Racial Ability Check Modifiers

[moriarty777]

First off, I know some of this was covered in a previous thread... but I'm going in a slightly different direction for purposes of clarification.

Taken that the racial bonuses for certain abilities DO NOT STACK, in the following example how would this be resolved.

You have three characters, a human fighter, an elven fighter, and an elven thief (assume no armor is being worn).

A fighter attempts to move silently... the roll + DEX.

An elven fighter... um would they get the +2 listed as a thief/assassin/ranger or nothing...

If they get nothing, how do you reconcile the racial ability? If they get the +2, how do you reconcile the fact that only 3 classes or so are listed with a +2 bonus?

An elven thief is clearly the roll + DEX modifier + lvl + 2

I thought perhaps that one way to handle it is to allow level modifier (total character level) for the races who have these sort of abilities in general which means, using the example above, that an elven fighter would get the roll + DEX modifier + lvl. You have to keep in mind that this is strictly in a wilderness environment. The elven thief has learned to use these racial gifts to perfect his craft and gets the +2 overall.

But that would also mean that an elven fighter would be as effective as a human ranger in terms of hiding in the wilderness. Which... kinda makes sinse on some level.

Of course, that same logic cannot be applied to the Listen ability effectively bringing me back to square one.

I tell ya... prolonged exposure to D&D 3.5 has a way of affecting how you think about these things.

Any additional insight would be appreciated.

Moriarty the Red
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

[babbage]

If I remember correctly, Elves get Move Silently as a racial ability. In my opinion, this would grant them the ability to add their level to the roll. Also, you have to take into account the fact that elves get a bonus to dex, so a straight human-to-elf comparison would have the elf edge ahead most times.

[rabindranath72]

babbage wrote:
If I remember correctly, Elves get Move Silently as a racial ability. In my opinion, this would grant them the ability to add their level to the roll. Also, you have to take into account the fact that elves get a bonus to dex, so a straight human-to-elf comparison would have the elf edge ahead most times.

Officially no. They add levels only to those classes who have the Move Silently ability.

[babbage]

I understand it isn't 'officially' but I would judge if a class OR race gets an ability, they can add their level. It just makes sense to me. But of course, this is the beauty of the game and as always... 'your mileage may vary'.

[PeelSeel2]

babbage wrote:
I understand it isn't 'officially' but I would judge if a class OR race gets an ability, they can add their level. It just makes sense to me. But of course, this is the beauty of the game and as always... 'your mileage may vary'.

That is my take on it too. Bladderdash with canon!! Of course the elf fighter would be restricted to thief type armor too in order to get his wilderness 'level' advantage.
_________________
Labor to keep alive in your breast that little spark of celestial fire called conscience.

-George Washington

[rabindranath72]

Of course, ones' MMV, but then what is the advantage of a class, if one gives even races class abilities? I think that the "natural" bonus is more than enough to distinguish a "stealthy" elf from a noisy human. A +2 is a huge bonus in C&C; a +2 is effectively equivalent to having two levels of a class, which considering the XP cost, is a large benefit. That's why "officially" race and class abilities are separated, and are cumulative only for specific classes (otherwise, there would not even be the need to specify in the class descriptions that the bonuses are effectively cumulative).

Cheers,

Antonio

[moriarty777]

Interesting points...

But the dilemna with this racial ability if you look specifically at the Elf is this:

By the straight and complete description, only elves who are thieves, assassins, or rangers get a +2 bonus.

What do elves of other classes get?

They all have move silent as a racial ability but it doesn't state *any* bonus in their move silently racial ability description.

This is what prompted me my train of thought... and why I'm effectively and mentally going around in circles.

With the Listen racial ability is states the +2 in the ability description... AND it states that thieves, assassins, rangers get a +2 to their Listen for their class.

We have already established that, effectively the bonuses do not stack. If they did, you'd have a Gnome thief with a +6 racial/class bonus on top of everything else (+3 for race and +3 for class -- that in itself demonstrates to me why these don't stack).

Still confused...

Moriarty the Red
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

[johns]

I let them add their level to their racial abilities, and then let the rogues/assassins/rangers add their level +2.

[BeZurKur]

You pose an interesting conundrum, Moriety. I agree with Antonio that we must carefully consider our rulings, and clearly you are by bringing them to the forum. Granting the bonus of level does seem to blur the distinction between class and race, perhaps too much. Id rule that ALL classes receive the +2 bonus to the attempt and only the thief class gets to add his level.

[moriarty777]

Thank you... I love making people think!

Seriously, the reason why this has come up is my C&C campaign I just started up... I've got a elven rogue and the whole racial ability thing came up. I wasn't entirely aware of the issue at the time so now I'm in the midst of researching the issue and hence this thread.

Moriarty the Red
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

[Dristram]

For my games, I treat racial abilities as additional class abilities and thus add their level to the check. Otherwise, I don't see the point of mentioning the racial skill.

I also let the bonus' stack. In the Gnome example, a Gnome non-Rogue/Assassin gets +3 to listen and gets to add their character level. A Gnome Rogue/Assassin gets an additional +3 from class training, and get a total of +6. Gnomes kick butt at listening and Gnome Rogues *really* kick butt at listening!
In my games, I don't mind if races like Elves and Gnomes rarely miss their racial ability checks. They're naturals!

[BeZurKur]

serleran wrote:
An elven character is skilled in moving silently. An elve thief is incredibly skilled at it. Both are better than a human non-thief, but only the elven thief is better than a human thief, because of a natural proclivity. Basically, having an ability as a racial ability means you're good at it, but not as good as being taught to use it.

That's an excellent breakdown. Granting the racial bonus to all classes makes the above true, with the only exception being the first two levels. Assuming all primes as Dex and same attribute bonuses, the elven fighter is better than a 1st level thief and just as good as a second level. After that skill trumps talent. Personally, I'm okay with that. It gives a good feeling of an Elvish army (1st level fighters) ambushing from the woods. The elf still feels appropriately sneaky without the human thief thinking, I should have been an elven fighter in leather armor.

[moriarty777]

serleran wrote:
An elven character is skilled in moving silently. An elve thief is incredibly skilled at it. Both are better than a human non-thief, but only the elven thief is better than a human thief, because of a natural proclivity. Basically, having an ability as a racial ability means you're good at it, but not as good as being taught to use it.

Does that mean you give non elven-thieves the +2 bonus as well (effectively a +2 across the board)? Meaning that this is probably one of those things that need adding to the errata as a clarification?

At the time I first saw this issue (presented by a Player who had an elven rogue), I saw the issue and saw doubling up as a bad thing. What I ruled at the time was that all elves get the +2 but those who had the corresponding class abilities got an additional +1.

Of course it was right after that, when I confirmed that the abilities don't stack (or shouldn't... CK's are free to run it how they wish after all)

It is when I read everything in detail that I noticed that certain abilities mentioned the bonus in two sections under the race (such as listen) in the PHB but others in just one (like move silently or hide/conceal)

Moriarty the Red
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

[babbage]

As I understand Serleran...

A non-elven non-rogue = no bonus

An elven non-rogue = +2

A non-elven rogue = +lvl

An elven rogue = +lvl+2

This means an untrained elf is better than an untrained non-elf, but a trained rogue is better than any untrained race. An elven rogue wins out over everyone.

[Dristram]

BeZurKur wrote:
The elf still feels appropriately sneaky without the human thief thinking, I should have been an elven fighter in leather armor.

The way I look at it, if a player is feeling that way, then he's not roleplaying. I've had to untrain that kind of thinking from my players. I tell them, envision a character both in look and personality, create it, and then live with the good and bad and roleplay it.

Also, something to keep in mind is that the natural elven ability to hide is in wilderness settings only. He doesn't get it in the city or dungeons.

In my experience so far, the human's ability to have an extra Prime far outweighs even my way of handling the benefits of hiding and listening for non-human races. I don't have players flocking to play elves and gnomes to be uber listeners and uber silent. 8)

[moriarty777]

So... in we are looking at game mechanics... would you set up different DCs for different characters??

Here's another consideration which might help (or create a bigger headache).

An elven wizard can move totally silent as long as he moves NO faster than half his movement rate (in a wilderness environment). In those normal circumstances, no check would be necessary and all elves can do this as long as they abide by moving slowly and presumably without clanking metal armor.

If they are a bit moving faster, they would require to roll a check.

A human would *always* have to roll a check... but rogues are naturally better at it and add their level modifier to the roll... and an elven-rogue is better still and gets an additional +2.

Does that effectively resolve the issue? The logic I applied are some of the climb abilities under the ranger for example and what a ranger can do without a roll where as the other character classes would.

Moriarty the Red
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

[moriarty777]

serleran wrote:
Oh, one other thing: a flat +2 for race would be simple to resolve the complexity. That would make a fine house rule, if one were inclined.

Yes... a flat +2 all around would be simpler... but as you may have noticed... I sometimes love making my life complicated!
Moriarty the Red
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

[Dristram]

Hmmm....this discussion has prompted me to think of an alternate way to handle the natural abilities of a race.

Races and classes with move silently as a skill move in total silence when making their check.

Races and classes without move silently as a skill move quietly when making their check, but the opponent gets a chance to hear them with a listen check.

[babbage]

Ah but that's 3e thinking that is! There aren't any opposed rolls in C&C.

[Dristram]

Ah, but also, in C&C, a character without a certain ability is not allowed to attempt that ability. So the CK allowing a human fighter to attempt to move silently is changing the rule. And thus doing an opposed roll would not be out of line then.

[Dristram]

I just realized I may have been doing something wrong. I've been adding the opponent's level or HD to the Challenge Level against moving silently. In other words, if an elven rogue is trying to sneak up on an ogre, the CL is 4. Sneaking past a hill troll would be CL 9.

Is that incorrect?

[Dristram]

serleran wrote:
This is not true. In C&C, any character can attempt anything. They simply do not always get their level added, and cannot perform as well as those who do have the ability. See page 112 of the PHB.

Okay, page 112

Quote:
In general, it is recommended that a Castle Keeper should disallow a character from a chance of succes in attempting a non-class ability.

I took that to mean that moving silently is a non-class ability for anything but Rogues and Assassins. And if you're strict about that statement in your games, then the elf and halfling's ability to move silently make more sense as is without a bonus or anything. An elf fighter could attempt to move silently where as a human fighter could not.

[babbage]

I have to disagree with Dristram - in a purely amicable sense of course! C&C allows any character to attempt any action - they are not 'not allowed to attempt that ability'. The only difference is that ones with the ability are better at it - which makes perfect sense to me.

A million monkeys hammering at typewriters will, in time, hammer out a sonnet or two. Of course, William Shakespeare would have been quicker at it.
Also, I wouldn't like to introduce opposed rolls in my own gaming as I always found the beauty of C&C was a 'one roll' only mentality. The CC is what it is, no matter who attempts it.

[babbage]

Seeing as we're quoting the PHB I thought I might answer the original question - always a good idea.
On page 112 it states

Quote:
If a Castle Keeper, for whatever reason, does allow a character to attempt a non-class ability, then the SIEGE engine attribute mechanic changes in one significant way. The character does not add his level to the attribute check roll.

Read literally, this means that a non-rogue wouldn't get his level as a modifier, regardless of whether the race does.

Of course, I take solace in the quote below, from page 109...

Quote:
So bending the rules and using them judiciously is a necessity for playing a well-run game.

[JonusBlackthorn]

Quote:
Okay, page 112 Quote:

In general, it is recommended that a Castle Keeper should disallow a character from a chance of succes in attempting a non-class ability.

I took that to mean that moving silently is a non-class ability for anything but Rogues and Assassins. And if you're strict about that statement in your games, then the elf and halfling's ability to move silently make more sense as is without a bonus or anything. An elf fighter could attempt to move silently where as a human fighter could not.

Distram keep reading the rest of that section it does state

Quote:
If a Castle Keeper, for whatever reason, does allow a character to attempt a non-class ability, then the SIEGE engine attribute mechanic changes in one significant way. The character does not add his level to the attribute check roll.

This is from the 1st printing(haven't gotten my 2nd printing yet) it also goes on to use an example of a thief and a fighter both trying to move silently and states that even if the fighter is successful the guard may get a wisdom check to notice him.

Keith

[moriarty777]

The second printing pretty much mirrors the first with regards to this.

Moriarty the Red
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

[Dristram]

Babbage, you and I are on the same page. I allow non-class abilities to be attempted in my games. I was only pointing out the basic rule of C&C recommends to not allow a non-class ability to be attempted, but C&C also incorporated changing that rule and showing how best to do that.

I'll use the same quote:

Quote:
If a Castle Keeper, for whatever reason, does allow a character to attempt a non-class ability, then the SIEGE engine attribute mechanic changes in one significant way. The character does not add his level to the attribute check roll.

This statement proves my point as well. In essence, allowing non-class abilities to be tried is an official game system house rule.

And, it is for that reason that we are having this discussion. If characters were not allowed to attempt non-class abilities, then the racial abilities, such as movie silently, would make more immediate sense and this discussion would not be happening as it is. It was confusing to me initially because I thought, if every character can attempt to move silently, the mentioning of it under the racial ability seemed redundant. It is not written clearly why an elf can move silently better than a human. But if you run your game where humans cant attempt the move silently ability, then mentioning that elves can makes a big difference.

[babbage]

Now I am confused. I never said I didn't allow players to attempt non-class abilities. I am assuming that when you say

Quote:
But if you run your game

You mean you - plural, as opposed to you - specific (i.e. me).

In my game, I choose to allow or disallow depending on common sense. If it's a skill that could be attempted, such as move silently, then why not. If it was something like creating a piece of armour then no, you would need training.

If the race has some affinity for the ability, they get a bonus.

[Dristram]

I mean't "you" in a generic sense of explaining something. Not to imply that you, babbage, did that. Sorry if that was confusing.
It would have been less confusing written as:

Quote:
But if a DM runs a game where humans cant attempt the move silently ability, then mentioning that elves can makes a big difference.

BTW, in 1st Ed. AD&D, only Thieves and Assassins could move silently. So restricting that in C&C is not unusual.

[Geron Raveneye]

To give a quote that might shed some light on the question, and on Serleran's answer on it...page 112 again.

Quote:
It is important to note that the abilities of each class have the best results when used by only that class. A rogue can move silently with a absolute absence of sound. A fighter, therefore, should only be able to move very quietly, even with a successful roll.

A rogue moving silently in order to sneak up on a guard would not alert that guard with a successful check. However, a fighter moving quietly, even with a successful roll, should still stand a chance of being noticed by the guard. Thus, the Castle Keeper might allow the guard a Wisdom check to notice the fighter moving up quietly behind him.

So what this tells me is that elves and half-elves (in wilderness areas) and halflings are treated like rogues where the effect of a successful move silently check is concerned, even if they don't get to add their level to the check. All others are still risking to be discovered by a sharp guard. Rogues have it best, as they add their levels, and get a +2 to that if they are of elven blood or halflings.

I actually think that makes good sense.