, though I'm not too stuffed about their inclusion. It's a reasonable work-around to what could be a very complex system.


----------



## pawsplay (Dec 21, 2007)

Fifth Element said:
			
		

> I don't know why people assume they're genetic rather than cultural. The idea is that all little elves learn to use these weapons as they're growing up. Nothing genetic about it.




Especially when you consider they stay at home and live with their parents for 85+ years before they take up adventuring. At least in 3e.


----------



## HeinorNY (Dec 21, 2007)

Bagpuss said:
			
		

> Yet they are archers? So what do they make all their bows and arrows out of? I guess bows could be bone, so they respect natural animals less than natural trees? But the arrows, I doubt there is enough dead-fall wood to keep a race of archers stocked?



Elven nature magic that creates wood out of nowhere.

Next concern please?


----------



## pawsplay (Dec 21, 2007)

I don't really like the reduced lifespan. Realistically, a 1000 year lifespan translates to about 300 years anyway, since you can only go about that long before something most likely kills you, but the idea that there might be a 1000 year old Elf King is kind of appealing.

I guess there still could be; maybe 30th level characters can become quasi-immortal kings.


----------



## Reynard (Dec 21, 2007)

Kid Charlemagne said:
			
		

> One thing to note about using squares versus feet - its  simple way to make the game easily portable within the US and overseas - it eliminates most issues about feet-versus-meters.




The biggest advantage I see is that it actually makes it easier to make locations and set-pieces "realistic" and provide some kind of flexibility in relationship to layout.  Have a good old fashioned bar brawl in mind?  Each square = 2 feet ish.  Want a battle in a massive cavern?  Each square is more like 10 feet.  As long as everything is measured in squares, it'll work.  Now, if they turn around and measure spell or weapon ranges in five-foot increments, frex, problems will develop.


----------



## Aloïsius (Dec 21, 2007)

Stop saying they are anorexiac. In 3e every character suffered from obesity  Remember that in a fantasy setting, most people are not going to work in car, don't eat pizza while watching TV and don't drink more coke than water. Those are elves, not humans.


There is a strange little thing in the fluff : every godess is refered as god rather than godess. Does that means they will take the extrem opposite road to 3e, when gender instability was rampant ?


----------



## med stud (Dec 21, 2007)

Aloïsius said:
			
		

> Stop saying they are anorexiac. In 3e every character suffered from obesity  Remember that in a fantasy setting, most people are not going to work in car, don't eat pizza while watching TV and don't drink more coke than water. Those are elves, not humans.




This is pretty interesting really; in many Western countries, more people are now obese and overweight than having a healthy weight. This sometimes make people getting misconceptions on how much a healthy human being should weigh.


----------



## Festivus (Dec 21, 2007)

Kintara said:
			
		

> "Shifting" sounds like what you do when you take five-foot steps.




It's a lot nicer name for it at any rate.


----------



## Kwalish Kid (Dec 21, 2007)

Obscure said:
			
		

> This version of the elf would easily have a +1 LA in 3.5e, if not +2. I guess this is healthy power creep?



In _Races & Classes_, this is exactly what they said they would do.


----------



## Zweischneid (Dec 21, 2007)

med stud said:
			
		

> This is pretty interesting really; in many Western countries, more people are now obese and overweight than having a healthy weight. This sometimes make people getting misconceptions on how much a healthy human being should weigh.




True... but a long-term nutrition shortage the type you'd see in the middle-ages stunts growth, not the height/weight relation. So if food is scarce in elven-country, they should be shorter, not necessarily so much thinner.

Also, there's still the majority of people living in non-western countries. They are not THAT thin, unless they suffer a more acute famine.

Also note that they've given you the _averag_e.. skinny elven maids are goin to weight even less.


----------



## Kwalish Kid (Dec 21, 2007)

Pygon said:
			
		

> Mmm, that's crunchy.
> 
> I think after waiting this long for something substantial, I'm failing to see what I do or don't like about the elf at this point.



Indeed, it should be difficult, given how the design team has said that the rules depend a lot on each other. Seeing this out of context makes it hard to judge.


----------



## mhensley (Dec 21, 2007)

Rechan said:
			
		

> I wonder if this is the "Friday thing that will blow people away" that The Rouse was talking about.




It's nice, but it certainly doesn't blow me away.  Nothing really unexpected here IMO.


----------



## Doug McCrae (Dec 21, 2007)

Incenjucar said:
			
		

> They are also horribly anorexic.



This is the noughties. Thin is in.

As a counterbalance it would be great to see a PC race that's really fat. I mean frickin huge. 500lbs and none of it is muscle. Wonder how many people would want to play em.


----------



## Kwalish Kid (Dec 21, 2007)

Sitara said:
			
		

> Oh and for the record I dislike the aura type ability; it is another way for wotc to boost mini sales. A rather cheap way, and does not make much sense in game.



The aura ability is a way for players to have characters that, through the rules alone if nothing else, depend upon and support each other.

This is a game that is for advanced players and beginning players. That the rules themselves provide a reason for characters to be together is a good thing. This will help player bonding in the new edition.

It's a small bonus and thus it is probably only useful at low levels. This means that it really only occupies the attention of the game at the low levels and when forgotten at higher levels it won't matter very much.

It is, however, a mechanism to make sure that beginning players think about the other characters in the group. That's a good thing.


----------



## Drammattex (Dec 21, 2007)

Very cool!

I love the sample characters. The sample character stats in 3e were rarely useful to me, and I never read them. These little character sketches give some cool character ideas, and actually seem to encourage role-play and story for your character. Cool!

*Suggestion:* Rewrite the third one. It's vanilla boring.


----------



## HeinorNY (Dec 21, 2007)

KarinsDad said:
			
		

> Group Awareness: Is it psionic? Does magic stop it? Does it occur when the elf is unconscious? Does it work through cover? Does it need line of effect, or does it work like a spread? Can the allies use it to find the elf if he is nearby and hidden? How about if he is invisible? When is a newly met creature considered an ally and can gain the benefit?



But it's so simple!
Imagine yourself walking in the woods with a watch dog. Suddenly your dog raises his ears, or stares to some direction, or becomes impatient in some place. That's a +1 bonus to your perception.


----------



## med stud (Dec 21, 2007)

Zweischneid said:
			
		

> True... but a long-term nutrition shortage the type you'd see in the middle-ages stunts growth, not the height/weight relation. So if food is scarce in elven-country, they should be shorter, not necessarily so much thinner.
> 
> Also, there's still the majority of people living in non-western countries. They are not THAT thin, unless they suffer a more acute famine.
> 
> Also note that they've given you the _averag_e.. skinny elven maids are goin to weight even less.




Yes but in this case I'm sure it's explained by genetics (or their fantasy equivalent). A healthy elf is that thin, it's just the way it is. There are human races that are on average thinner than other humans (innuits and somalians for example) so that a different species are thin don't bother me at all.


----------



## Kwalish Kid (Dec 21, 2007)

Zweischneid said:
			
		

> I can see the rational behind all this. But since it so drastically reduces the chance of failure, the question arises if it is economical to still roll dice at all. Might just do..
> 
> Elven Accuracy + Perception: Once per encounter, by using this ability one of you're arrow hits!
> 
> ...



Because one of their design goals was to make certain races attached to certain roles and activities? Elves are often thought of as archers and this rule reinforces that image.


----------



## Aloïsius (Dec 21, 2007)

Zweischneid said:
			
		

> True... but a long-term nutrition shortage the type you'd see in the middle-ages stunts growth, not the height/weight relation. So if food is scarce in elven-country, they should be shorter, not necessarily so much thinner.
> 
> Also, there's still the majority of people living in non-western countries. They are not THAT thin, unless they suffer a more acute famine.
> 
> Also note that they've given you the _averag_e.. skinny elven maids are goin to weight even less.



Last year summer, I weighted 63 kg for 1.77 meter. That's 138 pounds for 5,88 feet. And I was *not* anorexiac at all nor in bad health. So an "alien" race weighting 130 pounds for 6 feet ? I don't have any problems with that, especialy if they have hollow bones or this kind of stuff.


----------



## mhensley (Dec 21, 2007)

Pssthpok said:
			
		

> 6' tall, 130 pounds?! Anorexia nervosa should also be a 'racial power'.




Just like I've always thought, all elves are really girls-



> The average height for a female model is said to be 5’8” while the average weight is supposed to be between 108-125 lbs.




http://www.blurtit.com/q838415.html


----------



## delericho (Dec 21, 2007)

Kwalish Kid said:
			
		

> Because one of their design goals was to make certain races attached to certain roles and activities? Elves are often thought of as archers and this rule reinforces that image.




Actually, that elf write-up says they get to reroll one attack - it doesn't specify that it has to be with a bow, or anything else. So, it doesn't really emphasise their role at all.


----------



## Dausuul (Dec 21, 2007)

Green Knight said:
			
		

> That's the thing, though. You don't know that they don't, yet here you are complaining about them. How about waiting for the rules to come out before you complain about rules which may or may not be badly explained?




I never understand this argument.  If the rules come out and they _are_ badly explained, what the heck are we supposed to do about it?  If there actually is a problem, and people complain about it now, it might get fixed.  If we wait to be sure the problem exists, by the time we know the answer it'll be too late to change it.


----------



## HeinorNY (Dec 21, 2007)

Pssthpok said:
			
		

> 6' tall, 130 pounds?! Anorexia nervosa should also be a 'racial power'.



I think they are fine.

_Removed picture of Victoria's Secret models that we don't really need on the site. ~ Piratecat_

Anorexia Nervosa: Once per encounter you dazzle 1d10 opponents for 1d4 rounds because you are so DAMN HOT!!!!


----------



## mhensley (Dec 21, 2007)

ainatan said:
			
		

> But it's so simple!
> Imagine yourself walking in the woods with a watch dog. Suddenly your dog raises his ears, or stares to some direction, or becomes impatient in some place. That's a +1 bonus to your perception.




Nah, when you travel with an elf you get so tired of her gloating about her senses being better than yours that you concentrate harder in an effort to show her up.


----------



## catsclaw227 (Dec 21, 2007)

OK -- I haven't gotten past the top of page four of the thread yet, so if this has been addressed, kindly ignore.

It appears that people are interchanging the term power and feat.  Elven Accuracy is a power, not a feat, and maybe racial powers are intended to be slightly weaker than feats acquired through level gain.

As for the perception bonus to allies in a 5 square radius, well, I don't consider 5% statistically insignificant because a "missed by one!" comes up in every session we play. Also, I will likely houserule this to work in non-combat situations as every ally in the scene gains the bonus.  If Joe the fighter is in another room talking to the captian, and the rest of the party is listening to the dukes advisor in the study, then Joe won't get the bonus.

So far, I like the class.  The 7sq movement gives (from what we can tell) a 1sq move bonus to the race, making tactical movement more interesting.  That's something people aren't really talking about yet.

So far, so good.


----------



## Clavis (Dec 21, 2007)

ainatan said:
			
		

> I think their are fine.
> 
> _Removed picture of Victoria's Secret models that we don't really need on the site. ~ Piratecat_
> 
> Anorexia Nervosa: Once per encounter you dazzle 1d10 opponents for 1d4 rounds because you are so DAMN HOT!!!!




Yeah, ribs sticking out so you look like a corpse, and maintaining body weight by cocaine and amphetamines (just like real models do). Real sexy. It's even sexier when they have spontaneous nosebleeds and wild mood swings.

I never cease to be amazed at at how the West has allowed its standard of female beauty to be dictated by fashion-industry men who don't even like to have sex with women.

Decadence, they name is Western culture.


----------



## BadMojo (Dec 21, 2007)

Clavis said:
			
		

> I hate the new elves.
> 
> I hate their short life spans. I hate the suggestion that elves now make "good clerics". I hate how they've lost their resistances to charms and paralysis. I hate how, given the new height and weight, every Elf would look like a Holocaust survivor.




These are actually the things I like the most.  The life span thing was always weird from a PC perspective.  Trying to explain why every single elf character apparently wasted the first 100 years of their development and ended up as the equivalent of a 17 year old human at age 120.

The taller elves are a nice nod to Tolkien and I like how they're now very focused on the woodsy forest elf concept.

The charm and paralysis resistance never made much sense to me (it was just one of those things that always was) and it seems more the realm of the Magic Flavored Eladrin than the Pine Cone Flavored Elves.

Maybe their bones are lighter than humans to make for stealthy woodland romping?  Hollow bird bones?

The cleric thing does mystify me a bit, but I'm not able to access Gleemax right now so maybe I'm missing something.


----------



## BadMojo (Dec 21, 2007)

Clavis said:
			
		

> Yeah, ribs sticking out so you look like a corpse...




OK...this whole thing is an odd tangent.  You do know that nothing good can come of this, right?  It would suck to have a thread with some good, solid rules info derailred and locked because of some werid fashion industry rant.

Elves don't do runway.


----------



## HeinorNY (Dec 21, 2007)

Clavis said:
			
		

> Yeah, ribs sticking out so you look like a corpse, and maintaining body weight by cocaine and amphetamines (just like real models do). Real sexy. It's even sexier when they have spontaneous nosebleeds and wild mood swings.
> 
> I never cease to be amazed at at how the West has allowed its standard of female beauty to be dictated by fashion-industry men who don't even like to have sex with women.
> 
> Decadence, they name is Western culture.



Thanks for the +1 aura bonus to my Will Defense, but I missed by 27. 

But the point of my post was not to show hot chicks, but so everyone could visualize how elves in 4E look like. It's not so bad.


----------



## Kwalish Kid (Dec 21, 2007)

If there are DMs that can't arbitrarily change the lifespan of an elf to suit their campaigns, I weep for their players.


----------



## Reynard (Dec 21, 2007)

Kwalish Kid said:
			
		

> If there are DMs that can't arbitrarily change the lifespan of an elf to suit their campaigns, I weep for their players.




I agree.  However, why the change at all?  Of course, I have the same question about so many of the flavour/fluff changes for 4E that the real question for me has become "Why change at all" and the answer is "Don't."


----------



## Zweischneid (Dec 21, 2007)

ainatan said:
			
		

> I think they are fine.
> 
> _Removed picture of Victoria's Secret models that we don't really need on the site. ~ Piratecat_
> 
> Anorexia Nervosa: Once per encounter you dazzle 1d10 opponents for 1d4 rounds because you are so DAMN HOT!!!!




Well, again 6 ft tall at 130 pounds is going to be the elven_ average_.

So consequently the Kate Moss and Keira Knightly of Elfland is going to weight in at no more than 60 to 70 pound.


----------



## Dausuul (Dec 21, 2007)

ainatan said:
			
		

> I think they are fine.
> 
> Anorexia Nervosa: Once per encounter you dazzle 1d10 opponents for 1d4 rounds because you are so DAMN HOT!!!!




Eh.  I don't think I've ever seen a super-skinny model whose looks could not have been improved by a few burgers and some weight training.  The elven ladies are pretty, but dwarven women are where it's at in 4E.


----------



## FireLance (Dec 21, 2007)

For what it's worth, I like the shorter elf lifespan. I like the idea of a long-lived race that the PCs can look up to discover the truth about past events, but I don't think they should be as common or as easy to find as the elves are implied to be in most D&D settings. 

The new mechanics do present a tighter focus for the elf. The wild step ability emphasizes his speed, and the elven accuracy ability emphasizes, well, elven accuracy. What I find quite interesting is that most of the new powers tend to be "active" in that the player decides when to use them: when shifting into difficult terrain, for example, or when re-rolling an attack that the player thinks is going to miss. 

On the other hand, the abilities that have disappeared - immunity to sleep, saving throw bonus against enchantment effects, and ability to detect secret doors - are mostly "passive" abilities in that the player doesn't actively decide to use them (beyond reminding the DM that he has them). In most cases, the burden is on the DM to remember to give the PC the benefit of the abilities when they become applicable. In a way, I think this represents a shifting of the responsibility of remembering what the PC can do from the DM to the player. It might not make the game less complicated for the player, but it certainly would make the DM's life easier.

As for the group awareness ability, I'm guessing that it was thrown in there to help foster group cohesiveness because every once in a while, one player will be thankful that another player has an elf PC. I wouldn't be surprised if we see more similar "selfless" abilities cropping up in future. As for slowing down game play, perhaps the best thing to do would be to just make a normal Perception roll first. Whether the PC is within 5 squares of an elf ally is only going to matter 5% of the time.


----------



## Reynard (Dec 21, 2007)

Clavis said:
			
		

> I never cease to be amazed at at how the West has allowed its standard of female beauty to be dictated by fashion-industry men who don't even like to have sex with women.




Weight has little to do with standards of beauty across time and cultures, actually.  The more important factor is chest-waist-hip ratio.  Did you know that Kate Moss and Marylin Monroe shared the same ratio, and that aboriginal tribesmen will pick the same ratio as Westerners?

/tangent


----------



## Lackhand (Dec 21, 2007)

Reynard said:
			
		

> I agree.  However, why the change at all?  Of course, I have the same question about so many of the flavour/fluff changes for 4E that the real question for me has become "Why change at all" and the answer is "Don't."




You should change back if you like the old way more (assuming that the new system entices enough to tempt you!), but it helps me justify to myself why there are level 1 elves.

Or maybe more like why there are elves with a Knowledge(History) check of under +30.

But if they new system doesn't appeal, of course, you shouldn't switch!


----------



## Imaro (Dec 21, 2007)

Kwalish Kid said:
			
		

> If there are DMs that can't arbitrarily change the lifespan of an elf to suit their campaigns, I weep for their players.




I just want to say, this model of thiking irritates me to no end.  How do you judge the merits of a game if the answer is always "just change it.".  By this logic there's no reason to pick any one specific roleplaying game over another.  Exalted is D&D...just change it to a d20 system, remove charms and replace them with feats and play in Forgotten Realms instead of creation???  

The elven age thing is perhaps a simple case, but  I've seen this argument toted out every time someone doesn't like something and it really doesn't address any issue at all.  Part of the money I spend on the core rulebooks goes towards fluff and if I don't think it's good fluff then just change it doesn't really focus on why it's not good fluff or why it was included/changed in the first place.

NOTE: I  personally have no problem with the new age  of elves, but I see this in every post where someone doesn't like something.  I bought Exalted because I liked the fluff and a game that doesn't capture me with it's fluff is probably not going to be bought by me.


----------



## ThirdWizard (Dec 21, 2007)

Re: Anorexic elves.

Legolas walked on snow.


----------



## Aristotle (Dec 21, 2007)

I like it...

As for the group "aura". I see it as the scene where the elf stops in his tracks and starts to scan the horizon, and everyone nearby does the same hoping to see what has the elf so wound up. That's how I'm going to play it. You only get the perception buff if the elf is using perception.

As for movement in squares. They will almost certainly be 5 foot squares, so just convert. It's simple math. The honest truth is, whether minis or basic counters are being used, battle mats and tiles (and similar products) are being used really heavily these days and folks really like having a visual element that allows everyone in the group to understand where they are in relation to their environment. I usually use a mat. I run without one sometimes. When I go without one I'll multiply by 5. Not an issue.

I can't judge the scaling level of powers and feats until I see a bunch more. It stands to reason that some will be viewed as inferior, even if they are supposed to be balanaced. I also don't know that a freebie power that you start play with should be as powerful as those you purchase. A +2 to one attack roll, once per encounter, doesn't seem huge by 3E standards but I'll hold judgment until I see the combat mechanic and know for sure how big or small a deal an extra +2 is under 4E rules.


----------



## Lackhand (Dec 21, 2007)

Imaro said:
			
		

> I just want to say, this model of thiking irritates me to no end.  How do you judge the merits of a game if the answer is always "just change it.".  By this logic there's no reason to pick any one specific roleplaying game over another.  Exalted is D&D...just change it to a d20 system, remove charms and replace them with feats and play in Forgotten Realms instead of creation???
> 
> The elven age thing is perhaps a simple case, but  I've seen this argument toted out every time someone doesn't like something and it really doesn't address any issue at all.  Part of the money I spend on the core rulebooks goes towards fluff and if I don't think it's good fluff then just change it doesn't really focus on why it's not good fluff or why it was included/changed in the first place.
> 
> NOTE: I  personally have no problem with the new age  of elves, but I see this in every post where someone doesn't like something.  I bought Exalted because I liked the fluff and a game that doesn't capture me with it's fluff is probably not going to be bought by me.




A good point.

But there's a continuum of annoyance, and I think what the comments you're complaining about represent are a different level of personal importance or investment.

I know that I see a lot of comments on the boards and think -- but hopefully, not always reply -- "just change it". This is because the change seems trivial and I like the new way more, or have made similar changes in the past with no problems.

Elf age seems a perfect example of this: age informs exactly 0 mechanics, at least currently, and the fluff here still seems to be "long lived", which means you're not going to change anything in ways you wouldn't have to cover anyway.

Gnome exclusion seems like another one, from my POV, because I can always just use halfling stats with exactly as much mechanical precision as we've had in previous editions. However, to gnome partisans (worst. Polearm. Ever.), it's a much bigger deal.

I'm sorry that I don't understand some of the things that bother you, Internet. Still friends?


----------



## Black_Swan (Dec 21, 2007)

Doug McCrae said:
			
		

> As a counterbalance it would be great to see a PC race that's really fat. I mean frickin huge. 500lbs and none of it is muscle. Wonder how many people would want to play em.




I always wanted to play a huge fat necromancer that had his undead minions do everything for him.

As for the elf entry I think I like it.

I'm not sure, I'll have to see more.


----------



## Reynard (Dec 21, 2007)

Lackhand said:
			
		

> You should change back if you like the old way more (assuming that the new system entices enough to tempt you!), but it helps me justify to myself why there are level 1 elves.
> 
> Or maybe more like why there are elves with a Knowledge(History) check of under +30.
> 
> But if they new system doesn't appeal, of course, you shouldn't switch!




Elves in particular are a Tolkienesque element and they don't really make much sense out of the context of Middle Earth, or at least a setting that emulates Middle Earth in many ways.  That said, there are some elements of 4E that seem they will actually make doing Tolkienesque fantasy easier than other editions -- so long as certain elements can be easily excised from either the system or the flavour, as applicable.


----------



## Lackhand (Dec 21, 2007)

*Reynard*: No argument here. I like having the *statistics* for elves available outside of Middle Earth, though: something human-like but alien, a magical long-lived forest-bonded fey race. 

Given my username: The Sithi from the _Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn_ series, for instance.

Elves qua Elves make the most sense in Middle Earth, but they're often pretty easy and worth it to transplant.


----------



## Fifth Element (Dec 21, 2007)

Zweischneid said:
			
		

> True... but a long-term nutrition shortage the type you'd see in the middle-ages stunts growth, not the height/weight relation. So if food is scarce in elven-country, they should be shorter, not necessarily so much thinner.



If food is scarce in elven-country, they get their clerics to create some food magically...

Elves are clearly intended to simply be slimmer than humans.


----------



## Intrope (Dec 21, 2007)

Aloïsius said:
			
		

> Last year summer, I weighted 63 kg for 1.77 meter. That's 138 pounds for 5,88 feet. And I was *not* anorexiac at all nor in bad health. So an "alien" race weighting 130 pounds for 6 feet ? I don't have any problems with that, especialy if they have hollow bones or this kind of stuff.



 Heh: when I went to college (too many years ago) I was 6' 2" & 150 lb. Now, I wasn't very muscular, but I was hardly anorexic!


----------



## Traycor (Dec 21, 2007)

Voss said:
			
		

> Its also just annoying to keep track of something a specific as
> if there is an elf
> and I am not an elf
> and I am with 5 'squares' of said elf
> ...



I like auras, but I agree that aura that grant a "+ bonus" are very annoying to keep track of and will usually be forgotten. I'm all for auras if they give an special ability or power or whatnot, but auras that give numbers should die a slow and painful death.

Side Note: I've *very* happy with the elf writeup!!!!


----------



## GVDammerung (Dec 21, 2007)

Stepping back from the entry and rereading it while imagining I had never read a description of an "elf" before, as if I was new to the game (admitedly not a sure task), the entry leaves me feeling "meh" as in "what's so great about elves?"  There is no pizzaz (sp) to this entry; it just lays there, specially if one imagines having no prior experience with elves.  It is frankly dully written and presented IMO.  Competent but hardly eye catching.  Maybe they are saving the coolness for the tiefling or the dragonborn entries?


----------



## The_Gneech (Dec 21, 2007)

This looks pretty good, overall.  Nice to have a preview that rubs me the right way for a change.

The short-lived elves idea is simplicity itself to ignore ... I've been ignoring the fact that D&D elves are too short and not immortal since 1979 and I can easily continue that. At least they're less too short now. 

+2 Wis isn't something I would have chosen for elves, but I can see where they're coming from with it. (I would have chosen Cha, since elves tend to be depicted as striking and generally attractive.) If you're going to build a race around the idea of keen senses, Wis is where it's at.

re: the Group Awareness, I sort of read that as a kind of passive "always on" Aid Another for Perception checks -- e.g., the elf says, "Did you hear something?" and the human says, "Yes, by thunder! A cry of help from over the hill!" (Or possibly "Look out behind you!" to help someone avoid surprise.) I would probably go with the _SWSE_ "line of sight" model rather than "within 5 squares" tho, just to make life easier.

Overall, this kind of thing is much more in line with what I've been hoping for from 4E.

-The Gneech


----------



## Dausuul (Dec 21, 2007)

Aristotle said:
			
		

> As for movement in squares. They will almost certainly be 5 foot squares, so just convert. It's simple math. The honest truth is, whether minis or basic counters are being used, battle mats and tiles (and similar products) are being used really heavily these days and folks really like having a visual element that allows everyone in the group to understand where they are in relation to their environment. I usually use a mat. I run without one sometimes. When I go without one I'll multiply by 5. Not an issue.




I like having the "basic measurement" in squares; when you're in mid-combat and already swimming in numbers, it's a nuisance to have to divide all distances by 5.  However, I'd like it if they also put the measurement in feet afterward in parenthesis, to make life just a bit easier when the characters aren't in combat mode, or for non-mini-using players.



			
				Aristotle said:
			
		

> I can't judge the scaling level of powers and feats until I see a bunch more. It stands to reason that some will be viewed as inferior, even if they are supposed to be balanaced. I also don't know that a freebie power that you start play with should be as powerful as those you purchase. A +2 to one attack roll, once per encounter, doesn't seem huge by 3E standards but I'll hold judgment until I see the combat mechanic and know for sure how big or small a deal an extra +2 is under 4E rules.




Well, it's still the d20 system.  +2 is still 10%, so you have a rough idea of the impact.  The real question is how this stacks up to other feats.  If 3E Weapon Focus is the standard power level for feats, this seems like a good match.  If 3E Shock Trooper is the standard, not so much.


----------



## HeinorNY (Dec 21, 2007)

Traycor said:
			
		

> I like auras, but I agree that aura that grant a "+ bonus" are very annoying to keep track of and will usually be forgotten. I'm all for auras if they give an special ability or power or whatnot, but auras that give numbers should die a slow and painful death.



Considering the following:
-Characters don't make Perception checks every round,
-Characters will make most Perception checks once, before combat starts,
-Characters will be most of the time close enough to their elven pals when they make that Perception check.

There is not really any need to keep track of things. The bonus will be there most of the time anyway, just note it down and be happy to have an elven ally.


----------



## Remathilis (Dec 21, 2007)

I'm generally liking it.

The elf-aura shouldn't be that hard after years of D&D...

DM: Everyone, perception checks!
PC1: *rolls* ah, that's a 20.
PC2: Everyone remember there perception bonus?
Pc1: Oh, sorry. 21.
DM: You see...

We've been doing that since_ Bless _in 2e...


----------



## WayneLigon (Dec 21, 2007)

KarinsDad said:
			
		

> Group Awareness: Is it psionic? Does magic stop it? Does it occur when the elf is unconscious? Does it work through cover? Does it need line of effect, or does it work like a spread? Can the allies use it to find the elf if he is nearby and hidden? How about if he is invisible? When is a newly met creature considered an ally and can gain the benefit?
> 
> The problem with "aura-like" abilities is that they create game questions. It's fine if the rules handle most of these questions, but if they do not, it just opens up a Pandora's box of posts on the rules forum forever.




Or you could just use common sense and stop splitting every hair you come across, and virtually no rules questions come up. The only question of those that comes close to being legit it 'Does it work through cover?', and my initial reaction would be 'no'. It depends on what the write-up for 'aura powers' says.


----------



## Voss (Dec 21, 2007)

I can see clearly now the elf has come
I can see all obstacles in my way
Oh, I don' need a lucky rabbit's foot no,
A lucky elf ear will chase my cataracts away!


----------



## kennew142 (Dec 21, 2007)

ptolemy18 said:
			
		

> I like the entry. It reads well, and I like what they're doing with elves. Too bad they're using "squares" as the measure for movement, rather than "feet" (go simulation-style RPGs! w00t!), but I suppose it'll be easier to parse on the game table.




The nice thing about squares is that they have no units attached to them. In the USA, we know that each square is 5 ft. In other countries they know that each square is 1.5 m. This way, players anywhere in the world can attach their own units, without having to learn a new system of measurement just to play the game.


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (Dec 21, 2007)

Zweischneid said:
			
		

> Is it? I think twitchy ears are quite satisfactory. It may not be perfect... true... but than again, it's only a game and hence it doesn't need to be.




(Legolas' ears twitch)
Aragorn:  "What is it, Legolas?  Did Gimli fall down a well?"

Sorry, that just popped into my head.

Brad


----------



## FickleGM (Dec 21, 2007)

WayneLigon said:
			
		

> Or you could just use common sense and stop splitting every hair you come across, and virtually no rules questions come up. The only question of those that comes close to being legit it 'Does it work through cover?', and my initial reaction would be 'no'. It depends on what the write-up for 'aura powers' says.



 Wow, thanks for clearing that up.  Would you now be so kind as to give us a complete list of "legit" questions?  I would hate to offend you with my curiosity...

Seriously, lighten up...please.  I agree that some of those questions might have been silly (to me), but even I was intrigued by a couple.


----------



## HeinorNY (Dec 21, 2007)

Voss said:
			
		

> I can see clearly now the elf has come
> I can see all obstacles in my way
> Oh, I don' need a lucky rabbit's foot no,
> A lucky elf ear will chase my cataracts away!



You don't need to see to make Perceptions checks
Humans have Perception, so do oozes, golems and undead
It's an abstract mechanic,
Can't be simpler than that.


----------



## Rechan (Dec 21, 2007)

Given their boost in Wisdom, I'm thinking an Elven Paladin could actually kick arse, given that we know Wisdom effects your smite damage.


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (Dec 21, 2007)

Dr. Strangemonkey said:
			
		

> Well, they could make laminate bows out of a bunch of composite pieces.  Or, as someone else has said, trusty bone and sinew composites.




We joked about having composite bows made of a mix of adamantine and mithril (the mithril being the slightly springier bit), once you got into the +10 or so Str bonus area.

Brad


----------



## Piratecat (Dec 21, 2007)

Clavis said:
			
		

> I never cease to be amazed at at how the West has allowed its standard of female beauty to be dictated by fashion-industry men who don't even like to have sex with women.



Let's not sidetrack the thread, please.


----------



## Thornir Alekeg (Dec 21, 2007)

I am now thinking I need to create an adventure to investigate why the lifespan of elves has shorted from 2000 years to 200 over the past couple of decades.  Clearly this is not a natural occurance and something needs to be done to reverse this terrifying trend.

Actually I like the shorter life span, it makes a huge difference in the homebrew setting I have been working on for a while.  The longer life span of the elves made it difficult to have certain world-shaking events of the past be forgotten without making it a really, really long time ago.  

Overall I'm liking the elf write up, but I will join with others in some concern about the "aura" bonuses we have seen a few of and the possible complexity of keeping track of them all.


----------



## Will (Dec 21, 2007)

I figure an elf interested in long life would go for one of those options to extend life:

Lich, for fun and profit!
20th level druid (in 3.5e, at least)
Bargain for a celestial template (or similar).

Really, lots of ways to be immortal if you are committed to it.

Personally, I like the idea that some elves pursue/refine their immortality, while most simply pass on.


----------



## BadMojo (Dec 21, 2007)

On the "don't cut down living trees" front.  This is just my own thoughts on the matter, but I'd think a valuable item (like a finely crafted bow) would be passed down through generations in a tribal society like the Wood Elves have (or at least did in Forgotten Realms).

This is made more convenient by shorter life spans and more passing down of the ancestral weapon.  The PoL setting should also mean that fewer folks die of old age, and the Elves always seem to be squabbling with orcs, goblins, etc. anway. 

Sort of related, I hope 4E incorporates a rule like the Ancestral Weapon feat that lets you improve an heirloom weapon instead of just tossing it out when you get that shiny new +1 sword.


----------



## LEHaskell (Dec 21, 2007)

Thornir Alekeg said:
			
		

> I am now thinking I need to create an adventure to investigate why the lifespan of elves has shorted from 2000 years to 200 over the past couple of decades.  Clearly this is not a natural occurance and something needs to be done to reverse this terrifying trend.




Ennui.


----------



## Rechan (Dec 21, 2007)

I personally like the aura. I don't know what people have an issue with - most parties aren't going to be spread out beyond 25 feet, especially in situations where they know they'll need to make a perception roll. 

Besides, the fluff of such an ability makes sense to me. The elf hears something and goes "SHht. Everyone quiet. ... Do you hear that?" Or you know, raises his hand so everyone is quiet, letting them know to LISTEN HARD.

Also, in one of the playtests, it was mentioned that the Eladrin used a half-elf friend's diplomacy bonus. I'm willing to bet that Half-Elves give a +1 bonus to Diplomacy to anyone within 5 squares. Yeah?


----------



## Thornir Alekeg (Dec 21, 2007)

Regarding the cutting of living trees, if they don't make any changes there, I would just make a slight  modification on my own to "They never cut _healthy, growing_ trees."  To preserve the health of their forests, they cut down unhealthy or dying trees and harvest the good wood from them for use in various crafts such as bowmaking.


----------



## Kunimatyu (Dec 21, 2007)

While I'm not an elf fan, most of this is good.

Complaints:
The +1 Perception is terrible -- if an ability like this has to be put in, a once/day ability that allows Initiative rerolls for the elf's allies would be a far better way to go.

The "+2 to reroll" feat -- Clunky and not a good idea; it would make a lot more sense as this:

Benefit: When you use the elven accuracy power, *you may keep the higher of your two rolls.*


----------



## delericho (Dec 21, 2007)

Thornir Alekeg said:
			
		

> Regarding the cutting of living trees, if they don't make any changes there, I would just make a slight  modification on my own to "They never cut _healthy, growing_ trees."




Or just drop the word 'never' and go with something less absolute. It's not exactly a huge issue, really.


----------



## Storminator (Dec 21, 2007)

Dausuul said:
			
		

> I never understand this argument.  If the rules come out and they _are_ badly explained, what the heck are we supposed to do about it?  If there actually is a problem, and people complain about it now, it might get fixed.  If we wait to be sure the problem exists, by the time we know the answer it'll be too late to change it.




But they already have hundreds of people reading the rules, in context, and if it's confusing one of them (or all of them...) will pipe up.

Having random people on message boards do the same adds nothing.

PS


----------



## Bishmon (Dec 21, 2007)

Kunimatyu said:
			
		

> The "+2 to reroll" feat -- Clunky and not a good idea; it would make a lot more sense as this:
> 
> Benefit: When you use the elven accuracy power, *you may keep the higher of your two rolls.*



Wouldn't that essentially have no effect? Say I roll a 5 and miss so I decide to use my elven accuracy to make a reroll. The second roll I roll a 3 and miss again.

With that feat, I'd get to keep my first roll, the 5. But that roll missed, which is why I used my elven accuracy in the first place.


----------



## Emirikol (Dec 21, 2007)

tsadkiel said:
			
		

> "Elfth's mature at about the same rate as humans but show few effects of age past adulthood."  This makes me happy.





Thank god.  The  60 year old infant mental retardation thing always bugged me.  I think everybody'd house ruled this before anyways 

jh


----------



## Novem5er (Dec 21, 2007)

*Rangers?*

I read through this whole thread and I didn't see anyone mention "Rangers".

Forgive me if I skipped over someone.

What I mean is that it seems that Elves are geared toward being rangers. Their three favorite classes are Rangers, Rogues, and Clerics.

Fluff wise, they are all about stalking through the forests. Mechanically wise, they get bonus proficiency of bows, bonus to Nature and Perception checks, and a bonus to Wisdom (which increases those skill checks).

What other choices do we have for an Archery badass right now? Races & Classes indicate that fighters will choose between sword/board and 2H weapons. We know Rogues have used bows in play tests, but have we seen any Archery feats or mention of Archery powers? Somehow, the idea of an Elven Cleric doesn't conjure images of bows & arrows.

The Elf SCREAMS ranger. Yet, as far as we know, Ranger is not included in the first PHB. Doesn't anyone else find this odd? The core concept of what an Elf is (as being presented) is not going to be playable for an entire year?


----------



## Merlin the Tuna (Dec 21, 2007)

Black_Swan said:
			
		

> I always wanted to play a huge fat necromancer that had his undead minions do everything for him.



Wheee.


----------



## outsider (Dec 21, 2007)

Novem5er said:
			
		

> The Elf SCREAMS ranger. Yet, as far as we know, Ranger is not included in the first PHB. Doesn't anyone else find this odd? The core concept of what an Elf is (as being presented) is not going to be playable for an entire year?




I haven't really seen anything that indicates that rangers aren't in the PHB.  The elf description is one of many things that cements my belief that rangers will be there.


----------



## Doug McCrae (Dec 21, 2007)

Black_Swan said:
			
		

> I always wanted to play a huge fat necromancer that had his undead minions do everything for him.


----------



## Doug McCrae (Dec 21, 2007)

Novem5er said:
			
		

> Yet, as far as we know, Ranger is not included in the first PHB.



What's your evidence for that? From what I've seen, everyone's been assuming the ranger will be in PHB1.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Dec 21, 2007)

Novem5er said:
			
		

> The Elf SCREAMS ranger. Yet, as far as we know, Ranger is not included in the first PHB. Doesn't anyone else find this odd? The core concept of what an Elf is (as being presented) is not going to be playable for an entire year?




I think as far as we know rangers ARE in the first PHB - after all, they feature in playtests, right?


----------



## Plane Sailing (Dec 21, 2007)

BTW, when I was in my twenties, I was 6ft tall and weighed 140lbs. I was skinny but functional.

Twenty years on... I'm not in such a fit shape


----------



## ehren37 (Dec 21, 2007)

Scholar & Brutalman said:
			
		

> The Accuracy power as a free (rather than immediate) action allows the Elf to use it whenever they use any other per-day or per-encounter attack and it misses. Since these are usually decisive abilities, the Elven Accuracy feat becomes a bit more powerful. I still think it doesn't sound that great. Compare it to the other two heroic level feats we've seen:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd rather take either of them.




Edit: Nevermind, I thought the reroll WAS the feat.


----------



## HeinorNY (Dec 21, 2007)

Novem5er said:
			
		

> The Elf SCREAMS ranger. Yet, as far as we know, Ranger is not included in the first PHB. Doesn't anyone else find this odd? The core concept of what an Elf is (as being presented) is not going to be playable for an entire year?



I beg your pardon, but the elf article, by listing the Ranger as a suitable class for the elf, just confirmed that the Ranger is going to be in the PHB1.


----------



## Novem5er (Dec 21, 2007)

Maybe I've been mistaken about the Rangers. I thought for some reason all the "nature" classes had been left out. I can't quote anything, just a general impression I found. I thought there were going to be 8 classes in the first PHB

1. Clerics
2. Fighters
3. Paladins
4. Rogues
5. Warlocks
6. Warlords
7. Wizards

and um...

8. Rangers?

Okay, never mind


----------



## withak (Dec 21, 2007)

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> BTW, when I was in my twenties, I was 6ft tall and weighed 140lbs. I was skinny but functional.
> 
> Twenty years on... I'm not in such a fit shape




When I was 16, I was 6', 130 lbs. And I certainly wasn't anorexic -- quite the opposite, actually.


----------



## Jraynack (Dec 21, 2007)

A'koss said:
			
		

> Looks good. Nothing there really shocking or surprising but looks to me like a good foundation.




I concur.  

I do like the fact that they aid other allies in Perception checks - it reminds me of a group blundering through the wood when the only elf in the party motions everyone to stop and 
listen. 

It gives a great benefit for having a group travel with someone of a different race.  I hope they do this with classes as well - ranger is a good example (perhaps a elf ranger grants a +2 to Perception checks)


----------



## sidonunspa (Dec 21, 2007)

ainatan said:
			
		

> You don't need to see to make Perceptions checks
> Humans have Perception, so do oozes, golems and undead
> It's an abstract mechanic,
> Can't be simpler than that.




It's a passive skill (about passive skills - Source: R&C).. so its always done as the characters "take 10" which means it’s a LOT easier to get jumped.... 

Unless sneak (hide/move silently) is also a passive skill, the ones doing the sneaking have a better chance to jump you (because of a lucky roll)


----------



## Sir Brennen (Dec 21, 2007)

On the Group Awareness thing... yeah, it might be a pain to remember to track individually. But, as it's been mentioned, R&C talks about (makes it sound like it was still in the discussion stage at the time of the R&C's writing) making some skills, like Perception, passive "defense" values. Essentially, the DM notes the "take 10" score for the PC's, and this is what he rolls against for active uses of opposing skills, like Sneak. (One advantage of this mentioned is you don't alert the _players_ that something's up asking them to make a roll.)

In that scenario the onus is on the DM to remember the Group Awareness bonus and adjudicate the proximity of the characters to each other. I think one thing that could really, really help facilitate this is a "DM Sheet"... a sheet which allows the DM to record all the important stats of the PCs, with places to note things like group bonus. So just by looking at the section with the Perception skills of the PCs, there's a reminder to take the elf into account. The new character sheet has been hyped much for it's attention to organization and detail (like something designed by the Container Store, per Shelly Mazzanoble's column). Let's hope similar thought has been given to tools for the DM.


----------



## HeinorNY (Dec 21, 2007)

sidonunspa said:
			
		

> It's a passive skill.. so its always done as the characters "take 10" which means it’s a LOT easier to get jumped....



Is it??
I think I missed that.

Are you 100% sure of that?


----------



## Aeolius (Dec 21, 2007)

4'2" has always been the ideal height for elven women, IMO. My elves will remain as Wendy Pini drew them.


----------



## Asmor (Dec 21, 2007)

Wow. I've been excited for 4th edition since the beginning, though recently my interest has waned a bit... and this totally excited me!

Not just the fact that the writeup of Elves is awesome, and I'd totally play one (I could never bring myself to play a 3.X elf due to the con penalty), but it gives me a lot of hope for the other races too.

The only thing which immediately jumped out at me was the oft-maligned perception aura. However, I think it's simple enough to just handwave and assume is always in effect.

I particularly like that the elves speed is listed as 7 squares. I prefer the squares convention to the feet convention, and I like the implication that different races will have different speeds.

I also really like the shorter lifespan. 200 years is still way longer than any human (which we, of course, all are), and so they seem very long lived to us, but it's not so long that it's practically a joke. Immortality (literal or practical) is cool on paper, but it just seems... I dunno, kind of dry in practice.

The only bit of the fluff that I don't really get is the whole thing about elves having short-lived passions. I don't think it meshes well with their longevity; I'd imagine a long-lived race would spend a long time on their passions. Think elven vintners spending a century cultivating their own personal brand of wine grapes or a legendary elven bowyer who spends decades working on each of his bows.

The not cutting down living trees is kind of silly as well, but for some reason that doesn't rub me the wrong way like their "passions" do. Go figure.

Oh, and one last thing regarding the "anorexia..." How can you even make that comparison? They're not human, they have an entirely different physiology. Heck, for all we know they have hollow bones like a bird. 130 pounds for 6 feet isn't outside of the realm of being reasonable, and so it's impossible to say that that would be an unhealthy weight for them. If it were something like 60 pounds, then you'd have a case for it being unrealistic... but 130 is totally doable.


----------



## Zurai (Dec 21, 2007)

Aloïsius said:
			
		

> Stop saying they are anorexiac. In 3e every character suffered from obesity  Remember that in a fantasy setting, most people are not going to work in car, don't eat pizza while watching TV and don't drink more coke than water. Those are elves, not humans.




Thank you.

6' tall and 130 lbs is only slightly underweight according to Body Mass Index guides. 5'7" and 100 lbs is more underweight, but don't forget this is an entirely separate species with a different metabolism and different build, and the BMI system is intended for humans only. Would anyone call a 5' tall 150 pound dwarf "obese"? Because the BMI system does. Same thing in reverse for elves.

Yes, the BMI system is flawed in some ways, but it's a decent general guideline, which is all I'm using it for.


----------



## sidonunspa (Dec 21, 2007)

At first I didint like the passive skill check thing 

but after thinking about it, I like it alot.. just sucks for the people being snuck up on...


----------



## HeinorNY (Dec 21, 2007)

sidonunspa said:
			
		

> At first I didint like the passive skill check thing
> 
> but after thinking about it, I like it alot.. just sucks for the people being snuck up on...



What about percepetion checks to listen through a door?
Or to find traps?
Perceptions is probably listen+spot+search.

Where is that confirmed?


----------



## med stud (Dec 21, 2007)

Asmor said:
			
		

> The only bit of the fluff that I don't really get is the whole thing about elves having short-lived passions. I don't think it meshes well with their longevity; I'd imagine a long-lived race would spend a long time on their passions. Think elven vintners spending a century cultivating their own personal brand of wine grapes or a legendary elven bowyer who spends decades working on each of his bows.



I don't know this, but I think it is to bring elves closer to what they are in faerie tales and the like (where elves = faery pretty much). They are more like slackers and jokers than the melancholic, focused elves of Tolkien (which is good too, but a bit overdone IMO).


----------



## sidonunspa (Dec 21, 2007)

ainatan said:
			
		

> Is it??
> I think I missed that.
> 
> Are you 100% sure of that?





90% shure.. pg 68.. R&C, right above the smaple power writeup



			
				med stud said:
			
		

> I don't know this, but I think it is to bring elves closer to what they are in faerie tales and the like (where elves = faery pretty much). They are more like slackers and jokers than the melancholic, focused elves of Tolkien (which is good too, but a bit overdone IMO).




But to be honest that why people play D&D they are looking for that Tolken'esk feel... if you want diffrent take on elves I know a lot of 3rd party publishers have done there own take


----------



## HeinorNY (Dec 21, 2007)

sidonunspa said:
			
		

> 90% shure.. pg 68.. R&C, right above the smaple power writeup



So let me see if I got it right.
When you use a skills "passively" you consider it to be a defense, ranks+10.
If you use it "actively" you normally roll 1d20+ranks.

Are you shure about that?


----------



## Emirikol (Dec 21, 2007)

Eew..there's a nasty email circulating about the 4E elf (elfth) details released today...

jh


----------



## renevq (Dec 21, 2007)

I really liked the writeup. The racial fluff has elves looking more like this:







Which is so far my favorite elf fluff.

Regarding the Elven Accuracy power: This sounds like it could be really useful in conjunction with other powers. The racial power + the feat = Lightning Recovery from Bo9S, and I always found it really useful. When using a per encounter maneuver (e.g. Feral Death Blow), It really helps to reroll those misses, especially if you are counting on an effect of the maneuver. I know this the race was meant for rangers, rogues and clerics, but I'm wondering that elves will make kickass fighters. Also, has it been mentioned if per encounter powers will have recharges ala Bo9S maneuvers or SWSE force powers? This would make it even more interesting.


----------



## EricNoah (Dec 21, 2007)

Pretty neat. I have to concur with those who have a problem with the perception aura thing -- I could see the elf granting a bonus if he himself succeeds on the check, but if the elf doesn't notice the (whatever), why would that make his nearby non-elf companions more likely to notice?  If I were switching over, I might make it so that the elves in the party make the checks first, and if they succeed the rest of the party makes their checks at +1.  Or I might just skip that ability entirely.


----------



## sidonunspa (Dec 21, 2007)

ainatan said:
			
		

> So let me see if I got it right.
> When you use a skills "passively" you consider it to be a defense, ranks+10.
> If you use it "actively" you normally roll 1d20+ranks.
> 
> Are you shure about that?




From R&C

_"Another idea that has been bandied about lately is converting some skills to passive "defense" values. Spot and Listen are good examples....."_

Now we know they have perception, but we also keep hearing about spot and listen being skills...

So, my guess is that perception just may be an averaged value of spot and listen +10... Thus being a passive skill.


----------



## Dausuul (Dec 21, 2007)

sidonunspa said:
			
		

> But to be honest that why people play D&D they are looking for that Tolken'esk feel... if you want diffrent take on elves I know a lot of 3rd party publishers have done there own take




If you want Tolkienesque elves, play eladrin.

The short-lived passions thing makes a lot of sense to me, actually--if you live a really long time, you might well tend to live in the moment.  Spending a lot of time brooding over the past or the future would just get depressing.


----------



## Sir Brennen (Dec 21, 2007)

ainatan said:
			
		

> So let me see if I got it right.
> When you use a skills "passively" you consider it to be a defense, ranks+10.
> If you use it "actively" you normally roll 1d20+ranks.
> 
> Are you shure about that?



_"Another idea that's been bandied about lately is converting some skills to passive "defense" values"_ - R&C, page 68. Note that the idea was not finalized as of that writing.

But it does address the problem of 1 sneaker vs. large group - you've got a much better chanced chance that at least one roll in the large group will be on the "high" end, but only "normal" chances for the sneaker to have a good roll.

Edit: sidonunspa keeps beating me to the punch.


----------



## Wormwood (Dec 21, 2007)

Emirikol said:
			
		

> Eew..there's a nasty email circulating about the 4E elf (elfth) details released today...



Okay, now I'm curious.


----------



## Deverash (Dec 21, 2007)

I may be reading too much into it, but the racial feat has a prerequisite of both "Elf" and "Elven Accuracy racial Power".  This strongly implies that all elves don't have the power as a default, but that it's an option you can choose when deciding your powers.


----------



## Banshee16 (Dec 21, 2007)

Thornir Alekeg said:
			
		

> I am now thinking I need to create an adventure to investigate why the lifespan of elves has shorted from 2000 years to 200 over the past couple of decades.  Clearly this is not a natural occurance and something needs to be done to reverse this terrifying trend.
> 
> Actually I like the shorter life span, it makes a huge difference in the homebrew setting I have been working on for a while.  The longer life span of the elves made it difficult to have certain world-shaking events of the past be forgotten without making it a really, really long time ago.
> 
> Overall I'm liking the elf write up, but I will join with others in some concern about the "aura" bonuses we have seen a few of and the possible complexity of keeping track of them all.




Lifespan's one of the first things to Rule 0 for me.  Not very Fey-like at all.  I prefer my Fey long-lived....as in centuries or millenia.  I'm not a huge fan of change for the sake of change, and roleplaying wise...most gamers I've played with haven't been good enough roleplayers in the first place for their lifespan to become an issue.  But the change causes havoc with a whole bunch of other things in the game.....to say nothing of the fact that I just don't like it.

I'm also curious how the Group Awareness ability is supposed to work.  Does having an elf standing next to you make your eyes work better?  Or is it just supposed to be that the elf can see better, and he points things out to you that ordinarily you wouldn't see?  Because if that's the case, it's generally done through roleplaying.

Banshee


----------



## Kintara (Dec 21, 2007)

EricNoah said:
			
		

> Pretty neat. I have to concur with those who have a problem with the perception aura thing -- I could see the elf granting a bonus if he himself succeeds on the check, but if the elf doesn't notice the (whatever), why would that make his nearby non-elf companions more likely to notice?  If I were switching over, I might make it so that the elves in the party make the checks first, and if they succeed the rest of the party makes their checks at +1.  Or I might just skip that ability entirely.



What if the elf is instinctually directing those nearby to focus on their surroundings in a more general sense, or coordinating the vision and hearing angles of the party?


----------



## Scribble (Dec 21, 2007)

Asmor said:
			
		

> The only bit of the fluff that I don't really get is the whole thing about elves having short-lived passions. I don't think it meshes well with their longevity; I'd imagine a long-lived race would spend a long time on their passions. Think elven vintners spending a century cultivating their own personal brand of wine grapes or a legendary elven bowyer who spends decades working on each of his bows.




To me, it's a good way to explain why the long lived races aren't more advanced, or capable then humans. They just don't have enough patience or drive concerning any one particular goal.


----------



## Banshee16 (Dec 21, 2007)

BadMojo said:
			
		

> These are actually the things I like the most.  The life span thing was always weird from a PC perspective.  Trying to explain why every single elf character apparently wasted the first 100 years of their development and ended up as the equivalent of a 17 year old human at age 120.




This was explained in both 2nd and 3rd Edition following the PHB.  Several supplements, including the Complete Book of Elves and Otherlands (Dragonlance) pointed out that elves were adult by about 30, and Races of the Wild did the same thing in 3E.  I never found it a difficult concept.

Similar to how in our reality, a 14-year old *could* be self-sufficient in past centuries, and was old enough to have children, whereas now, people are often entering their late 20's or 30's before they leave their parents' homes.

Banshee


----------



## Stone Dog (Dec 21, 2007)

EricNoah said:
			
		

> I could see the elf granting a bonus if he himself succeeds on the check, but if the elf doesn't notice the (whatever), why would that make his nearby non-elf companions more likely to notice?



"Shh.  I think I just failed a Perception check."


----------



## Banshee16 (Dec 21, 2007)

Reynard said:
			
		

> Elves in particular are a Tolkienesque element and they don't really make much sense out of the context of Middle Earth, or at least a setting that emulates Middle Earth in many ways.  That said, there are some elements of 4E that seem they will actually make doing Tolkienesque fantasy easier than other editions -- so long as certain elements can be easily excised from either the system or the flavour, as applicable.




Why are elves just Tolkienesque?  They're also inspired by Celtic myth (ie. the Sidhe), the Alfar and Dock-Alfar of Norse myth, , the Melniborean, etc. etc.

Banshee


----------



## lbporter (Dec 21, 2007)

*Group Awareness is about emphasizing teamw*

The Group Awareness ability seems to follow the trend of valuing teamwork in 4thE. I am willing to bet that all races in the PHB have some ability to help the whole party, I am not talking about an aura, but something that gives the party a nice little bonus. As for the distance in a non combat situation either you are spread out and you don’t get it, or you are reasonably grouped so you do (that is assuming the elf is not off scouting, which it looks like they will be very good at). 

I would like to thank Bill Slavicsek, and all of those at WotC and I wish y’all happy holidays. Thanks for the present, sorry I didn’t get you anything.  

Luke


----------



## Pbartender (Dec 21, 2007)

Kintara said:
			
		

> What if the elf is instinctually directing those nearby to focus on their surroundings in a more general sense, or coordinating the vision and hearing angles of the party?




I still like the basic idea of being a "role model" for the other characters, thereby passively making them better.  It makes sense for this sort of "aura" power, and is the sort of explanation that has examples in real life.


----------



## kennew142 (Dec 21, 2007)

sidonunspa said:
			
		

> But to be honest that why people play D&D they are looking for that Tolken'esk feel... if you want diffrent take on elves I know a lot of 3rd party publishers have done there own take




I'm especially fond of the elorii in Arcanis, with their elemental heritage and *excellent * backgound (I hate the term fluff). I can't wait to see them in a 4e adaption.


----------



## kennew142 (Dec 21, 2007)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Lifespan's one of the first things to Rule 0 for me.  Not very Fey-like at all.  I prefer my Fey long-lived....as in centuries or millenia.  I'm not a huge fan of change for the sake of change, and roleplaying wise...most gamers I've played with haven't been good enough roleplayers in the first place for their lifespan to become an issue.  But the change causes havoc with a whole bunch of other things in the game.....to say nothing of the fact that I just don't like it.




On the other hand, many of us have been using house rules to shorten elven lifespans since the 70s.


----------



## wordsmithpdx (Dec 21, 2007)

Merlin the Tuna said:
			
		

> That "never cut living trees" line is still a bit bothersome, but eh.




I hear you, but I'll be mollified if there are game mechanics (simple rituals or spells, skill write-ups, etc.) that let you do things like "remove a part of a living tree with magic" or craft bows and arrows from living wood or somesuch.

I guess they really want to stress the "harmony with nature" aspect of these elves, and to a lot of the general public who live in a modern society and never have to eek a living out of nature, it can be hard to pin down the difference between subsistence pioneers (humans), native folks living in harmony with nature (elves), and so on. Heck, it can be hard for the authors to differentiate. Easier to just make it clear-cut (pun intended).


----------



## Merlin the Tuna (Dec 21, 2007)

kennew142 said:
			
		

> On the other hand, many of us have been using house rules to shorten elven lifespans since the 70s.



I haven't been doing it since the 70s, but yeah, this is another one of those "Hey, my house rules are official now!" moments for me.  Given how much of fantasy is built on lost histories, having an entire race of people that live for hundreds of year is kind of problematic.

Do note that this isn't actually that much of a change, though.  As the 3.5 PHB/SRD notes, "The maximum ages are for player characters. Most people in the world at large die from pestilence, accidents, infections, or violence before getting to venerable age," indicating that most elves die before 350.


----------



## wordsmithpdx (Dec 21, 2007)

Gloombunny said:
			
		

> That said, a freely-assigned +2 - or just a higher point value, since they're going with point buy as the default - would be pretty cool for humans.




I like the higher point-buy idea, since you can really tweak numbers for good efficiency there. The prob with a freely-assigned +2 is that, in any stat generation system where you can place your numbers, it's kinda pointless. Why not just pick a race that has the stat you would've applied the +2 to?

I'm hoping humans have much more to keep them on par than just stat "flexibility" (although I'm optimistic about it...Wizards did a great job with humans in 3E/3.5, I think). Something to do with persistence (though that could be dwarven territory)?


----------



## Stalker0 (Dec 21, 2007)

Some notes on the flavor thing:

Age: Perfectly fine, and easily houseruled if you still want older elves.
Weight: Perhaps elves have evolved superior muscle tissue, meaning they need smaller muscles to maintain the same strength as a human. Maybe their organs are more efficient and are smaller. Or maybe...just maybe...its magic!!!

Living trees and bows: People are assuming that since humans couldn't get enough wood from dead trees neither can elves. These are people that have almost a living communion with the woods and often live twice as long as we do. Maybe they have a few techniques. Maybe they can strengthen dead wood to be as strong as regular wood, etc.

Perception Aura: I said it 4 pages ago and it bears repeating. Dodge is one of the most commonly houseruled rules in 3x...period. The top reason mentioned for this is because people constantly forgot to include their +1 bonus. And let's not forget:

1) That's an AC bonus. The critical barrier between life and death!
2) Its your own ability. This isn't some bonus you got from a buddy, you spent a feat on it.

Even with that, people couldn't remember it. Now we have a tiny little +1 bonus on a skill check from another person. I guarantee it will be forgotten in many parties.

I personally like the idea of auras, but if your going to do it, at least make it worthwhile to remember. When I play a bard, I've had to constantly remind my party about their +2 or even +3 bonus to attack and damage. But with such a nice bonus, at least its worth my time.

Oh and lastly, I love the "shift" name for the 5 foot step. Elegant name, easy to say, and it makes sense when you describe your actions. "Alright I shift towards the ogre and attack."


----------



## TwinBahamut (Dec 21, 2007)

I didn't realize this myself until I was reading the later pages of this thread, but there is no mention at all of elves "trancing" in this description, and they have no resistance to sleep effects. It seems the weird effect of elves not sleeping is completely gone, now.

Considering that this is the tenth page of this thread, and I have not see anyone else mention it, I suppose that property of elves wasn't very popular or iconic. I certainly don't miss it.


----------



## kennew142 (Dec 21, 2007)

wordsmithpdx said:
			
		

> I like the higher point-buy idea, since you can really tweak numbers for good efficiency there. The prob with a freely-assigned +2 is that, in any stat generation system where you can place your numbers, it's kinda pointless. Why not just pick a race that has the stat you would've applied the +2 to?
> 
> I'm hoping humans have much more to keep them on par than just stat "flexibility" (although I'm optimistic about it...Wizards did a great job with humans in 3E/3.5, I think). Something to do with persistence (though that could be dwarven territory)?




To the best of my knowledge there is *no * default system in the PHB. The point buy system and the array system have been moved their from the DMG, placing them alongside the random method. It is important that racial bonuses be usable with *any * of the official systems for creating characters.


----------



## Cadfan (Dec 21, 2007)

Re: Forgetting the +1 Perception bonus.

If Perception is a "passive" ability, the person who has to remember is not the player.  Its the DM.

That's my job, and I personally think I can handle it.


----------



## BadMojo (Dec 21, 2007)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> This was explained in both 2nd and 3rd Edition following the PHB.  Several supplements, including the Complete Book of Elves and Otherlands (Dragonlance) pointed out that elves were adult by about 30, and Races of the Wild did the same thing in 3E.  I never found it a difficult concept.




I don't think it's particularly difficult, but I find it kind of silly.  Your average heroic adventurer elf has spend 70+ years singing songs, writing poetry and picking flowers but hasn't really learned anything of use?

One day a week practicing with sword and bow for 70 years and they can still get beat down by a human who's only been able to lift a sword for 3 or 4 years?

It really stretches my disbelief suspenders.


----------



## Thornir Alekeg (Dec 21, 2007)

TwinBahamut said:
			
		

> I didn't realize this myself until I was reading the later pages of this thread, but there is no mention at all of elves "trancing" in this description, and they have no resistance to sleep effects. It seems the weird effect of elves not sleeping is completely gone, now.
> 
> Considering that this is the tenth page of this thread, and I have not see anyone else mention it, I suppose that property of elves wasn't very popular or iconic. I certainly don't miss it.



 Nice catch.  It is of course a little harder to notice the things that are not included than those that are.  The shift away from immunity to sleep effects is in line with what we have heard about the changes in resistance/immunity in monsters.  The whole "trance" thing was a tiny aspect that was barely used in any of my games, it will not be missed at all.


----------



## Spatula (Dec 21, 2007)

Anthtriel said:
			
		

> Most of these minor boni were artifacts anyway. They don't appear in any other fantasy I'm aware of,



The 1e D&D elven racial abilities (most of which have been carried throughout the editions) all come from various passages in the Hobbit or LotR.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Dec 21, 2007)

> If Perception is a "passive" ability, the person who has to remember is not the player. Its the DM.
> 
> That's my job, and I personally think I can handle it.




Not bad, but it's still a small bonus in a zone. 

I think my house rule is this: at character creation, if someone chooses to be an elf, the whole party gets a +1 bonus to Perception.

The way I grok it is this: the reason everyone gets that bonus is because the elf is pointing out things they notice, so the rest of the party is a little more attuned to it. When the elf says "notice the way the wind curls out from this so-called wall" the rest of the party notices it, too. Over time spent adventuring, everyone who hangs around the elf gains a bit of that sensibility. "How would Elladriel look at this wall?" becomes part of an adventurer's repotoire.

There. A one-time bonus I don't need to keep track of. Someone's an elf? Everyone gets +1 to Perception. Over, done, let's pay more attention to the fun stuff.


----------



## Cadfan (Dec 21, 2007)

Spatula said:
			
		

> The 1e D&D elven racial abilities (most of which have been carried throughout the editions) all come from various passages in the Hobbit or LotR.



They also had heavy gamist implications back in the day when D&D often played like Paranoia: The Middle Ages.  Especially the secret doors bit.


----------



## Spatula (Dec 21, 2007)

delericho said:
			
		

> Actually, that elf write-up says they get to reroll one attack - it doesn't specify that it has to be with a bow, or anything else. So, it doesn't really emphasise their role at all.



It doesn't pigeonhole them as archers, rather.  If you're an archer, it emphasizes your role.  If you're a rogue, it's still useful.  If it was bow-only, you'd end up with people picking elves to play archer-types and never for anything else (because that would be a waste of your racial ability).  Of course it remains to be seen if re-rolling attacks is useful for spellcasters.


----------



## FickleGM (Dec 21, 2007)

Cadfan said:
			
		

> Re: Forgetting the +1 Perception bonus.
> 
> If Perception is a "passive" ability, the person who has to remember is not the player.  Its the DM.
> 
> That's my job, and I personally think I can handle it.



 I run things like this:  I'll remember the penalties, you remember the bonuses.

Not that I never remind players of bonuses or they don't honestly subtract their penalties, but in my games the responsibility falls on the benefitting party.  That way, it's known up front, if you forget a bonus, oh well.  You didn't have it on that turn.  Likewise, if I forget a penalty, you got lucky.  In the end, they're all just modifiers to a somewhat significant range of random numbers.


----------



## ehren37 (Dec 21, 2007)

Nightchilde-2 said:
			
		

> Or you can do it the easy way...
> 
> "You're all hanging out close enough to the elf." or "You're all not hanging out close enough to the elf."





Its still a sorry +1 bonus (ie, not worth keepign track of). It reminds me of affiliations. Cool concept, but frequently lame implementation. Am I really going to remember that I get a +1 to make pancakes on Tuesday?


----------



## ehren37 (Dec 21, 2007)

pawsplay said:
			
		

> I don't really like the reduced lifespan. Realistically, a 1000 year lifespan translates to about 300 years anyway, since you can only go about that long before something most likely kills you, but the idea that there might be a 1000 year old Elf King is kind of appealing.




It really screws with the concept of "ancient history", and limits the types of stories you can tell. "Oh, something happened 300 years ago dyuring the dark ages? No problem, we'll go ask by uncle about stories his dad used to tell him."


----------



## Traycor (Dec 21, 2007)

Remathilis said:
			
		

> I'm generally liking it.
> 
> The elf-aura shouldn't be that hard after years of D&D...
> 
> ...



Yes, but there are going to be lots of auras now. It's going to be a chore to remember 10 or 15 different aura powers all going on at once. Especially if the group gets seperated (as seems to happen to my players all the time) then we either have to parse out the aura bonuses, ignore them, or grant them regardless of range.

Bleh. I like auras, but not when they give a +bonus. I'd rather it granted party members a perception reroll or something like that.


----------



## Nine Hands (Dec 21, 2007)

Imaro said:
			
		

> I just want to say, this model of thiking irritates me to no end.  How do you judge the merits of a game if the answer is always "just change it.".  By this logic there's no reason to pick any one specific roleplaying game over another.  Exalted is D&D...just change it to a d20 system, remove charms and replace them with feats and play in Forgotten Realms instead of creation???




Sure why not?  I know many people who run games outside of the original system they were designed in.  GURPS Star Wars, GURPS Forgotten Realms, Fuzion Rifts, etc.

The system is just a way of expressing things at the table, game systems can be changed, tweaked, massaged, etc to fit the concepts the GM and players want.

Its the game master and players that make a game work, not a game system.


----------



## Pinotage (Dec 21, 2007)

Kamikaze Midget said:
			
		

> There. A one-time bonus I don't need to keep track of. Someone's an elf? Everyone gets +1 to Perception. Over, done, let's pay more attention to the fun stuff.




This is the most sensible suggestion. If I ever get to play 4e, I think this will make a good house rule. Anything that results in easing game play and preventing interuptions gets my vote. I can just see thousands of gamers on Saturday night saying, "Remember, I'm an elf, so you can all get +1 Perception."

Much better to just leave it as a static bonus that always applies to allies of the elf.

Pinotage


----------



## Incenjucar (Dec 21, 2007)

The thing with the bow proficiency is that it forces house ruling any time you have a non-standard background for an elf.

If you have an elf raised by different races, if the elf's culture simply does not have bows for some reason, if there's nothing to make bows out of, etc etc etc.

Culture-based standard racial abilities are annoying, not game breaking, but annoying.   :\


----------



## Silent Cartographer (Dec 21, 2007)

On balance, me likey _mucho grande!_ Not perfect, but the flaws are small to meaningless, IMO.



			
				Clavis said:
			
		

> I hate... I hate... I hate... I hate... I hate... I also hate...



Heh. We get it that you hate. A lot. You could probably power several small desktop accessories off that much hate. In fact, I've just started a pot of tea off the residual intertubes hate-runoff from your post. Kthxs!    

I agree with the clumsy no-cut-living-tree color text problem, but almost every race description I've ever read included a "detail too far" like this. This barely registers as an itch. Everything else I'd change falls into this same category of easy-peasy, zero rules footprint stuff.

Regarding Perception Aura, I agree that this is the weakest racial feature. _Bless_-like bonuses can be useful, but are almost always annoying, too.

However, watching the simulationists decending on this feature like buzzards is a little boggling to me.   

If you guys get really bored, I have some dancing angels and pins that ought to keep you busy for a long time. I think 4th edition is going to contain a *bunch* of gamist features like this, and I can just see the closet simulationists rushing into street, wailing and gnashing their teeth this summer.

Its an abstraction, folks. As some have suggested, just think of it as a Leadership-style of race feature, where Legolas' good habits and clean living inspire his compatriots to be just a little like him.  

Mmmm, tea...


----------



## Silent Cartographer (Dec 21, 2007)

Oh, and in regards to lifespan, I like the Shadowrun approach to elven lifespans. Best of both worlds...


----------



## Wormwood (Dec 21, 2007)

Did the Alertness feat granted by a wizard's familiar cause this much kvetching back in 2000?


----------



## Bishmon (Dec 21, 2007)

Wormwood said:
			
		

> Did the Alertness feat granted by a wizard's familiar cause this much kvetching back in 2000?



I'm guessing most people just put the bonuses provided by the familiar on their character sheet and then stuffed their familiar in their character's backpack or whatever to ensure that the familiar was always nearby.

With another party member, though, it's not quite so easy. I don't think the party elf would take to kindly to being shoved into a backpack so his aura bonus is always nearby and therefore in effect.

Personally, I like the idea of just giving his non-elf allies a +1 to perception. Maybe I'll put some time on it if new PCs keep leaving and joining the party, like in order to get the +1 bonus, the non-elf character has had to have gained a full level with the elf in the party.

Alternately, I might just bump up the elves' racial perception bonus to +3 and just get rid of the aura ability altogether.

I doubt I'll leave it as it is, though. I just think its clunkiness isn't worth what the ability adds to the game.


----------



## HeinorNY (Dec 21, 2007)

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> Perception Aura: I said it 4 pages ago and it bears repeating. Dodge is one of the most commonly houseruled rules in 3x...period. The top reason mentioned for this is because people constantly forgot to include their +1 bonus. And let's not forget:
> 
> 1) That's an AC bonus. The critical barrier between life and death!
> 2) Its your own ability. This isn't some bonus you got from a buddy, you spent a feat on it.
> ...



 But the perception skill is used differently than dodge... 
Most of the time people remember the dodge bonus when they start using and then they just forget it, but you don't need to remember the Group Awareness bonus in every round, you need to remember it just before the combat start, when the party make the perception rolls.
Also, the dodge bonus is a passive bonus that works against one opponent. If you have 4 opponents attacking you, you will probably forget it because it's an excpetion in the combat routine. A bonus to a skill, and in the case of the Perception skill, considering its uses in the game, will rarely be the exception.

-Party is attacked by hidden enemies, bonus ON
-Party searching for a trap/secret door, bonus ON
-Party listening behind the door before kikcing it, bonus ON

Players won't need to remember it because most of the times it will be available, actually, they will just have to remeber when not using it, in the rare cases the party is not together.
Dodge feat is a bad example because how and when it works differs completely.


----------



## Delta (Dec 21, 2007)

Sir Brennen said:
			
		

> R&C talks about (makes it sound like it was still in the discussion stage at the time of the R&C's writing) making some skills, like Perception, passive "defense" values. Essentially, the DM notes the "take 10" score for the PC's, and this is what he rolls against for active uses of opposing skills, like Sneak. (One advantage of this mentioned is you don't alert the _players_ that something's up asking them to make a roll.)




To me, it's amazing how the 4E changes are almost unanimously the exact opposite of what I'd like to see done with the D&D game. If true, here's another one -- my past analysis decided it was best for my game & players to do the exact mirror-image of this idea, namely have everyone "Take 10" on Sneak-type/protective actions, and have "Cooperative Bonus" rolls for all the Perception-type/detection actions.

http://www.enworld.org/archive/index.php/t-11017.html


----------



## Delta (Dec 21, 2007)

Wormwood said:
			
		

> Did the Alertness feat granted by a wizard's familiar cause this much kvetching back in 2000?




No, but the Bardic Music morale bonus sure did.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0034.html


----------



## Emirikol (Dec 21, 2007)

Wormwood said:
			
		

> Okay, now I'm curious.




I'm sure it will get around at some point.  It has to do with all the evidence in the 4E write up (released today) why elves are clearly "frolicky."  Strange stuff.

jh


----------



## DreadPirateMurphy (Dec 21, 2007)

Hm...

I vote with those who find rerolls and aura effects to both be a minor pain.  They're not unworkable, but they require more attention to mechanics.

Also, other than the Dex bonus, I don't see what's so stealthy about them.  They're still human-sized, and they get bonuses to perception rather than not being perceived.

Generally speaking, I don't like the word "squares" instead of feet, though I admit it makes no practical difference since it is easy to translate.

Not cutting living trees is BS, unless they have some kind of racial feat that lets them shape living wood (which isn't a bad idea, albeit not original).

Also, just as a nitpick, I think of an "average" as a single value rather than a range of values, e.g., 115 lbs. rather than 100-130 lbs.


----------



## maggot (Dec 21, 2007)

This elf entry isn't bad.  I'm surprised at the +2 Wis as it seems to say that elves are really good clerics.  But it makes sense for elven rangers, and fits the perception and enchantment save bonuses they used to get.

I'm really surprised at the reroll an attack bit.  That seems out from left field.

But what really surprises me is the conditional +1 bonus.  I hate conditional bonuses and have house ruled them all away in my 3.5 games (elves just get +2 will save instead of +2 on enchantment), but now they have a conditional bonus based on distance.  Talk about slowing the game down and taking up extra char sheet space.

Now imagine that every races has these kind of things.  Yuck.  yuck.  yuck.  If I ever run 4e, I know something that is going immediately into the house rules.


----------



## Banshee16 (Dec 21, 2007)

ehren37 said:
			
		

> It really screws with the concept of "ancient history", and limits the types of stories you can tell. "Oh, something happened 300 years ago dyuring the dark ages? No problem, we'll go ask by uncle about stories his dad used to tell him."





300 years ain't ancient history though.  3000 years?  That's a different matter.

And frankly, in a world where you've got races that can live from 700-2500 years (or more), even that isn't much.  Have you looked at the Grand History of the Realms?  There are things in there that were occurring 33,000 years before the present day.

I *like* that broader reach.

Especially now that I'm reading Stephen Erikson's Malazan series.

I like to do histories for characters etc.  One of the characters in my Midnight game is a Caransil Dragonborn, descended from Zardrix.  It was fun mapping out generations of ancestors, to figure out where the character came from, and can create a lot of opportunities for roleplaying.

And, as others have mentioned, the idea that you could have an elven king who is 1000 years old is appealing.

According to these new rules, characters like Kith-Kanan from Dragonlance, who lived like 1200 years or so, were apparently freaks or liches or something.  Or you've got to rewrite the whole thing.

It's a useless change that doesn't really accomplish anything useful, but can have a lot of impact over other aspects of the game.  So I question why it had to be made.

The flavour text is cool though.  Particularly for the Eladrin.  Makes them more like the mysterious noble fey who live under the hill..that kind of thing.  Or like those from Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell....hiding in some ruined castle in another world, the bodies of human knights hanging like piniattas from trees around the crumbled ruin.

Banshee


----------



## Clavis (Dec 21, 2007)

Silent Cartographer said:
			
		

> Heh. We get it that you hate. A lot. You could probably power several small desktop accessories off that much hate. In fact, I've just started a pot of tea off the residual intertubes hate-runoff from your post. Kthxs!




I haven't even gotten started. I've just put on some old Rollins-era Black Flag, and now I'm really getting my hate on! 

For instance, I didn't mention how much I HATE Tieflings as a core race. Or how much I HATE removing Gnomes from the PHB. Or how much I HATE the idea of a Golden Wyvern Adept. Screw it, I think I HATE just about everything that I've read about 4th edition, including the idea that a 4th Edition was needed at all.

That felt good.


----------



## Kintara (Dec 21, 2007)

Clavis said:
			
		

> I haven't even gotten started. I've just put on some old Rollins-era Black Flag, and now I'm really getting my hate on!
> 
> For instance, I didn't mention how much I HATE Tieflings as a core race. Or how much I HATE removing Gnomes from the PHB. Or how much I HATE the idea of a Golden Wyvern Adept.



So I guess you didn't enjoy the latest cartoon?


----------



## Deep Blue 9000 (Dec 21, 2007)

Bishmon said:
			
		

> I'm guessing most people just put the bonuses provided by the familiar on their character sheet and then stuffed their familiar in their character's backpack or whatever to ensure that the familiar was always nearby.
> 
> With another party member, though, it's not quite so easy. I don't think the party elf would take to kindly to being shoved into a backpack so his aura bonus is always nearby and therefore in effect.
> 
> ...




I think its also matter of increasing expectations and understanding. This annoying bookkeeping was rife in 3E but wasn't recognized as a problem. Nowadays we know it is bad and despise it when we see it.


----------



## WayneLigon (Dec 21, 2007)

6'0" - 130#




5'11" - 130#




5'11 - 115#




5'11 - 125#

Skinny, for the males, but within the average. Those women don't have ribs showing or looking like they're about to fall over from hunger. Given than at elf has a slighter average frame than a human, they probably look like humans that have about 10-15 more pounds on average.


----------



## Traycor (Dec 21, 2007)

Bagpuss said:
			
		

> Yet they are archers?  *snip* But the arrows, I doubt there is enough dead-fall wood to keep a race of archers stocked?



lol. Do you have trees in your yard? I have to go out every couple of days and clear the many many dead branches out of my front and back yards. If elves live in forests, they would have more than enough wood for arrows and bows.

Besides... it's not like they are shooting arrows all the time. Most of the arrows would be used in mundane hunting.


----------



## FadedC (Dec 21, 2007)

It seems like if your really worried about people not remembering their elven perception bonus, you can just tell them to write it on their sheet as a passive bonus. They are going to have it in the vast majority of circumstances anyway, it's probably much easier to remember to subtract 1 from your perception every time you and the elf are seperated then it is to remember to add 1 everytime he is around.


----------



## TwoSix (Dec 21, 2007)

Incenjucar said:
			
		

> The thing with the bow proficiency is that it forces house ruling any time you have a non-standard background for an elf.
> 
> If you have an elf raised by different races, if the elf's culture simply does not have bows for some reason, if there's nothing to make bows out of, etc etc etc.
> 
> Culture-based standard racial abilities are annoying, not game breaking, but annoying.   :\




The other option would be to remove any "cultural" abilities from the races.  Of course, then you'd have to house-rule in anything the character may have learned from their culture, or just presuppose no one has any culture.

Or break them apart, and have there be a race selection and a culture selection.  Of course, if you're running a non-standard game, you're going to have to house-rule in your own cultures.

Out of those options, I think I'll take race = culture.


----------



## Asmor (Dec 21, 2007)

TwoSix said:
			
		

> The other option would be to remove any "cultural" abilities from the races.  Of course, then you'd have to house-rule in anything the character may have learned from their culture, or just presuppose no one has any culture.
> 
> Or break them apart, and have there be a race selection and a culture selection.  Of course, if you're running a non-standard game, you're going to have to house-rule in your own cultures.
> 
> Out of those options, I think I'll take race = culture.




How about option 3: Culture as a defined option.

The simplest method, of course, would be to just give everyone a cultural feat. Most elves take proficiency with bows as their cultural feat.

The more interesting idea, though, is to make culture a choice just like race and class. So define three or four cultures for every race, but don't restrict cultures to the race... For example, a dwarf raised by humans could select a human culture.


----------



## Rechan (Dec 21, 2007)

Asmor said:
			
		

> How about option 3: Culture as a defined option.
> 
> The simplest method, of course, would be to just give everyone a cultural feat. Most elves take proficiency with bows as their cultural feat.
> 
> The more interesting idea, though, is to make culture a choice just like race and class. So define three or four cultures for every race, but don't restrict cultures to the race... For example, a dwarf raised by humans could select a human culture.



And that woudl cause more "WotC is insisting on shoving their culture up my homebrew".


----------



## Stone Dog (Dec 21, 2007)

Clavis said:
			
		

> Screw it, I think I HATE just about everything that I've read about 4th edition, including the idea that a 4th Edition was needed at all.




All this time in this neighborhood must be giving you an ulcer then.  How fun!


----------



## Zamkaizer (Dec 21, 2007)

I can guarantee that, by now, no one in this thread is ever going to forget about Elves' perception bonus.


----------



## Merlin the Tuna (Dec 21, 2007)

Clavis said:
			
		

> Screw it, I think I HATE just about everything that I've read about 4th edition, including the idea that a 4th Edition was needed at all.



You mention this roughly 4 times each time a thread is posted on the forum, regardless of its topic.  I'd say you got started quite a while ago.


----------



## Clavis (Dec 21, 2007)

Stone Dog said:
			
		

> All this time in this neighborhood must be giving you an ulcer then.  How fun!




Not at all. I grew up in an Irish American household where dinner conversation sometimes resulted in tables thrown across the room.

I sometimes miss a good fight when I don't have one!


----------



## BadMojo (Dec 21, 2007)

Merlin the Tuna said:
			
		

> You mention this roughly 4 times each time a thread is posted on the forum, regardless of its topic.  I'd say you got started quite a while ago.





I don't think he likes it.  At all.  No sir, not one bit.  That's the impression I get.


----------



## Emirikol (Dec 21, 2007)

Elves look more like this I guess...






jh
http://www.unmoderated-forum.com/


----------



## sidonunspa (Dec 21, 2007)

Clavis said:
			
		

> I haven't even gotten started. I've just put on some old Rollins-era Black Flag, and now I'm really getting my hate on!
> 
> For instance, I didn't mention how much I HATE Tieflings as a core race. Or how much I HATE removing Gnomes from the PHB. Or how much I HATE the idea of a Golden Wyvern Adept. Screw it, I think I HATE just about everything that I've read about 4th edition, including the idea that a 4th Edition was needed at all.
> 
> That felt good.





LOL never had a power-gaming super stat monkey in your home game did you? Using just the cleric class and player’s hand book my home game GM would shake her head in disbelief.
And I won’t even get started on what happened when she let everyone in the campaign start using any WoTC book (because she said that 3rd party books where broken) 
Needless to say she had to include “PCDs” in her home game (Peter Control Devices) because thanks to magic item creation, the right PHB spells, and some out of the box thinking…. I would crack almost any combat she presented us with.

I cannot tell you how many times I sat in on a table and saw how the players were not working together.  the cleric would never have GMW or MV prepped for the fighter, hell you have any idea how many players overlook spells like Hero’s Feast? The characters would not use “one mech” strategy, and the rouges would always forget to flank... so on.

Sit in on a RPGA high level table once or twice… the brokenness of 3e becomes clearly apparent.  I have seen characters running around with +48 strength, using force cage as a spell like ability, and even turning the entire table into some crazy strike team (wand of invisibility, stone of silence, fly).. and lets not even start with the super undead turning clerics that can dust almost any undead they face.

A lot of GMs who love 3e never had to deal with a “power gamer”, but for those of us who have, 4e is a nice addition, and we hope, will fix a lot of issues 3e has.


----------



## Clavis (Dec 21, 2007)

Merlin the Tuna said:
			
		

> You mention this roughly 4 times each time a thread is posted on the forum, regardless of its topic.  I'd say you got started quite a while ago.




Is it only 4 times?
I'm getting soft in my old age!


----------



## sidonunspa (Dec 21, 2007)

Asmor said:
			
		

> How about option 3: Culture as a defined option.
> 
> The simplest method, of course, would be to just give everyone a cultural feat. Most elves take proficiency with bows as their cultural feat.
> 
> The more interesting idea, though, is to make culture a choice just like race and class. So define three or four cultures for every race, but don't restrict cultures to the race... For example, a dwarf raised by humans could select a human culture.




Get out of my head!!

I have been working on something along these lines for about three weeks now.. what I have been trying to work out is _culture > race > background > profession/class_ each step gives you X, Y, Z. Its in a very rough outline form until I see 4e. 

Also playing around with a simple skill-based magic system, but that’s neither here nor there.


----------



## Wulfram (Dec 21, 2007)

Bishmon said:
			
		

> I'm guessing most people just put the bonuses provided by the familiar on their character sheet and then stuffed their familiar in their character's backpack or whatever to ensure that the familiar was always nearby.
> 
> With another party member, though, it's not quite so easy. I don't think the party elf would take to kindly to being shoved into a backpack so his aura bonus is always nearby and therefore in effect.




Perhaps not party members, but Elves are pretty skinny, and with their dex bonus, probably pretty flexible, so you could hire a small elf as a henchman and stick him in the backpack.

That raises another thing that makes me dislike this ability - you don't have to be very perceptive at all to give this bonus.  He might be a level 15 ranger, reknowned as scout and tracker, while you're a level one cleric who has become the butt of jokes for his tendency to accidentally walk into trees - but he's a human, and you're an elf, so he gets a bonus.


----------



## Xethreau (Dec 21, 2007)

I like that elves get two stat bonuses and a power to start out with.  That will make all races, including stronger ones, easier to stat out.


----------



## TwinBahamut (Dec 21, 2007)

RyukenAngel said:
			
		

> I like that elves get two stat bonuses and a power to start out with.  That will make all races, including stronger ones, easier to stat out.



It really does. I have been working on rules for a fairly difficult to implement race for a while now. 3E convinced me it was impossible, but all the previews for 4E is making it look rather easy. Once balancing is achieved via the natural method of opportunity cost, rather some vague concept of a zero-sum, more options become available, especially when the base starting point is high and you can improve the power of the race with racial feats.

The big question I still have is whether racial feats take up normal feat slots, or characters have levels where they get a feat slot which can only be filled with a racial feat. I doubt it is the latter, but I think it would be interesting.


----------



## Sir Brennen (Dec 21, 2007)

RyukenAngel said:
			
		

> I like that elves get two stat bonuses and a power to start out with.  That will make all races, including stronger ones, easier to stat out.



If you read the Elf Fluff article, it almost sounds like Drow might only have a Dex bonus, especially compared to the trait descriptions of the other two races. My guess is this leaves room for more "classic" drow abilities at first level (though not all - it sounds like the more powerful ones will be reserved for feats.)


----------



## Aristotle (Dec 21, 2007)

I think there is enough evidence that the heights/weights would be fine for a slight people. More muscular, or overweight, characters would exceed the listed weights just as I'm sure the human equivalents in real life will exceed the weights listed for humans in the PHB. 

I don't have much to say about the whole "never cuts wood" thing. I'm okay with hand waiving it. I really like the idea of a relic that is a "living bow" with vines and/or flowers growing on it. Once I see the magic item rules I may have to have a go at making that.


----------



## med stud (Dec 21, 2007)

On the "never cut down a tree"- policy; it's quite possible that elves have a spell for healing trees. They take a big branch of a tree and then heal it so it doesn't die from it. That way they solve the problem of needing fresh wood without killing a tree.


----------



## Anthtriel (Dec 21, 2007)

Clavis said:
			
		

> I haven't even gotten started. I've just put on some old Rollins-era Black Flag, and now I'm really getting my hate on!
> 
> For instance, I didn't mention how much I HATE Tieflings as a core race. Or how much I HATE removing Gnomes from the PHB. Or how much I HATE the idea of a Golden Wyvern Adept. Screw it, I think I HATE just about everything that I've read about 4th edition, including the idea that a 4th Edition was needed at all.
> 
> That felt good.



I can just imagine how you will walk into your local RPG shop on release date, pick up ten copies of all handbooks and then proceed to shout at them and smash them against each other.

To each his own I guess. Wizards surely won't mind. If you wouldn't love to hate it, you wouldn't be so active here.


----------



## The Ubbergeek (Dec 21, 2007)

Consider that alignements is downplayed.

I guess the other such more fluffy bits will be downplayed - I guess it's more a cultural thing, and that there will be 'deviants' and such.


----------



## Sir Brennen (Dec 21, 2007)

sidonunspa said:
			
		

> I have been working on something along these lines for about three weeks now.. what I have been trying to work out is _culture > race > background > profession/class_ each step gives you X, Y, Z. Its in a very rough outline form until I see 4e.



Iron Heroes, which is a human only setting, does something like this with each beginning character selecting "traits". They receive 2 traits total from the categories of Background, Mental or Physical (only 1 Background trait max, tho.)

Presuming each PHB race has a beginning Racial Power like the elf, I could see offering characters the option to replace it with another cultural trait or feat if their background warrants it.

However, there are a couple of drawbacks to this:

1) You've effectively nixed any racial feats which have the racial power as a prereq (just like the Elven Precision feat in the article). Additional house-ruling could allow the power to be selected later like a normal feat, tho.

2) Allowing other races this much latitude at creation steps on the flexible human shtick. Humans having an option of selecting from multiple "racial powers" to reflect a diverse culture I can easily see being an option. Allowing other races to do this makes this particular human trait less special.


----------



## Sir Brennen (Dec 21, 2007)

med stud said:
			
		

> On the "never cut down a tree"- policy; it's quite possible that elves have a spell for healing trees. They take a big branch of a tree and then heal it so it doesn't die from it. That way they solve the problem of needing fresh wood without killing a tree.



The article says "never cut a tree", but "never cut *down* a tree" would make more sense. I mean, don't you prune plants to keep them healthy?


----------



## Plane Sailing (Dec 22, 2007)

Sir Brennen said:
			
		

> If you read the Elf Fluff article, it almost sounds like Drow might only have a Dex bonus,




Sounds to me like the Drow get Dex and Charisma bonus - "Although they are no taller than eladrins, they have a presence that often makes members of other races feel smaller and on edge"

Sounds like Cha to me.

Cheers


----------



## Plane Sailing (Dec 22, 2007)

Regarding age of races, there is a nice line in Races & Classes about Eladrin that goes like this



> Human diplomats find it hard to negotiate with the high elf realms because they're often told "If we're at an impasse, that's fine: We'll bring the matter up with your grandchildren"


----------



## jasin (Dec 22, 2007)

Sir Brennen said:
			
		

> The article says "never cut a tree", but "never cut *down* a tree" would make more sense. I mean, don't you prune plants to keep them healthy?



If this makes so much more sense (and it does), doesn't it make sense to just assume that's what was meant?


----------



## HeinorNY (Dec 22, 2007)

I hope one of the designers clarify the "never cut a tree" issue before it becomes an international crisis!


----------



## pawsplay (Dec 22, 2007)

Traycor said:
			
		

> lol. Do you have trees in your yard? I have to go out every couple of days and clear the many many dead branches out of my front and back yards. If elves live in forests, they would have more than enough wood for arrows and bows.
> 
> Besides... it's not like they are shooting arrows all the time. Most of the arrows would be used in mundane hunting.




Plus, dead wood requires less curing.


----------



## Remathilis (Dec 22, 2007)

Clavis said:
			
		

> I haven't even gotten started. I've just put on some old Rollins-era Black Flag, and now I'm really getting my hate on!
> 
> For instance, I didn't mention how much I HATE Tieflings as a core race. Or how much I HATE removing Gnomes from the PHB. Or how much I HATE the idea of a Golden Wyvern Adept. Screw it, I think I HATE just about everything that I've read about 4th edition, including the idea that a 4th Edition was needed at all.
> 
> That felt good.




Don't sugarcoat your feelings Clavis, tell us how you REALLY feel.


----------



## The Ubbergeek (Dec 22, 2007)

You know, maybe it could be like in the Elder Scrolls serie - who have REALLY PoL wood elves...

The wood elves there have made a pact with nature... an hardcore one. They are wholly CARNIVOROUS, and use meat and other flesh and bone products for EVERYTHING, or so I heard.,.. They even 'brew' things from meat.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Dec 22, 2007)

Remathilis said:
			
		

> Don't sugarcoat your feelings Clavis, tell us how you REALLY feel.




Actually, don't.

Clavis, I understand that there is much that you don't like about 4e, but you don't need to tell us any more about it in this thread thanks.

By all means contribute thoughtfully though.

Thanks


----------



## Scribble (Dec 22, 2007)

Sir Brennen said:
			
		

> The article says "never cut a tree", but "never cut *down* a tree" would make more sense. I mean, don't you prune plants to keep them healthy?




In most cases, I believe that's only if you want to "interfere" with nature and keep them looking pretty for a longer period then they naturally would. 

Perhaps the elves simply do not interfere with nature. At all.


----------



## The Ubbergeek (Dec 22, 2007)

Scribble said:
			
		

> In most cases, I believe that's only if you want to "interfere" with nature and keep them looking pretty for a longer period then they naturally would.
> 
> Perhaps the elves simply do not interfere with nature. At all.




It could be, as I noted, the Elder Scrolls dark twist...


----------



## mhacdebhandia (Dec 22, 2007)

sidonunspa said:
			
		

> But to be honest that why people play D&D they are looking for that Tolken'esk feel...



Whoa, now. That simply isn't true.


----------



## Will (Dec 22, 2007)

Well, I really don't like rerolls, and I really REALLY don't like rerolls that can be lower than your original roll. 

Aura; I hope it has an in-setting explanation. I also feel wary about it because while they've stated they are simplifying bonuses and such, it sounds very much otherwise. Still holding out hope, but it's thinning.

Put me in favor of race selection, culture selection, class selection; I'm disappointed to find out they aren't splitting out culture.


----------



## The_Fan (Dec 22, 2007)

I'm somewhat surprised no one has mentioned the "elven Characteristics" section.

Is this just fluff? Or might there be some mechanical support for it, like choosing one or two characteristics and gtting a small bonus for it?


----------



## Bishmon (Dec 22, 2007)

The_Fan said:
			
		

> I'm somewhat surprised no one has mentioned the "elven Characteristics" section.
> 
> Is this just fluff? Or might there be some mechanical support for it, like choosing one or two characteristics and gtting a small bonus for it?



I'd imagine it's like what it was in the PHB2. That book had a number of different example character traits you could apply to your character. They were just suggestions designed to get people to think about their character's personality a bit more.

In that book, there was no mechanical benefit for it. And I hope for the love of all that is good they don't tie any mechanics into the characteristics in the 4E PHB because then it'll take all of a half-second for those to turn from 'suggestions to flesh out a personality' into 'ways to squeeze the most juice out of certain builds'.


----------



## Asmor (Dec 22, 2007)

Bishmon said:
			
		

> I'd imagine it's like what it was in the PHB2. That book had a number of different example character traits you could apply to your character. They were just suggestions designed to get people to think about their character's personality a bit more.
> 
> In that book, there was no mechanical benefit for it. And I hope for the love of all that is good they don't tie any mechanics into the characteristics in the 4E PHB because then it'll take all of a half-second for those to turn from 'suggestions to flesh out a personality' into 'ways to squeeze the most juice out of certain builds'.




Hey, that's a great idea! As long as we're stealing ideas from WoW, why _not_ take a cue from Pokémon as well?

I don't know if I should play a modest wizard or an adamant warlord.

/my timid Jolteon will pwn you faster than you can blink


----------



## cr0m (Dec 22, 2007)

I'm still thinking about Elven Accuracy. An earlier poster guessed that you're required to keep your re-roll in order to stop players from rolling well (a successful hit, for example) and then using Elven Accuracy to try to improve that to a critical.

That's a great use of the power! Do you burn it now, hoping for a crit, or save it for when you know you missed? I really don't get the strange, fiddly "you must keep the 2nd roll" rule.


----------



## KarinsDad (Dec 22, 2007)

Kintara said:
			
		

> What if the elf is instinctually directing those nearby to focus on their surroundings in a more general sense, or coordinating the vision and hearing angles of the party?




Everyone but the other Elves in the party.

And again, how exactly is it that the Elves "force" the other party members to behave or react in certain ways?


----------



## KarinsDad (Dec 22, 2007)

Cadfan said:
			
		

> Re: Forgetting the +1 Perception bonus.
> 
> If Perception is a "passive" ability, the person who has to remember is not the player.  Its the DM.
> 
> That's my job, and I personally think I can handle it.




Only at some tables.

At my table, I have the players roll most of their perception-like rolls.


----------



## KarinsDad (Dec 22, 2007)

ehren37 said:
			
		

> Its still a sorry +1 bonus (ie, not worth keepign track of). It reminds me of affiliations. Cool concept, but frequently lame implementation. Am I really going to remember that I get a +1 to make pancakes on Tuesday?




The entire problem with 3E/3.5 was that there are too MANY bonuses.

WotC should be getting rid of many of the bonuses. These are the things that eventually made the math bad at higher levels.

There are only so many possibilities with a D20 roll, but when someone is +40 with an ability and the opponents only have defenses of 35, the D20 becomes superfluous.

Look at the Elf. +2 to Perception. +1 to Wisdom. He is +3 to the roll with a Wisdom of 10. With a 1st level Wisdom of 18 (16 +2 racial), +2 to the skill, getting the skill Trained (+5) and Skill Focus (+5), he is already +16 to the roll (assuming a SWSE system and assuming he can get both of these). The bonuses can add up real quick.

His buddies in the group are +1 to +6.

The Elf can Take 10 and see most everything and his buddies can roll and rarely see anything.

The bonus range is too broad for first level PCs.


----------



## The Little Raven (Dec 22, 2007)

KarinsDad said:
			
		

> Everyone but the other Elves in the party.




Because the other Elves already have a +2 bonus to Perception from race, and they're trying to get rid of all those stacking bonuses.


----------



## FireLance (Dec 22, 2007)

KarinsDad said:
			
		

> Look at the Elf. +2 to Perception. +1 to Wisdom. He is +3 to the roll with a Wisdom of 10. With a 1st level Wisdom of 18 (16 +2 racial), +2 to the skill, getting the skill Trained (+5) and Skill Focus (+5), he is already +16 to the roll (assuming a SWSE system and assuming he can get both of these). The bonuses can add up real quick.
> 
> His buddies in the group are +1 to +6.
> 
> ...



How broad is too broad, anyway? 

Of the +16 in bonuses, only +3 directly relate to his being an elf. A human could have 16 Wisdom and Training and Focus in Perception for a +13 bonus at 1st level. The human similarly outclasses anyone is his party with a Perception bonus of +3 or lower, which is probably anyone who has no particular need to specialize in Wisdom.


----------



## Shroomy (Dec 22, 2007)

The range isn't too broad if the bonuses on the opposed Stealth role are of a similar value, which they should be if my understanding of the SWSE skill system is correct.


----------



## Voss (Dec 22, 2007)

FireLance said:
			
		

> How broad is too broad, anyway?
> 
> Of the +16 in bonuses, only +3 directly relate to his being an elf. A human could have 16 Wisdom and Training and Focus in Perception for a +13 bonus at 1st level. The human similarly outclasses anyone is his party with a Perception bonus of +3 or lower, which is probably anyone who has no particular need to specialize in Wisdom.




Lets put it this way.

Elf guy, as above.  +16  (or someone else trained, focuses and a pile of bonuses)
Rogue, trained, slight wisdom.  call it +7
untrained, wisdom-less fellow.  +0.  Or +1 if the elf is close by.

this is all first level, by the way.

Whats an appropriate DC here?
10?  Not even an issue for the elf.  #2, 85% chance of success. #3, 50%.
15?  100% for elf.  #2: 60%.  #3: 25%
20?  #1: 80%, still.  #2, 35%.  #3: 5% 
25?  Sorry, only the elf is playing reliably at this level.  He's still at 55%. #2 is down to 15%.  #3 isn't even there.

So how do you appropriately challenge this party with spot or search scenario?  Oh, the perception specialist found it and the rest of you shouldn't even bother isn't a very good option.

Even without the elf (say a human with focus, training, that perception/combat advantage feat and a decent wisdom, near an elf he's at +15 or so.), this variance in the modifier for 1st level characters is far too huge.  0 to about ~15 when the random number generator only goes to 20 is a major problem.  Someone's randomly throwing the dice and hoping he gets Vegas Odds, and someone else is almost guaranteed a win.  That isn't good.  In fact, as a system, thats down right *horrible*.

Gods help us if they take the Saga route and make initiative a skill


----------



## Campbell (Dec 22, 2007)

KarinsDad said:
			
		

> The entire problem with 3E/3.5 was that there are too MANY bonuses.
> 
> WotC should be getting rid of many of the bonuses. These are the things that eventually made the math bad at higher levels.
> 
> ...




If the bonus range is too broad, that's mostly due to Skill Focus. However, I don't understand your emphasis on 1st level. If we assume that extending the sweet spot over all levels of play is a Good ThingTM how can a bonus range be too broad at 1st level yet perfectly acceptable at 30th ?


----------



## Spatula (Dec 22, 2007)

That's assuming they're copy-and-pasting the SWSE skill rules and feats straight out of the Saga book, which are horribly flawed at low levels (as the example indicates).  SWSE allows for big giant numbers up front and then the skill bonuses flatten out over 20 levels.  I doubt we'll see the exact same thing in 4e.


----------



## Stalker0 (Dec 22, 2007)

Voss said:
			
		

> Lets put it this way.
> 
> Elf guy, as above.  +16  (or someone else trained, focuses and a pile of bonuses)
> Rogue, trained, slight wisdom.  call it +7
> ...




We are making a couple of assumptions that have to be looked at:

1) Skill Focus provides a +5. Lets remember that feats are downgraded in 4e from what we've heard. They may provide a +4 or +3 bonus. Further, that skill training provides the +5 bonus.

2) That skill focus will often be taken. I mean, in this example we are talking the paragon of perception, a man who is wholly dedicated to seeing stuff. Now if we are talking a guy with just an amazing wisdom (+4) an elf (+2), and trained (+5), we have a +9 bonus. This is only 2 points higher than our 3e equivalent (16 wis, elf, 4 ranks in spot).

How often will characters take skill focus?

3) Will skill focus even be in the game? Perhaps their will only be reroll feats, and not straight bonuses like in SAGA, we just don't know yet.


----------



## FireLance (Dec 22, 2007)

Voss said:
			
		

> So how do you appropriately challenge this party with spot or search scenario?  Oh, the perception specialist found it and the rest of you shouldn't even bother isn't a very good option.



I do recognize that this can be a problem, but it just seemed strange to me to criticize the elf bonuses when the +5 bonuses from Trained and Focus seem to be much larger contributing factors.

Perhaps to even things a bit more at 1st level, +5 to each may only be the bonus at the Epic tier. At Heroic and Paragon tiers, perhaps the bonuses from Trained and Focus could be +3 and +4 - still a significant edge over untrained/unfocused characters, but not nearly as overwhelming.

A tweaked out elf could thus have +12 at 1st level, a rogue could have +5, and the untrained guy could have +0.


----------



## Voss (Dec 22, 2007)

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> We are making a couple of assumptions that have to be looked at:




Yes we are.  We're assuming that Saga is the big preview of 4e that we've been repeatedly told that it is.

But really, perception is a big, big skill.  (Like init is, if that is for some reason made a skill, like Saga).  That surprise round can literally kill you.  Throwing a feat into that is very worthwhile, since it comes up in some many encounters, particularly the potentially fatal ones.


@Firelance- that doesn't really help.  The variance is still too big.  Going beyond about a +5 variance within a single level is too much, mathematically speaking.  Thats 25% on a die roll.  Thats *huge*.  Reasonable differences are ideally +2 to +4.


----------



## Kintara (Dec 22, 2007)

KarinsDad said:
			
		

> Everyone but the other Elves in the party.
> 
> And again, how exactly is it that the Elves "force" the other party members to behave or react in certain ways?



Why force? I don't think it would be out of line to decline the bonus. It's like offered advice. You don't need to follow it, but in this case it's good advice.


----------



## small pumpkin man (Dec 22, 2007)

Voss said:
			
		

> Yes we are.  We're assuming that Saga is the big preview of 4e that we've been repeatedly told that it is.



No, it shows where their heads were at at the time, we've been specifically told that 4e skill system will be similar, but different to the Saga System, the reasons the trained/skill focus bonuses were so big in Saga is because they were the only ones it was possible to get. The fact that there are bonuses besides these implies that the bonuses from trained and the feat will be smaller.


			
				Voss said:
			
		

> But really, perception is a big, big skill.  (Like init is, if that is for some reason made a skill, like Saga).  That surprise round can literally kill you.  Throwing a feat into that is very worthwhile, since it comes up in some many encounters, particularly the potentially fatal ones.
> 
> 
> @Firelance- that doesn't really help.  The variance is still too big.  Going beyond about a +5 variance within a single level is too much, mathematically speaking.  Thats 25% on a die roll.  Thats *huge*.  Reasonable differences are ideally +2 to +4.



There's one very large difference you're forgetting, everyone scales almost equally (except for the people who put points into the appropriate stat). What this means is while the nutcase perception character has +16 over the mook or Wizard at first level, which is a lot more than 3e, that difference remains essentially the same all the way to level 30. (or at least will scale less), which is a much smaller difference than it was at level 20 between the crazy perception guy and the mook (which was closer to 30 or 50).

In fact I would argue about +15 is exactly the sweet spot between the crazy skilled guy and the mook that you want, and that extending that sweet spot from 1st to 30th is a Good Thing.


----------



## Voss (Dec 22, 2007)

+15 is way too high.  Its literally 75% of the possible results on a d20, almost to the point that the die roll doesn't even matter.  

Its better than 3e, true, but really, next you're going to tell me that a mansion is better than a shack.

OK, on the Saga thing, you are correct.  There are assumptions built in.  But lets take a look at what we actually do know.  100% verifiable facts.
An elf, at first level can take the negate combat advantage feat, which gives a +2 perception (feat) bonus.
Between that and his +2 perception bonus and his +2 to wisdom, a first level elf can be at an extra +5 over the 'normal' maximum for a perception roll (whatever that is).

He an extra 25% bonus on perception checks.  He is hitting a static DC an extra one quarter of the time. Thats a rather large stack of bonuses he can sit on at first level.  
Thats really stretching the limit of the statistical curve. And you can *start* that way with one feat.

If perception is a passive skill, he is 25% less likely to be surprised be stealthy enemies. Thats a very significant game effect. 

 (And it should be pointed out that we've been told that most things advance a 1/2 level.  I do believe skills were included in this list.  He's competing equally with a significant number of 10th level characters).


(back to speculation for a minute.  if you add this +5 to the +15 you say is the sweet spot, you've got a 100% win rate.  The perception junky always wins.  Thats... bad.)


----------



## JohnSnow (Dec 22, 2007)

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> Sounds to me like the Drow get Dex and Charisma bonus - "Although they are no taller than eladrins, they have a presence that often makes members of other races feel smaller and on edge"
> 
> Sounds like Cha to me.
> 
> Cheers




And since "Eladrin share the grace and agility of their elf cousins but place more value on the developed intellect than on intuition and emotion," I'm betting they get:

+2 Dex, +2 Int

Cheers!


----------



## Mr. Wilson (Dec 22, 2007)

I don't understand why people take such issue with the height/weight of elves.  When I finished high school I was 6 foot tall and weighed 128 pounds.  I was fit enough to run at least a mile every day, do farm work, play basketball fairly well, etc, etc.  Yeah, I was skinny, but not OMG YOU'RE GONNA DIE skinny.

When I graduated college in 2003 I was up to 145 pounds, and honestly didn't look much different.  I now weight 160 pounds but I blame that on lack of excerise and bad diet.


----------



## Will (Dec 22, 2007)

You know, it occurs to me that I may have misunderstood what they meant when the devs said 'we want to reduce the number of stacking bonuses.'

I assumed they meant 'we want fewer bonuses to worry about.' Maybe they were rather specifically saying 'now most bonuses don't add together.'


...

Sigh.


----------



## Moon-Lancer (Dec 22, 2007)

Mr. Wilson said:
			
		

> I don't understand why people take such issue with the height/weight of elves.  When I finished high school I was 6 foot tall and weighed 128 pounds.  I was fit enough to run at least a mile every day, do farm work, play basketball fairly well, etc, etc.  Yeah, I was skinny, but not OMG YOU'RE GONNA DIE skinny.
> 
> When I graduated college in 2003 I was up to 145 pounds, and honestly didn't look much different.  I now weight 160 pounds but I blame that on lack of excerise and bad diet.





I know what you mean. I'm 5.11 and 140 pounds. Its almost as if the majority of gamers were fat.... AH HA, the popularity of dwarves makes perfect sense now.


----------



## The_Fan (Dec 22, 2007)

Bishmon said:
			
		

> I'd imagine it's like what it was in the PHB2. That book had a number of different example character traits you could apply to your character. They were just suggestions designed to get people to think about their character's personality a bit more.
> 
> In that book, there was no mechanical benefit for it. And I hope for the love of all that is good they don't tie any mechanics into the characteristics in the 4E PHB because then it'll take all of a half-second for those to turn from 'suggestions to flesh out a personality' into 'ways to squeeze the most juice out of certain builds'.




Probably right. It would lead to what you say, though the intention would be good. Maybe if it's highly situational or fully at DM discretion if you got the bonus or not?

But you're right, probably best left as a roleplaying suggestion.


----------



## The_Fan (Dec 22, 2007)

Moon-Lancer said:
			
		

> I know what you mean. I'm 5.11 and 140 pounds. Its almost as if the majority of gamers were fat.... AH HA, the popularity of dwarves makes perfect sense now.



 6'4", 170 lbs.

I've found gamers tend to be at the extremes. Very tall, very skinny, very short, or very fat. We're an odd looking bunch.


----------



## Mr. Wilson (Dec 22, 2007)

The_Fan said:
			
		

> 6'4", 170 lbs.
> 
> I've found gamers tend to be at the extremes. Very tall, very skinny, very short, or very fat. We're an odd looking bunch.




It would be an interesting experiment to see if gamer's body type influenced what race they played in D&D.


----------



## Spinachcat (Dec 22, 2007)

_Group Awareness: You grant non-elf allies within 5 squares a +1 racial bonus to Perception checks._

If my dwarf is surrounded by 10 elf buddies, do I get a +10 bonus?


----------



## Will (Dec 22, 2007)

Just a minor note to say that BMI is a horrible horrible thing, mainly because it's terribly inaccurate and at the same time misused rather widely by the medical community.

(BMI was originally developed as a statistical population tool in the 1800s.)


----------



## Incenjucar (Dec 22, 2007)

Moon-Lancer said:
			
		

> I know what you mean. I'm 5.11 and 140 pounds. Its almost as if the majority of gamers were fat.... AH HA, the popularity of dwarves makes perfect sense now.




Muscular or simply bulky of form.  You'd be amazed how much you can weigh with a 30" waist.

The main thing is that, with all the physical activity elves get involved in... outdoors no less... and often in trees... and this is their standard behavior...

But not that big a deal.  Just makes them easier to pick up and throw.


----------



## KarinsDad (Dec 22, 2007)

Shroomy said:
			
		

> The range isn't too broad if the bonuses on the opposed Stealth role are of a similar value, which they should be if my understanding of the SWSE skill system is correct.




Not true.

If the enemies have +16 as well, then only the PC Elf has a real chance to notice them. The PCs will rarely notice them.

If the enemies have +6 so that all of the +1 to +6 PCs have some chance to notice them, then the PC Elf notices them nearly every time.

This isn't balance.


----------



## The Little Raven (Dec 22, 2007)

KarinsDad said:
			
		

> Not true.
> 
> If the enemies have +16 as well, then only the PC Elf has a real chance to notice them. The PCs will rarely notice them.
> 
> ...




But when it comes down to it, this isn't because he's an elf, it's because he's a character that is focused on Perception. As has been demonstrated, a human with an equal focus on Perception will have a score within 3 points of the elf.


----------



## Stalker0 (Dec 22, 2007)

FireLance said:
			
		

> Perhaps to even things a bit more at 1st level, +5 to each may only be the bonus at the Epic tier. At Heroic and Paragon tiers, perhaps the bonuses from Trained and Focus could be +3 and +4 - still a significant edge over untrained/unfocused characters, but not nearly as overwhelming.




I personally would love it if feats scaled like that in 4e. Flat bonuses that increase every so often. Not a crazy amount, just once in a blue moon, but it makes the feat competitive (but not over the top) at both low and high levels.



> But really, perception is a big, big skill. (Like init is, if that is for some reason made a skill, like Saga). That surprise round can literally kill you. Throwing a feat into that is very worthwhile, since it comes up in some many encounters, particularly the potentially fatal ones.




Another assumption we have to take a closer look at. We know in 4e there will be less "save or suck spells", at least as far as save or dies. Further, combats are expected to take more rounds to accomplish. Therefore, it makes sense that the surprise round is less important than it once was. In that respect, initiative plays less of a role. So even if the elf goes on surprise round often, it likely will not make as big an impact as you would expect.


----------



## med stud (Dec 22, 2007)

EDIT: Removed post due to being off topic.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Dec 22, 2007)

Spinachcat said:
			
		

> _Group Awareness: You grant non-elf allies within 5 squares a +1 racial bonus to Perception checks._
> 
> If my dwarf is surrounded by 10 elf buddies, do I get a +10 bonus?



+1 _racial_ bonus. Unless the rules for stacking change strongly in D&D 4, no, you just get a +1 bonus.


----------



## ehren37 (Dec 22, 2007)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> 300 years ain't ancient history though.  3000 years?  That's a different matter.
> 
> And frankly, in a world where you've got races that can live from 700-2500 years (or more), even that isn't much.  Have you looked at the Grand History of the Realms?  There are things in there that were occurring 33,000 years before the present day.




Yeah, I left a 0 off that. It was intended to be 3000. 

Wonder WHY timelines in published campaigns have to be retardedly long? Why humanoids in D&D are apparently flat out stupid and uncreative compared to Earth when it comes to technology? Its because they have a race thats lifespan is an era of history, so the numbers have to be inflated to allow for "ancient" events that you cant go and ask your local elf about.


----------



## Reynard (Dec 22, 2007)

ehren37 said:
			
		

> Wonder WHY timelines in published campaigns have to be retardedly long? Why humanoids in D&D are apparently flat out stupid and uncreative compared to Earth when it comes to technology? Its because they have a race thats lifespan is an era of history, so the numbers have to be inflated to allow for "ancient" events that you cant go and ask your local elf about.




There is an ebb and flow to social and technological development.  Assuming we would call the 13th century the typial D&D time-frame, there's 4000 years of human civilization to account for, some periods of which were more advanced socially and technologically that the "modern" time.


----------



## Amrynn Moonshadow (Dec 22, 2007)

med stud said:
			
		

> I have to disagree here. BMI most often can't be used without looking at the patient as well but at the limits set by the medical community as being unhealthy (above 30, below ~17) BMI is pretty much always accurate.




I don't think so . . . BMI isn't 'pretty much always accurate' in my medical opinion. Just take a look at a few professional athletes. Mark Eaton was a bean pole, but his BMI is over 26. Karl Malone, who has 2.3% body fat, is also overweight by the BMI scale, the two time MVP of the NBA has a BMI over 27. I agree that BMI by itself is not as good as it is with other diagnostic tools, however is that more a product of the 'other diagnostic tools' being useful, and the BMI being the Gnome bard of the medical diagnosis toolbox (it's loud, everyone has heard of it, and has an opinion of it, but not everyone understands what it means) or that the BMI's use is augmented by further examinations?


----------



## Szatany (Dec 22, 2007)

Bishmon said:
			
		

> I love the elf entry. Absolutely perfect for what I want out of elves.
> 
> My only concern is the +1 to allies within a certain distance thing, and I'm only concerned because those type of abilities could be annoying to track if there's a lot of them. But my small concern about that is vastly overshadowed by my happiness at the racial entry.



Agreed, it should rather be a +5 bonus for all allies for one Perception check, usable once per day.


----------



## Kintara (Dec 22, 2007)

Spinachcat said:
			
		

> _Group Awareness: You grant non-elf allies within 5 squares a +1 racial bonus to Perception checks._
> 
> If my dwarf is surrounded by 10 elf buddies, do I get a +10 bonus?



No, I just don't think that makes sense because why would non-elves benefit vastly more than elves? I can understand a +1 because elves get a racial bonus of +2 already. I can see sharing half of that bonus with a non-elf.
--
Anyway, I'm trying to remember where I saw it, but I remember hearing one of the SWSE developers making a comment that he thought it was unlikely that they'd be using the skill system from that game. D&D has different priorities than SWSE had. It'll probably bear some semblance to it, but I wouldn't assume too much.


----------



## WayneLigon (Dec 22, 2007)

ehren37 said:
			
		

> Wonder WHY timelines in published campaigns have to be retardedly long? Why humanoids in D&D are apparently flat out stupid and uncreative compared to Earth when it comes to technology?




Typically, D&D campaigns have a slightly higher level of technology than we did at the midieval period. Remember, the last 100 years or so is not the norm for how technology has progressed on Earth - you have 5000+ years of people basically grubbing in the dirt with sticks, only the sticks change every 500 years or so. And we have not had magical disasters wiping out all progress occassionally. The closest we come is the fall of the Roman Empire and it plunged Europe into 1000 years of darkness. One of the few things that kept learning alive was a unified Church and not many D&D worlds have that.


----------



## Banshee16 (Dec 22, 2007)

BadMojo said:
			
		

> I don't think it's particularly difficult, but I find it kind of silly.  Your average heroic adventurer elf has spend 70+ years singing songs, writing poetry and picking flowers but hasn't really learned anything of use?
> 
> One day a week practicing with sword and bow for 70 years and they can still get beat down by a human who's only been able to lift a sword for 3 or 4 years?
> 
> It really stretches my disbelief suspenders.




As mentioned in my post above, they don't need to be 70 years old to be an adventurer.  They could easily be one by 30.  They'd just sort of be looked at by their family as the red-headed stepchild...the one who moved out at 17...that kind of thing.

And at 30, they wouldn't be any less competent than many humans are at that age...still lvl 1.

I find it humourous to discuss suspension of disbelief with respect to elves living a long time, when they're in the middle of putting demonically or devilishly blooded human crossbreeds, and walking humanoid dragonfolk into the game 

Banshee


----------



## Banshee16 (Dec 22, 2007)

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> Regarding age of races, there is a nice line in Races & Classes about Eladrin that goes like this




Nice 

Banshee


----------



## DandD (Dec 22, 2007)

Bah, these magical D&D-worlds are far more advanced than we ever could be. They can tap upon powers to travel to alternate realities, change time, tele-transport, have far superior medical techniques with which they can even bring back dead people, can grow food instantly, and destroy worlds in an instant, cause tidal waves, and create viable offsprings with alien creatures. Their only problem, like upon our world, is the distribution of power and ressources. 
But everytime some mage-goons stick together to do something good, they create uber-magical empires that can do things that defy anything we ever accomplished, like floating cities, never-ending food and drinks, magical automaton slaves and such.


----------



## HeinorNY (Dec 22, 2007)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> As mentioned in my post above, they don't need to be 70 years old to be an adventurer.  They could easily be one by 30.  They'd just sort of be looked at by their family as the red-headed stepchild...the one who moved out at 17...that kind of thing.
> 
> And at 30, they wouldn't be any less competent than many humans are at that age...still lvl 1.
> 
> ...



Agreed.
People forget that humans and elves are different species.
Humans need 7,8 or 9 years to even be able to defend themselves from dangers, at least to recognize the danger and run away.
An 8 or 9 years old dog is already and old adult dog.

A 17 years old human beating down a 70 years old elf is no more silly than a 3 years old dog chasing a scared 30 years old human on the street.

Are humans retarded?
If a dog could think he would answer: WHOOF WHOOF!


----------



## Banshee16 (Dec 22, 2007)

Moon-Lancer said:
			
		

> I know what you mean. I'm 5.11 and 140 pounds. Its almost as if the majority of gamers were fat.... AH HA, the popularity of dwarves makes perfect sense now.




I'd suspect that the majority (though not all) of the gamers posting on these boards are in North America....I think the reticence to accept the weight thing is simply because of the increasing size of north american culture.  You kind of stop noticing it at after a while...though when I went to continental europe, it reminded me of how big people back home are.

I think by your standards, I'm probably big, at 5'9" and 180.  Used to be 162, but office job, inadequate exercise, etc.  But against what I see around me sometimes, most think I'm fairly small.

I think that a race like elves could have lighter bones, faster metabolism, etc.  I know guys who could probably polish off a few burgers a day, and not gain any weight.  It just doesn't seem to stick to them.

Banshee


----------



## Destil (Dec 22, 2007)

KarinsDad said:
			
		

> The entire problem with 3E/3.5 was that there are too MANY bonuses.
> 
> ...
> 
> (assuming a SWSE system and assuming he can get both of these).



Actually, this is a pretty good indication that there's some significant changes to the skill system from SWSE. In Saga racial bonuses to a a skill are *always* either a conditional bonus feat of Skill Focus (if you are trained in the skill you get Skill Focus for free) or a auto-reroll of the skill each time, taking the better (mostly for movement skills like Swim for an aquatic race). So I wouldn't go throwing around thoes numbers just yet...


----------



## med stud (Dec 22, 2007)

EDIT: Post removed due to being off topic.


----------



## Piratecat (Dec 22, 2007)

Let's focus back on elves and away from weight/BMI, please.


----------



## Voss (Dec 22, 2007)

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> Another assumption we have to take a closer look at. We know in 4e there will be less "save or suck spells", at least as far as save or dies. Further, combats are expected to take more rounds to accomplish. Therefore, it makes sense that the surprise round is less important than it once was. In that respect, initiative plays less of a role. So even if the elf goes on surprise round often, it likely will not make as big an impact as you would expect.




Uh. We've already had a look a powers that do double damage straight out of the gate. If you can consistently win the surprise round, you're at a major advantage.  If you've got two such powers and can consistently win surprise and initiative, you've got the combat pretty much locked up.

 there aren't that many assumptions involved.


----------



## Asmor (Dec 22, 2007)

DandD said:
			
		

> Bah, these magical D&D-worlds are far more advanced than we ever could be. They can tap upon powers to travel to alternate realities, change time, tele-transport, have far superior medical techniques with which they can even bring back dead people, can grow food instantly, and destroy worlds in an instant, cause tidal waves, and create viable offsprings with alien creatures. Their only problem, like upon our world, is the distribution of power and ressources.
> But everytime some mage-goons stick together to do something good, they create uber-magical empires that can do things that defy anything we ever accomplished, like floating cities, never-ending food and drinks, magical automaton slaves and such.




It's worth noting that, in all likelihood, we're far below our potential technology level...

Technology and learning was increasing pretty steadily (maybe even exponentially?) for quite a long time... and then all of a sudden the dark ages happened. People stopped learning, stuff we already knew was forgotten, and we didn't even stagnate for those hundreds of years; we actually slid back a lot. Finally when the dark ages ended, we had to start back from a lower point than we had already achieved.

So a culture that never had a dark ages (or equivalent) might be far more advanced than us. Actually, that's a plot point in one of the Stargate episodes which I can't think of...

Anyways, back on track, there's something else to consider; namely, the existence of magic somewhat obviates the needs for technology. Not completely, mind you. Technology would be great for the peasants and lower classes, but real technological and industrial development would be spurred by the richer classes, merchants and nobles, who really don't have much of a problem hiring magic users to do things. Cheaper in the short run, and infinitely less risky than investing in some gnome's crazy steam-powered carriage.


----------



## KarinsDad (Dec 22, 2007)

Mourn said:
			
		

> But when it comes down to it, this isn't because he's an elf, it's because he's a character that is focused on Perception. As has been demonstrated, a human with an equal focus on Perception will have a score within 3 points of the elf.




Partially true.

There are two issues here:

1) If Skill Focus and Skill Training are +5 each, WotC mathematically screwed up. IMHO. At +3, they are probably ok. Or, they are probably ok if Skill Focus does not exist and Skill Training is +5.

2) The Elf is +3 over the same stat human. That's still pretty substantial. If he is a "perceptive class" (i.e. base Wisdom 16 as opposed to base Wisdom 10), that's probably another +3 over his comrades.

Without taking any training at all, the Elf Ranger is (in the ballpark of) +6 over "the Fighter" or "the Wizard".

+6 is huge in a D20 system at first level with absolutely no training. And half of that +6 is racial.


----------



## Kintara (Dec 22, 2007)

KarinsDad said:
			
		

> Partially true.
> 
> There are two issues here:
> 
> ...



Actually, you're counting the Wisdom bonus twice. An elf with a Wisdom 16 personally has a +5, and the bonus from Group Awareness actually shrinks the comparative difference between party members....


----------



## TwinBahamut (Dec 22, 2007)

Asmor said:
			
		

> It's worth noting that, in all likelihood, we're far below our potential technology level...



This would only really be true if all of human history only occurred in Europe, and the Middle East, India, and China did not exist.

Rome was still struggling to catch up to a lot of the developments in those regions when it collapsed, and a lot of the knowledge of classical Europe was preserved and vastly expanded upon in the Middle East. Not to mention that the "Dark Ages" showed the development of a lot of things that did not exist before.

As a whole, the idea that mankind somehow regressed significantly after the fall of the roman empire is greatly exaggerated, and is mostly a product of Eurocentric thinking and an overstatement of the technological and intellectual achievements of Rome. I mean, in the middle of the so-called Dark Ages, China came close to triggering the Industrial Revolution...


----------



## Dausuul (Dec 22, 2007)

TwinBahamut said:
			
		

> As a whole, the idea that mankind somehow regressed significantly after the fall of the roman empire is greatly exaggerated, and is mostly a product of Eurocentric thinking and an overstatement of the technological and intellectual achievements of Rome. I mean, in the middle of the so-called Dark Ages, China came close to triggering the Industrial Revolution...




Agreed.  "Dark ages" in the real world are much less widespread and dramatic than most people think; technology trends upward pretty steadily.  Sometimes there's a burst of progress, sometimes a period with very little, but it's rare to see things actually go backward.

However, D&D has other ways to explain a worldwide "dark age"--from the spectacular, such as a portal to the Abyss being opened and unleashing a horde of demons, to the subtle, such as the machinations of Asmodeus steadily extinguishing the lights of knowledge and civilization so that his minions can establish control.


----------



## mhacdebhandia (Dec 22, 2007)

KarinsDad said:
			
		

> Only at some tables.
> 
> At my table, I have the players roll most of their perception-like rolls.



You missed the point of the post to which you replied.

"Perception as a passive value" means Perception as a defensive score, like AC - a value which the DM "attacks" with an NPC's Stealth skill. So the DM "has" to roll it, otherwise the players know there's someone out there who might be stalking them.


----------



## Imp (Dec 22, 2007)

TwinBahamut said:
			
		

> This would only really be true if all of human history only occurred in Europe, and the Middle East, India, and China did not exist.
> 
> Rome was still struggling to catch up to a lot of the developments in those regions when it collapsed, and a lot of the knowledge of classical Europe was preserved and vastly expanded upon in the Middle East. Not to mention that the "Dark Ages" showed the development of a lot of things that did not exist before.
> 
> As a whole, the idea that mankind somehow regressed significantly after the fall of the roman empire is greatly exaggerated, and is mostly a product of Eurocentric thinking and an overstatement of the technological and intellectual achievements of Rome. I mean, in the middle of the so-called Dark Ages, China came close to triggering the Industrial Revolution...



But unless you actually have a world-spanning campaign setting that point is neither here nor there – it's fairly difficult in a campaign to span an area much larger than Europe anyway, except for Jaunts To Exotic Foreign Lands some of which may have Mystical Technology which can just underscore the dark-age atmosphere of the main setting... and in any case the "points-of-light" campaign building that they're encouraging this time around _is_ a dark ages (or possibly Bronze-Age) setting.  That's one of its limitations.

What was the point of all this?  Terribly long timelines?  That's something that I've been solving lately by cyclical rise-and-decline-and-falls.  It is also interesting to have truly ancient elven swords be bronze, or corroded to near-formlessness (but still effective and magical).  Ever read the Grasscutter stories in Usagi Yojimbo?  Like that.


----------



## Henry (Dec 22, 2007)

TwinBahamut said:
			
		

> As a whole, the idea that mankind somehow regressed significantly after the fall of the roman empire is greatly exaggerated, and is mostly a product of Eurocentric thinking and an overstatement of the technological and intellectual achievements of Rome. I mean, in the middle of the so-called Dark Ages, China came close to triggering the Industrial Revolution...




A professor of mine about 15 years ago used to refer to this as "The Petrarchan Screwjob."  It still amazes me some of the "modern" concepts and inventions that did originate from AD 500 to 1000. (CE, AD, etc.)


----------



## Plane Sailing (Dec 22, 2007)

mhacdebhandia said:
			
		

> "Perception as a passive value" means Perception as a defensive score, like AC - a value which the DM "attacks" with an NPC's Stealth skill. So the DM "has" to roll it, otherwise the players know there's someone out there who might be stalking them.




One of the side effects that I like about the times when passive perception is used is that one roll tells you how many of the party have spotted things and the people who have invested in decent spot skills don't get shafted by continually rolling badly on the spot checks. If the average guy sees it, then the spotmeister has seen it too.


----------



## Kintara (Dec 23, 2007)

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> One of the side effects that I like about the times when passive perception is used is that one roll tells you how many of the party have spotted things and the people who have invested in decent spot skills don't get shafted by continually rolling badly on the spot checks. If the average guy sees it, then the spotmeister has seen it too.



I like the idea, as long as one side has something to roll. If something is merely hard to find instead of hidden, it would seem a little strange to roll for it as the DM. I would be fine with it, but it might be too weird for D&D.


----------



## Will (Dec 23, 2007)

As an aside, the book 'Ancient Inventions' is pure awesome, and really inspires for some of the technology you might see in historic games, particularly if you start dosing in magic.

Romans, for example, had obstetric equipment unmatched until the last century or so. Ancient Indians had cosmetic surgery and dissolvable sutures (made of ant heads... weird, but it worked). 

It's worth reading to fill your head with bizarre ideas of what you might find in a gnome dungeon, or whatnot...


----------



## Blue (Dec 23, 2007)

*Some good, some bad, some tangents.*

It’s got things I like and things I don’t.

I really like the bonuses-only.  I can’t say the number of times I haven’t played a race/class combo because of a penalty (like a half-orc paladin), but I don’t mind playing a race that doesn’t get a bonus (like a dwarven cleric).  Someone pointed out that it makes it easier to balance vs. what previously would be a +1 LA.  Good!

On the other hand, one I don’t that’s also in SAGA is assuming that combat is the default.  Speed is only listed in squares.  I want things like hourly walking as well as combat.  One that could be bad is that it just mentions low-light.  In SAGA the racial entries mention low-light, but only it’s affects on combat, ignoring all other uses.

I’m a fan of the (assumed) slight increase in move.  That’s fits, and makes them unique.

The age thing helps run them in the same game as other races.  (And, as people mentioned, it can change for a world.  For example, in my campaign they are truly age-immortal, but eventually feel a Tolkien-esqe call because there are only so many elven souls to go around and they may need to die before any new elves are born.)

Group awareness seems a bit backwards.  You want game design of racial characteristics to support racial feel in play.  Here you have perceptive folks who favor rogues and rangers – who usually won’t be scouting ahead of the party since then the party is too far away to get the Group Awareness bonus.  In other words, that bonus engenders the exact opposite game action (sticking them in the middle of the party) as the class description would lead you to expect (scouting around).  That's a design boo-boo, but not a killer.

People are talking that the feat isn’t all that fantastic.  I wonder if the number of racial feats means anything, like Shifter feats in Eberron.  That would allow weaker feats, but any of them build on your elfiness.  Elf-ness.  Elveness.  Elfhood.  Faeriness.  You know what I mean.

The loss of the resistances and such don’t bother me.  It will make the existing campaigns I run/play in harder to convert (as will the rest).  But since I’m okay with them killing some sacred cows, I’ll accept that it will be hard to convert anyway so that’s not a point against.

Though I was sort of hoping with all of the sacred cows they were doing away with that they’d separate racial bonuses from cultural bonuses.  “The elves of the south are masters of bows, while the elves of the mountains are canny trackers one and all.  And all elves have eyesight that make eagles seems half-blind.”

Sure, you can house-rule it, but if you just separate it you can make things easy.  “I’m a half-elf fully accepted into the elven community since birth.  It took me just as long to grow up as the full blooded elves.  But somehow, I never learned how to use a bow.”  Or things like an elf reincarnated (if that still exists) into another race.  They lose the racial bonuses, keep their cultural bonuses, and don’t get the cultural bonuses the other race would have available.

Okay, wandering off track.

I sort of wish the racial bonuses were higher.  +1 and +2 have some meaning at low levels, but get lost in the noise at higher levels.  Make that you're of a race mean something up through paragon play at least.

All in all, that's a race I would play, and I think it's about a 7 out of 10 in terms of being "all that" that 4ed is trying to be over 3.5.

Cheers,
=Blue(23)


----------



## Glyfair (Dec 23, 2007)

Blue said:
			
		

> Though I was sort of hoping with all of the sacred cows they were doing away with that they’d separate racial bonuses from cultural bonuses.  “The elves of the south are masters of bows, while the elves of the mountains are canny trackers one and all.  And all elves have eyesight that make eagles seems half-blind.”



Changing that would require a major paradigm shift for D&D and I think we would have heard about it.  It would have added another thing to choose during character creation (choose class and culture) since everyone should then get something specifically for their culture.  DMs would also have a huge amount of prep work since they would have to design "culture packages" for every backgrounds PCs would want to take.

_Fantasy Hero_ did it pretty well.  They had package deals for both racial characteristics and cultures.  However, choosing and balancing such things were at the base of the Hero system.  D&D isn't built quite that way, and I think we won't see it soon.


----------



## Reynard (Dec 23, 2007)

Blue said:
			
		

> For example, in my campaign they are truly age-immortal, but eventually feel a Tolkien-esqe call because there are only so many elven souls to go around and they may need to die before any new elves are born.




*yoink*


----------



## Ahglock (Dec 23, 2007)

didnt see the mod post


----------



## Ahglock (Dec 23, 2007)

On the stat side it seems like a fairly cool set of stats and nothing that would shoehorns it into only one of two concepts to firmly.  The lack of stat penalties help a lot in that regard.  Its hard to say much since we only have the elf to look at so far.  By itself its cool, whether it is cool when compared to other races we don't know yet.


----------



## Kintara (Dec 23, 2007)

The mods have told us not to talk about the whole BMI thing.

Anyway, yeah, it's hard to say what these stats mean without context. But I do like the look of the Accuracy power. It's generally useful to any class, but still seems to fit the Elven style. I wonder how many feats and acquired powers they are planning for each race....


----------



## Ahglock (Dec 23, 2007)

Kintara said:
			
		

> The mods have told us not to talk about the whole BMI thing.
> 
> Anyway, yeah, it's hard to say what these stats mean without context. But I do like the look of the Accuracy power. It's generally useful to any class, but still seems to fit the Elven style. I wonder how many feats and acquired powers they are planning for each race....




sorry must of missed that in the 14 pages or so.


----------



## broghammerj (Dec 23, 2007)

Edited per PirateCats previous request which was unread at the time of original posting.  By looking at this page, I guess I am not the only one.


----------



## Stereofm (Dec 23, 2007)

Will said:
			
		

> As an aside, the book 'Ancient Inventions' is pure awesome, and really inspires for some of the technology you might see in historic games, particularly if you start dosing in magic.
> 
> Romans, for example, had obstetric equipment unmatched until the last century or so. Ancient Indians had cosmetic surgery and dissolvable sutures (made of ant heads... weird, but it worked).
> 
> It's worth reading to fill your head with bizarre ideas of what you might find in a gnome dungeon, or whatnot...




I am interested. could you give me the full reference to it ? publisher/year/...


----------



## HeinorNY (Dec 23, 2007)

How often can the elf use his Elven Accuracy power outside of an encounter?
Let's say he is in an archery tournament, or just shooting fruits on a tree.


----------



## broghammerj (Dec 23, 2007)

It seems there is some disdain for the old elf bonuses to longsword and bows.  In general, why are people happy with their removal?

I sort of miss some of the old crazy bonuses such as immunity to ghoul paralysis, ability to find secret doors, etc.  I can remember some times when those had a real impact on the game.  Perhaps it's my nostalgia talking.


----------



## Kintara (Dec 23, 2007)

broghammerj said:
			
		

> I sort of miss some of the old crazy bonuses such as immunity to ghoul paralysis, ability to find secret doors, etc.  I can remember some times when those had a real impact on the game.  Perhaps it's my nostalgia talking.



Well, we actually don't know what the Elf and Eladrin can get later on with racial feats and powers. Heck, we don't even know what the Eladrin start with, yet.


----------



## Ahglock (Dec 23, 2007)

ainatan said:
			
		

> How often can the elf use his Elven Accuracy power outside of an encounter?
> Let's say he is in an archery tournament, or just shooting fruits on a tree.




We don't know yet.  Some seem to think that if its not an encounter then they just can't use it.  Though I guess I'd describe a tournament and shooting fruits off a tree as an encounter.  So for me the tournament would be one encounter, if you didn't have large breaks between shots, and shooting fruits off a tree until you were done shooting it would be one encounter.  If someone wants to shoot once, wait a bit and focus up I'd be willing to say after a minute or two(or whatever a designated rest period is) its a new encounter.


----------



## BryonD (Dec 23, 2007)

ainatan said:
			
		

> How often can the elf use his Elven Accuracy power outside of an encounter?
> Let's say he is in an archery tournament, or just shooting fruits on a tree.



I'm just making this up on the fly, but letting them use it at will in these circumstances might be cool.  When an elf can calmly let an arrow fly without distraction, then they are simply the best there is.  Even common elves would be clearly superior to most rank and file human archers when the task is nothing more than target shooting.  In the heat of battle, this isn't as reliable, but even 1/encounter would still show a marked superiority over time.  

It fits the feel nicely in my mind.  

And when a 23rd level human ranger shows up and wins a local elven archery tournament, he will officially be Bad Ass.  

I wouldn't have an issue with more clear limitations, such as the tournament = 1 encounter.  But it just doesn't seem a critical issue to me.  I wouldn't be concerned about it being broken.  It would simply be understood in the setting that entering an archery match with an elf is about like entering a wrestling match with an ogre.  Only REAL HEROES need apply.


----------



## Piratecat (Dec 23, 2007)

broghammerj said:
			
		

> Edited per PirateCats previous request which was unread at the time of original posting.  By looking at this page, I guess I am not the only one.



Thanks, everyone.


----------



## UngainlyTitan (Dec 23, 2007)

ainatan said:
			
		

> How often can the elf use his Elven Accuracy power outside of an encounter?
> Let's say he is in an archery tournament, or just shooting fruits on a tree.





Were, I the DM and with no info in the rules to the contrary I would rule that each round of an archery contest is an encounter. Why would it not be an encouter?


----------



## med stud (Dec 23, 2007)

ainatan said:
			
		

> How often can the elf use his Elven Accuracy power outside of an encounter?
> Let's say he is in an archery tournament, or just shooting fruits on a tree.



Personally I would let the elf use the accuracy for each shot in the tournament. It would give the elf a huge edge but it would really hit home how accurate he/she is. I suppose most people wouldn't do it like this


----------



## mhacdebhandia (Dec 23, 2007)

The per-encounter powers in _Tome of Battle: The Book of Nine Swords_ had pretty clearly-defined "recharge times" when out of combat. Even if you don't consider an archery tournament to be an encounter, I'm sure there will be a five- or ten-minute recharge time given for per-encounter powers in general.


----------



## BryonD (Dec 23, 2007)

mhacdebhandia said:
			
		

> The per-encounter powers in _Tome of Battle: The Book of Nine Swords_ had pretty clearly-defined "recharge times" when out of combat. Even if you don't consider an archery tournament to be an encounter, I'm sure there will be a five- or ten-minute recharge time given for per-encounter powers in general.



Which could still be "every shot".


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Dec 23, 2007)

BryonD said:
			
		

> I'm just making this up on the fly, but letting them use it at will in these circumstances might be cool.  When an elf can calmly let an arrow fly without distraction, then they are simply the best there is.  Even common elves would be clearly superior to most rank and file human archers when the task is nothing more than target shooting.  In the heat of battle, this isn't as reliable, but even 1/encounter would still show a marked superiority over time.
> 
> It fits the feel nicely in my mind.
> 
> ...



Yes, I think it's really not that bad. Elves really look like bad-ass archers, while in a real game scenario, they are not overshadowing the dedicated non-elven archer.
Retain flavor without losing sight of game balance.


----------



## mhacdebhandia (Dec 23, 2007)

BryonD said:
			
		

> Which could still be "every shot".



Yes, absolutely. If that produces results you don't like, then you can run it as an encounter.


----------



## Kintara (Dec 23, 2007)

mhacdebhandia said:
			
		

> Yes, absolutely. If that produces results you don't like, then you can run it as an encounter.



Hah! I like the cut of your jib.


----------



## ThirdWizard (Dec 24, 2007)

broghammerj said:
			
		

> I sort of miss some of the old crazy bonuses such as immunity to ghoul paralysis, ability to find secret doors, etc.  I can remember some times when those had a real impact on the game.  Perhaps it's my nostalgia talking.




Keep in mind that eladrin are the "magical elves" and probably have the sleep, charm, secret doors thing going on. Although, the secret doors thing might be gone because its another thing that the DM has to keep track of instead of the player. Also, ghoul immunity would go in the ghoul MM entry so we won't be sure either way until we see its stats.


----------



## HeinorNY (Dec 24, 2007)

BryonD said:
			
		

> Which could still be "every shot".



What about making an analogy with the "take 10" rules?

If the character is not being threatened or distracted, he can use Elven Accuracy in every shot.

If he is in combat, thus being threatened and distracted, he can use the power only once in that encounter.


----------



## Zurai (Dec 24, 2007)

ainatan said:
			
		

> How often can the elf use his Elven Accuracy power outside of an encounter?
> Let's say he is in an archery tournament, or just shooting fruits on a tree.




Any time the player is making a decision in a situation presented to him by the DM, he's in an encounter. An archery tournament is an encounter (although it's up to the DM to determine how many encounters it entails). Shooting fruit off a tree may or may not be an encounter, depending on whether the player is just doing this randomly ("Hey, are there any fruit trees around? If there are, I want to shoot a fruit off one!") or whether it's a scenario the DM presented ("You come to a clearing in the forest. In the center of the clearing is an apple tree with dozens of ripe red apples dangling from its limbs.").

Generally speaking, if the results of PC actions matter in any way, they're in an encounter. Just my opinion, but it makes sense if you take the game definition of encounter into account rather than the dictionary one.


----------



## WayneLigon (Dec 24, 2007)

broghammerj said:
			
		

> It seems there is some disdain for the old elf bonuses to longsword and bows.  In general, why are people happy with their removal?




Doesn't much matter either way to me. There might not be the types of weapon proficiencies we've come to know in 4E, so that might explain their removal. Or they could be the last vestiges of 'Elf=Automatic Fighter/Magic-User'. If that was the case, then good riddance.


----------



## Merlin the Tuna (Dec 24, 2007)

ThirdWizard said:
			
		

> Although, the secret doors thing might be gone because its another thing that the DM has to keep track of instead of the player.



Yeah.  It kinda throws up flags when you say "I walk over to the bookcase" and the DM says "Oh.  Uh... what path do you take to get there?"


----------



## Voss (Dec 24, 2007)

broghammerj said:
			
		

> It seems there is some disdain for the old elf bonuses to longsword and bows.  In general, why are people happy with their removal?
> 
> I sort of miss some of the old crazy bonuses such as immunity to ghoul paralysis, ability to find secret doors, etc.  I can remember some times when those had a real impact on the game.  Perhaps it's my nostalgia talking.




I think its largely that people these days are (or are supposed to be) uncomfortable with racial stereotypes.  Yeah, its just a game, but there is an element of that race runs really fast or is good at math buried in the magically good at certain things because you're an elf.

Or, to be a little more gamer oriented, the rules are dictating fluff.  *all* elves do x, is bad.  All elves have a general bonus to a certain type of thing isn't so bad, but saying all elves get drilled in finding secret doors and using bows and swords... thats reaching a bit past the rules book and dictating cultural or personal traits to the character sheet.  Not as thrilling...

As for the ghoul thing... eh.  I'd rather get a useful ability.  A  specific immunity to the special ability of a monster that you may encounter a couple times in a certain level range isn't that useful.  Particularly if you never actually encounter a ghoul.  Its taking up space that could be filled with an ability thats actually useful.


----------



## Silvergriffon (Dec 24, 2007)

*Elven Sideburns*

In case no one else has pointed it out, I have been looking over the art in R&C and I can maybe allay some concerns about this little bit of aesthetics. When they say that elven males grow long sideburns, they do not appear to be talking about long sideburns down the side of their cheeks, but rather long hair growing down from just in front of the ear (perhaps more properly called sidelocks). Don't think Wolverine, think the payot or peyot of a Jewish Rabbi (only bound or braided rather than curly and obviously no beard).


----------



## ThirdWizard (Dec 24, 2007)

Voss said:
			
		

> Or, to be a little more gamer oriented, the rules are dictating fluff. *all* elves do x, is bad. All elves have a general bonus to a certain type of thing isn't so bad, but saying all elves get drilled in finding secret doors and using bows and swords... thats reaching a bit past the rules book and dictating cultural or personal traits to the character sheet. Not as thrilling...




But, they do all have proficiency with bows. I think its a fairly safe bet to say that eladrin got the sword proficiency and possibly some kind of secret door ability, even if its just a bonus to Search.



			
				Voss said:
			
		

> As for the ghoul thing... eh.  I'd rather get a useful ability.  A  specific immunity to the special ability of a monster that you may encounter a couple times in a certain level range isn't that useful.  Particularly if you never actually encounter a ghoul.  Its taking up space that could be filled with an ability thats actually useful.




Note that nowhere in the 3.5 elf entry does it state that elves are immune to ghoul paralysis, yet they still have that immunity, as it is in the ghoul entry in the MM. So, I don't think that's much of a concern.



			
				Silvergriffon said:
			
		

> In case no one else has pointed it out, I have been looking over the art in R&C and I can maybe allay some concerns about this little bit of aesthetics. When they say that elven males grow long sideburns, they do not appear to be talking about long sideburns down the side of their cheeks, but rather long hair growing down from just in front of the ear (perhaps more properly called sidelocks). Don't think Wolverine, think the payot or peyot of a Jewish Rabbi (only bound or braided rather than curly and obviously no beard).




I don't have the book. Kinda like this?

[sblock]
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





[/sblock]


----------



## HeinorNY (Dec 24, 2007)

I don't care about elves growing long sideburns, afterall, they are "elves".


----------



## LostSoul (Dec 24, 2007)

ainatan said:
			
		

> How often can the elf use his Elven Accuracy power outside of an encounter?
> Let's say he is in an archery tournament, or just shooting fruits on a tree.




I think the definition of an encounter will cover this.

An archery tournament could be a series of encounters, an encounter in itself, or just a part of a larger encounter.

We'll see.

edit: I imagine that the advice on what constitutes an ecounter will be variable based on what the DM thinks will fit, so it could cover all of the above.


----------



## Sir Sebastian Hardin (Dec 24, 2007)

This +2 and another +2 in ability scores made me think about humans... maybe they get only a +2 in one score, but you get to choose wich score!


----------



## Amrynn Moonshadow (Dec 24, 2007)

*sorry to all for contributing to the BMI thread hijack*

I'm going to miss elves having some versatility (like others have stated: humans can be barbarians or wizards or whatever, but I guess elves can now only be the grungy forest dwellers, and the magic happy elves are a new species now). additionally, some of the old abilities were things I got a little used to (detecting secret doors...etc).

Not having a -2 Con is good. +2 to Wis is also good. I fail to see how elves make non-elves better at seeing things though. I guess elves have an aura which makes everyone have half-elven skill bounses to what we used to call spot and search . . . funny.

This write up answers some questions, but adds many as well. What's the deal with weapon proficiencies and allignment?

I want to adopt 4e rules, but I think that we're going to have to see the full rule books so we get the bigger picture, instead of disecting this elf entry without seeing how it affects everything else. (maybe elves can take a racial feat to regain some immunity to paralysis or whatever?)


----------



## Asmor (Dec 25, 2007)

I think it's clear that elves pulled a KHTHS (killed him, took his stuff) on the Kender.

That's why they grant the bonus to their allies. Think about it, it makes perfect sense!

With kleptomaniacal elves running around, whenever you see one you're gonna be extra cautious and pay close attention...


----------



## Amphimir Míriel (Dec 25, 2007)

lbporter said:
			
		

> The Group Awareness ability seems to follow the trend of valuing teamwork in 4thE. I am willing to bet that all races in the PHB have some ability to help the whole party, I am not talking about an aura, but something that gives the party a nice little bonus. As for the distance in a non combat situation either you are spread out and you don't get it, or you are reasonably grouped so you do (that is assuming the elf is not off scouting, which it looks like they will be very good at).




Agreed



			
				wordsmithpdx said:
			
		

> I hear you, but I'll be mollified if there are game mechanics (simple rituals or spells, skill write-ups, etc.) that let you do things like "remove a part of a living tree with magic" or craft bows and arrows from living wood or somesuch.




This reminded me of the "Piggies" in Orson Scott Card's "Speaker of the Dead", which are an alien race that never cut down trees, but all their tools and constructions are made of wood. They do it by "talking" to trees and asking them to provide them with wooden tools... The tree then warps a branch (or its whole trunk) and drops the requested piece of shaped wood on the floor.



			
				TwinBahamut said:
			
		

> I didn't realize this myself until I was reading the later pages of this thread, but there is no mention at all of elves "trancing" in this description, and they have no resistance to sleep effects. It seems the weird effect of elves not sleeping is completely gone, now.




I'd say that "wordly" elves do sleep, and "fey" eladrin keep their trance... I'd also wager eladrin are longer-lived


----------



## catsclaw227 (Dec 25, 2007)

Amphimir Míriel said:
			
		

> This reminded me of the "Piggies" in Orson Scott Card's "Speaker of the Dead", which are an alien race that never cut down trees, but all their tools and constructions are made of wood. They do it by "talking" to trees and asking them to provide them with wooden tools... The tree then warps a branch (or its whole trunk) and drops the requested piece of shaped wood on the floor.



Oh my!  How could I have forgotten about that!  Good call.  That would be some awesome flavor, but I wonder how that would be abused by powergamers.


----------



## Sir Brennen (Dec 25, 2007)

catsclaw227 said:
			
		

> Oh my!  How could I have forgotten about that!  Good call.  That would be some awesome flavor, but I wonder how that would be abused by powergamers.



Since what the tree creates is entirely under the DM's control, if the "tree" feels exploited, it simply won't produce any items. Nor will it's neighbors. Word travels fast on the winds in the forest.


----------



## Kintara (Dec 25, 2007)

Amrynn Moonshadow said:
			
		

> I'm going to miss elves having some versatility (like others have stated: humans can be barbarians or wizards or whatever, but I guess elves can now only be the grungy forest dwellers, and the magic happy elves are a new species now). additionally, some of the old abilities were things I got a little used to (detecting secret doors...etc).



I think the stats have plenty of versatility. You can play an Elven Wizard who studied magic in an arboreal city, just as easily as you can play an Eladrin Ranger who creeps around in the forests of the Feywild. You can play an Eladrin in Elven lands, or vice versa (there were many times in history where they lived together in one kingdom); their families might have lived as minority populations for millennia. I see no reason to boil anyone down to stereotypes. As far as I'm concerned, I just consider it an increase in the versatility.


----------

