Races - Humans and Build Point Theory

Duncehack Edition

Return to the Link Dump here

So who are you?

Just some tosser with an over inflated sense of self importance.

Send verbal abuse via Minds.com

What is the Duncehack?

It emerged from a place of frustration. There's quite a number of areas where 5e could be improved but... it's not going to happen for various reasons.

The Duncehack is my attempt to fix these problems I have. Plan is to go through the whole game - all of it - and homebrew it into the game I think is should have been.

Feel free to disagree with me, but ultimately I think there's no harm in putting my thoughts out there, at the very least if even one DM decides to adopt these rules, then my job is done.

No DM Guild? No OGL Release?

I chafe under binding contracts and both of these are exactly that.

The DM Guild gives you more room to mess with established rules, but basically demands that all be under the service of flagship settings.

The SRD on the other hand gives more room for interesting settings but clamps down extremely hard on what established rules you're allowed to use. Their biggest contention is that they don't want someone to sell a sourcebook that removes the need for core books. Translation: they don't want Pathfinder to happen all over again.

More to the point, both assume money will change hands. I don't want money, I just want Wizards to fix their game.

Groundrules

Groundrules for the Duncehack are as follows:

  • No Nerfs: the goal is to bring weaker archetypes on the level of the stronger ones.

  • Remove Traps: incentives built into classes and archetypes should provide an active payoff, rather than be the suboptimal choice.

  • Frontload Agency, Backend Power: Generally speaking, people like having more options to do things, rather than more raw power. As a design rule: things that feel like core class features, or are defining class mechanics, should happen in the first ten levels, sheer numeric increases in power should come after that.

The 'No Nerfs' rule is more for classes than races - as no one can balance things to Yuan-ti Pureblood without snapping the game in two. I'll list potential options to dial back these offending races in sidebars when they come up.

No money changed hands here

This is a passion project. I want to keep it that way.

I also want to avoid legal issues for self-evident reasons.

No UA?

Too much changes between UA and official release.

Obligatory Natural Crit Plug

http://www.naturalcrit.com/

Someone else made a thing that lets me make homebrews without having to post them on pastebin or something. They deserve a lot of credit for that.

Obligatory /tg/ Plug

The feedback I got from various Anons on this helped me build this into something that wasn't bad and stupid.

No Images?

I originally wanted to, but I was encountering problems with the sheer size of these PDFs. I have to break these into parts to upload them anywhere as it is.

What Races won't feature?

I won't be touching any of the Dragonmark Variants from Eberron. They're tied to the Eberron setting specifically and there's a lot of rules wranging to get it all to work.

Aven won't feature because they were basically worse Aarakocra. Their rules are folded into the Aarakocra rules.

Aetherborn won't feature because they're just refluffed Half-Elves inextricably tied to the setting of Kaladesh.

What Races are in this document?

This is an essay on how I believe 5e races are balanced.

Once upon a time I left this little preamble there, but in the wake of the various controversies regarding the handling of race in the game I feel this document's more important than ever.

The dust hasn't settled exactly, but it appears Wizard's is taking the 'kin' approach to things (that is Variant Humans but refluffed). Seems like having the tools to build an entire race splat from the ground up would fill that role far, far better than their solution.

So if that matters to you, the build point system at the end here can be used as part of character generation.

RACES | DUNCEHACK

Balance Rationale

In order to explain, I need to start with the Standard Human stat block.

Humans

  • Ability Scores: Str +1; Dex +1; Con +1; Int +1; Wis +1; Cha +1
  • Size: Medium
  • Speed: 30 ft.
  • Languages. Common and one extra language of your choice.

Source: PHB, page 29

Build Point Theory

So the point I want to make is this: Thanks to a couple of feats, we have a solid numeric scaling of where most race features stack up. Now I don't think the game was designed with this in mind, I think they just... 'intuited' things.

Skilled tells us that 3 skill proficiencies are worth 2 Ability Score points.

In order to make this work evenly, lets assign a point scaling to this. We'll call them Build Points for argument's sake. 3 times 2 is 6, so we have an easily divisible number to work with.

Under this system Humans are worth 18 build points.

So from here, we'll operate under the assumption that all races should balance around that number.

Variant Human

  • Ability Scores: +1 to two Ability Scores of your choice
  • Skill Proficiency of your choice
  • Feat. You can select one full-feat of your choice, or a half-feat and an ability score increase of your choice, or two half-feats of your choice.
  • Size: Medium
  • Speed: 30 ft.
  • Languages. Common and one extra language of your choice.

At first glance, Variant Humans are only 14 points (6 for the ability scores, 6 for the feat, 2 for the skill).

Except anyone who's played the game can tell you straight up that optimisation potential is valuable in itself.

So, to fit this into the theory there's a tax on the ability to choose. There are four choices that V. Humans can make. So if the choice tax is +1 per option, then it rounds up to being equal to regular humans.

Thus V. Humans round up to 18.


Why stop at 18?

It's a much easier number to work with.

Because in order to get a step more granular to cover everything (cantrips and weapon proficiencies don't round nicely under the weighting scheme here), I'd have to use 72 at the final number.


On Full/Half Feats

The result of decoupling things like Observant from it's ability score (i.e. leaving that choice up to the player to make the feature more attractive overall) meant I had to clarify terms here. The Ultimate takeaway is that V. Humans are relatively unchanged.

For reference: Half-feats cost +1 Ability Score Point in my new framework. When you get an ASI from levelling up, you can pick up two of them, or one of them and an extra ability score point.

What if I think V. Humans are OP?

My disagreement with that assessment aside (they appear that way because you have to be a special kind of stupid to make a suboptimal build with them), it's good news for you - there's a solution.

So out of the Plane Shift Innistrad writeup, what is presented is 3 examples of V. Human used as a DM template to create cultural archetypes.

They have:

  • Kessig: +1 Dex. +1 Wis. Survival Proficiency. Mobile Feat.
  • Nephalia: +1 Int. +1 Cha. 4 skills of your choice (V. Human skill + Skilled feat).
  • Stensia: +1 Str. +1 Con. Intimidation Proficiency. Tough Feat.

Essentially what these examples provide is mechanical reinforcement for different human cultural groups. Doing this for your game is a real easy way to flavour the human cultures too, because it condenses what would otherwise be pages of exposition into a dot point list.

An example I came up with to explain that:

Say you want to make a Mongolian Steppe People. You've got in-universe Ghengis Khan. So how would you mechanically reinforce this?

  • Steppefolk: +1 Dex. +1 Wis. Animal Handling Proficiency. Mounted Combatant.

I went with with Dex, because they're horseback archers primarily, Wis. mostly for Animal Handling, but the rest of the skills under Wisdom are culturally important (particularly Survival). Animal Handling Proficiency because... horses. And as for the feat? Well, keeping that horse alive is a big deal.

Go nuts with making your own.

Personally, to make up for the whole choice tax thing I mentioned before, giving a free tool proficiency as well, or maybe advantage on some culturally relevent history check, or some other ribbon might not be too bad an idea either.

Note with other rules: Now if you've read my other stuff, you'll have noticed that I've removed the Mounted Combatant feat and turned it into the 'Cavalier Fighting Style'. If you want to use this Steppefolk example with my other rules, just use my version of the Weapon Master feat giving them that fighting style.


RACES | DUNCEHACK

Human Racial Feats

(Also available to half-human races)


Half feat just means it costs one of the two points you'd normally gain on an ability score increase

Heritage (Half or Full Feat)

When you select this feature, you select the half-feat or full-feat version. This feat allows the character access to select a racial feat from races not their own, indicating a mixed bloodline somewhere in their ancestry.

The limits of this feature is up to the DM and the setting. For instance, selecting a feat from a race that does not exist in your setting may not be permitted.

If the DM wishes to limit this feat so that the character does not have a 'mix of everything', they instead pick one race with the first purchase of this feat, and every subsequent purshase may only be made on other feats within that first selected race.

Adaptable (Half-Feat)

You have advantage on saving throws to resist harmful environmental conditions (e.g. weather conditions such as extreme heat or extreme cold; environmental hazards such as frigid water) and saving throws to resist negative effect from pushing yourself (such as making a Forced March).

You also gain +5 Passive Survival and +5 Passive Athletics.

Common Sense (Full-Feat)

Whenever you are about to make a catastrophic laspe of judgement, or you are about to take a course of action that even your own character would be completely aware of it's absolute foolish nature, your DM is required to indicate that you are about to make a bad decision.

They aren't required to tell you the right decision, nor are they required to tell you why it's a bad idea. If the character doesn't have prerequisite knowledge to discern a good or a bad idea in context, they do not gain the benefits of this feature (i.e. if the character is clueless about the existence of fire, they might not be aware that sticking their hand into the fire is a bad idea. However, after the first time, any similar situation that emerges thereafter would benefit from this feature).

Don't the Kin rules in Tasha's do the same job as the Heritage feat?

See, about that. The Kin method laid out in Tasha's is just the Variant Human race but you're allowed to switch out the skill proficiency with Darkvision.

While it's nice to have a simple solution any DM can implement, I hate myself a little too much to be satisfied with simple solutions.
No Prodigy?

If I haven't completed it already, Prodigy will be broken down into generic feats that will be available to all races.

Heratage

This feat serves two functions.

The primary function is to give humans a powerful racial feat option that makes sense to lock as a racial feat (see my rationale on Prodigy above)

The secondary function is a pressure valve for those you'd expect to be mocked as wanting a 'special snowflake' character. You know the one: "half-tiefling, half-aasimar, raised on the streets by humans, full edgelord."

Adaptable

Humanity are already something of a 'lets cover all bases' race. This is meant to further lean into that.

Common Sense

This highlights Humanity as the go-to for ease of use for newer players, as well as a safety net against being screwed by things that the player didn't know out of character, but their character would actually know in-universe.

Also, every other game I've seen with a feat system has a variant of this feature.

Alternate Common Sense

Here's a more game-y version of the feature for those who want to pass the responsibility of bookkeeping this feature back onto the player who buys it. If you wondering about the exclusion clauses, it's because I specifically didn't want it to be a second Lucky.

Common Sense

Whenever you are about to make a critical decision outside of combat, you can ask the DM if it's a good idea. The DM must answer whether it is or it isn't and give a reason based on what your character would know in the given context (It doesn't have to be a good reason, the DM has no obligation to actually tell you why something might be a bad idea, just why your character might think it is). They don't have to tell you the actual reason, nor are they required to share new information with the character. They are not required to tell you just how bad an idea is, though they are encouraged to. If the character simply does not have the information available to them to make an assessment, the results are inconclusive and uses of this feature are not spent.

You can use this a number of times equal to your proficiency modifier. You regain uses of this feature after a long rest. This feature cannot be used to effect rolls (this doesn't help you when the trap is sprung, but it might help you realise there are traps, or that you're disarming them wrong).

RACES | DUNCEHACK

Build Point Listing

  • +1 Ability Score Point = 3 build points
  • Skill/Tool/Language Proficiency = 2 build points (Common + Native tongue is free), +3 for expertise
  • Based on the Skilled Feat.
  • Weapon Proficiency = 0.75 of a build point
  • Based on the Weapon Master Feat.
  • Armor Proficiency = 3 build points
  • Based on armour proficiency feats.
  • Cantrip = 2 build points
  • Loosely based on the Magic Initiate Feat. This assumes each cantrip and spell is worth 1/3rd of the feat.
  • Racial Magic = Variable, usually 6 build points (e.g. Drow Magic)
  • Based on racial magic feats, such as Wood Elf Magic.
  • Natural Weapons (at d4) = 1 build point, +2 for every die past d4.
  • This is an assumption loosely based on the Tavern Brawler Feat. It may be that the unarmed damage was the part of the feat that's supposed to be worth more.
  • Natural Armor = 1 build point per base AC above 10, max 13. Only works when wearing no armour.
  • This is loosely based on the Dragon Hide feat. I'm actually thinking that 11AC is a freebie, because otherwise the feat is slightly overloaded.
  • Specialisation = 1 build point (i.e. limited advantage/expertise in a narrow field, such as stonecunning)
  • Sunlight Sensitivity = Refunds 3 build points
  • This is an assumption. It's the only way Drow are in any way balanced. I've never heard a complaint that they're overpowered so it might be right.
  • Flight (30 ft in medium or less armor, or 50 ft in light or less armor) = 6 build points.
  • This is based off the V. Tiefling rule in SCAG where they can give up Racial Magic for Flight.
  • Swim (30 ft) = 1 build point. Amphibious comes free.
  • This is an assumption based on the budget left over from Triton after the rest of their features were calculated.
  • Climb Speed (30ft in medium or less armor) = 1 build point.
  • As with swim speed but based off Kor.
  • Move Speed = 1 build point per 5 over 30. (Also, refunds 1 per 5 points under 30).
  • Based on Mobile Feat, assuming the three features are evenly weighted.
  • Powerful Build = 1 build point
  • This is straight up a guess as I personally think this is just a ribbon.
  • Active features = Variable, but usually 3 build points.
  • This is a guess, but not entirely without reason. If it's a very limited minor action, 2 because Tavern Brawler. 1/rest feature, 3 for equivalence to Magic Initiate.
  • Common damage type resistance = 2 build points (e.g. fire, cold)
  • Uncommon damage type resistance = 1 build point (e.g. radiant, necrotic)
  • Poison Resistance = 2 build points. This covers both condition and damage.
  • The cost is mostly derived from Tiefling and the rationale for DMG Aasimar, the latter explaining there's a budget difference between common and uncommon damage. Poison is in the common category, but its the single most resisted/immune damage type in the game and resistance to the condition is also resistance to the damage.
  • Darkvision = 2 build point, +1 for superior
  • Initially this was an assumption based on what's left over in the budget from races that possess the feature, but Tasha's confirmed it to be the case.
  • Fighting Style = 3 build points
  • This is just conjecture. There's a houserule for Weapon Master where instead of 4 weapon proficiencies, you pick up a fighting style and I'm basing it off that.
  • Choice Tax = 1 build point (Choice from a list doesn't count, it has to be open choice)
  • Based on the Variant Human rationale outlined before.

On Ribbons

Ribbons are features where the build point weight is ignored because they're not meaningfully powerful (i.e. overwritten by your 1st level class features or your background), or they're situational in a way that has little bearing outside of niche situations.

The following is a list of things that seem like they're being treated as Ribbons.

  • Tool/Language Proficiency
  • Specialisations
  • Weapon Proficiency
  • Armor Proficiency
  • Powerful Build
  • Natural Weapons (at d4) - d6 and above are not treated as ribbons.
  • Natural Armour (at 11) - 12 and above are not treated as ribbons
What if I think Flight is OP/Undercosted here?

Like I said, I'm basing it entirely on a SCAG Variant Rule feature.

Most people ban flight anyway, but if you think it's OP but you're not willing to ban it outright, there's a houserule for you:

"Creatures with a flight speed may only glide until they reach 5th level."

It's in the first 5 level it's most powerful anyway.

But isn't a fighting style worth a whole feat since Tasha's?

+2 Dex is roughly equivalent to having BOTH Defensive and Archery fighting styles.

So no. I don't care if it's official, Tasha's is wrong.

RACES | DUNCEHACK