Do any other Dwarves feel they have been cheated a little?

[maddmatt70]

I agree with the OP as well. I think the old toughness of dwarves was something unique and special about dwarves just like the halflings have sneak damage. What should have happened was the uniqueness and specialness of the other races should have been more flushed out and enhanced. The developers' solution was the easy one, but was not the best solution.

[DoctorWhofan]

DDDDOOOOOOMMMM!!! I quit! Turbine and their nerfing went too far! They gimped the dwarves so bad tha...


Oh wait! I don't play dwarves!

But I play clerics! Guess what? Now those elves and humans last longer and the dwarves are a little bit easier to heal. So stop cryin' in ya ale and get ya rears out of the Ever Full Flagon and start fightin' and Adventurin'!


geez people! It's not the end of the world!

[Borror0]

I agree with the OP as well. I think the old toughness of dwarves was something unique and special about dwarves just like the halflings have sneak damage. What should have happened was the uniqueness and specialness of the other races should have been more flushed out and enhanced.

They didn't remove it, they reduced the benefit.

The developers' solution was the easy one, but was not the best solution.

Out of curiosity, what would you have done?

[Enochroot]

They didn't remove it, they reduced the benefit.


Out of curiosity, what would you have done?

I'm kind of all for increasing the differences, instead of decreasing them. I'm not going to put much more thought into that answer than that for now, but as a general feeling. =P Feel free to shoot holes in that.

[Borror0]

I'm not going to put much more thought into that answer than that for now, but as a general feeling.

The problem is that you had warchanters like mine with 424 HP and warchanters with 275ish HP.

At least now the gap is smaller by 30 HP...

[Lithic]

I'm kind of all for increasing the differences, instead of decreasing them. I'm not going to put much more thought into that answer than that for now, but as a general feeling. =P Feel free to shoot holes in that.

The problem with dwarf toughness as it use to be was that it discouraged variety. Every melee was a dwarf with at least one toughness feat (and at least the first three tiers of enhancements) or they were gimped. Thats one major choice (Race), one moderate choice (feat), and 6 minor choices all taken away from anyone concerned with being a great melee. Now at least other races aren't so far behind.

[Enochroot]

The problem is that you had warchanters like mine with 424 HP and warchanters with 275ish HP.

At least now the gap is smaller by 30 HP...

well, if dwarf is 149 hp over same build of other race, as long as other race got some sweet stuff, i'd be ok with that ^^

Like halfling +saves, elf with +to-hit longsword/rapier, human whatever, give drow something actually worthwhile, WF etc - if we're saying 149 hp was simply overpowering, i'd rather create a higher difference for other builds? =P I'm totally shooting by the gut here, for the record, and reserve the right to change my mind in about 3 posts.

[Enochroot]

The problem with dwarf toughness as it use to be was that it discouraged variety. Every melee was a dwarf with at least one toughness feat (and at least the first three tiers of enhancements) or they were gimped. Thats one major choice (Race), one moderate choice (feat), and 6 minor choices all taken away from anyone concerned with being a great melee. Now at least other races aren't so far behind.

Hm, I built my elf ranger splash purposefully and he was far from gimped, and had 354 hp, and a 14 con. In fact, he's being called "power build" by those in "that other thread". I'd rather you gave him +1 to-hit or night-vision or something that 20 more hp.

Because your "creating variety" is simply "making all races more similar" ... which I vote is decreasing variety (Except aesthetically)

[Borror0]

well, if dwarf is 149 hp over same build of other race, as long as other race got some sweet stuff, i'd be ok with that ^^

The 150ish gap included 45 HP from a Green Steel items.

The problem with such a gap is that you cannot balance encounters for the two extremities. Either that much HP becomes overkill or 275 HP makes you extremely squishy in combat, but either way there is one that is going to suffer. In the current context, it was other races that got the shaft so... they got a bit of love.

For that reason, like Lithic said, there was close to no reason to roll a non-dwarf.

It was an extremely overpowered ability. It would have taken another extremely overpowered for each other races... and even there...

[Enochroot]

The 150ish gap included 45 HP from a Green Steel items.

The problem with such a gap is that you cannot balance encounters for the two extremities. Either that much HP becomes overkill or 275 HP makes you extremely squishy in combat, but either way there is one that is going to suffer. In the current context, it was other races that got the shaft so... they got a bit of love.

For that reason, like Lithic said, there was close to no reason to roll a non-dwarf.

It was an extremely overpowered ability. It would have taken another extremely overpowered for each other races... and even there...

Including that 45 hp is irrelevant =P

Well, I still never rolled any dwarves, even with the extra hp, as I've never really valued hp. It can be made up for easily with twitch skills and build skill, imo. I've not had a problem surviving, but hey, I can't speak for everyone. =P

And I see a lot of reason at least for human, WF, halfling, dwarf. Elf and drow are harder to argue I think? I'm finding it hard to want to make a drow anymore anyway.

So, well, maybe good move? (I like my extra hp) - but I still argue against this sort of movement.

[Borror0]

Because your "creating variety" is simply "making all races more similar" ... which I vote is decreasing variety (Except aesthetically)

There is healthy difference and unhealthy difference.

If I was to give +2 AC to elves while moving, would you say it's encouraging diversity? You probably would and something like that could be neat if worked out. Perhaps a concealment bonus? Anyway, something to protect them and to represent their innate dexterity at the same time.

Now, if I were to give them +50 AC, would you still call it diversity or would you agree it kills it for every AC build?

[Enochroot]

There is healthy difference and unhealthy difference.

If I was to give +2 AC to elves while moving, would you say it's encouraging diversity? You probably would and something like that could be neat if worked out. Perhaps a concealment bonus? Anyway, something to protect them and to represent their innate dexterity at the same time.

Now, if I were to give them +50 AC, would you still call it diversity or would you agree it kills it for every AC build?

Yup, the matrix is very complex, agreed. =)

I just want the matrix to be diverse.

Whoever balanced starcraft needs to be mandated by congress to balance all games. =P

[Borror0]

Including that 45 hp is irrelevant =P

No, it is. You are going to have players that have it and players that don't.

That means that between best spec and average spec there is a +45 HP that has appeared and widened the gap.

Well, I still never rolled any dwarves, even with the extra hp, as I've never really valued hp.

I notice the difference in survivability on my warchanter.

[Enochroot]

No, it is. You are going to have players that have it and players that don't.

That means that between best spec and average spec there is a +45 HP that has appeared and widened the gap.

I notice the difference in survivability on my warchanter.

Then you may as well say that encounters have to be gauged from a 6 con noob that has 0 gear and 90 hp to your 425 hp build.

You don't.

Balancing an encounter to a 425 hp warchanter is assuming basically all in-game gear (or a good amount) - and can be assumed to be elite content balance.

So you only have to balance that with the other races' elite gear to make the choice a tossup to us diversity builders.

Assuming without this - ie. dwarf like yours warchanter without this - can be assumed to be normal-hard difficulty balance, etc. Nawmean? And then balance the low end of the other races spectrum as well.

I mean, it's easy, there's only like 7 billion variables.

[sephiroth1084]

Whoever balanced starcraft needs to be mandated by congress to balance all games. =P

I dunno about that...terrans are weaker in most ways than the other 2 races, and the protoss is balanced against the zerg by one being good early in the game and the other late in the game, which is basically how fighters and wizards are balanced in PnP.

[Borror0]

Then you may as well say that encounters have to be gauged from a 6 con noob that has 0 gear and 90 hp to your 425 hp build.

You don't.

Without going for the lower extreme of gimpness, you still have to consider average to high spec.

Best spec is dwarf warchanter with all the gear. That's about 425 HP. However, in the same quest, there are going to be drow warchanters with around 300 HP. That's a huge gap, but it doesn't stop there as there are fighters with even more HP. So, you are stuck taking in account some 600 HP juggernaut and a 300 HP stickman. How do you balance for both? They are going to run the same content.

If you don't want the barbarian to get bored, the low HP dudes take the hit and rolling a dwarf becomes the obvious choice.

That is why Green Steel equipment is and Dwarven Toughness was overpowered.

[branmakmuffin]

I understand that Racial Toughness was a good thing, but I also can't help but feel like Dwarves lost one of the key enhancements that helped to set them apart from other races.

The only reason I made my Fighter a Dwarf was because of the additional Toughness Enhancements. Now every single fighter in the game has access to these enhancements regardless of race. Now the only difference between a Human Fighter and a Dwarf Fighter is 2 points of constitution.

While this change helped many other players, I can't help but feel like it gimped my Dwarf. Had I made him a Human he would be exactly the same as my Dwarf, except he would have 30% more healing received and an extra feat.

You're saying you created a Dwarf for the racial Toughness enhancement, and now that other races get that same bonus, you're saying Dwarves have been gimped? I simply don't get this.

[Wizzly_Bear]

disclaimer - ive only read the first page

you people should really research this stuff before you proclaim such trash as fact

-dwarves lost 10 hps from the racial toughness change, not 40, not 5, not 15, 10.

-humans are not as tough as dwarves.

-dwarves can get 3 more con than humans, not 1, not 2, not 4, 3.

-humans do not get 4 ranks of racial toughness. they get 3. not 4, not 2.

-the only other race that can match the dwarf toughness are wf. i think a roboticish thing should be at least this tough.

[sephiroth1084]

Depending on how you look at it, dwarves in AP-starved classes (paladin, barbarian) got a slight boost, since they can take only 2 ranks (3 AP) of racial toughness and gain +5 HP over the previous number. Then 3 ranks costs the same and gives the same benefit as before: +30 HP. So, really, the only dwarves that lost anything at all are the ones who had AP to spend, and went for the whole 10 AP line, and even then, you lose out on only 10 HP.

Meanwhile, as has been already stated, we can get +3 AC beyond anything anyone else can get, better saves vs. spells, higher AC vs. giants, extra damage vs. goblinoids (and there are many in the game), +2 starting Con, and another +2 Con from AP (perhaps the AP you save from the new toughness change can go toward more Con), better balance, extra damage to greataxes (the best 2-hander and only race to gain a 2-hander damage/attack bonus), and dwarven axes and throwing axes (wow, dwarves are also the only race to get a bonus on ranged, 1-handed and 2-handed weapons, and ALL FOR ONE enhancement line, rather than 2 like elves), and dwarves get a tactical feat bonus package.

Yeah, losing that 10 HP really sucks. You should delete all your dwarves and start making origami instead.

[Enochroot]

You're saying you created a Dwarf for the racial Toughness enhancement, and now that other races get that same bonus, you're saying Dwarves have been gimped? I simply don't get this.

You don't get this because you apparently don't think about build trade-offs.

Think about it this way: what if all the races got the SAME hp as dwarves (for comparison of extremes)

Now suddenly humans have an extra feat, but no longer the hp trade-off.

Therefore, the OP may have decided instead that he would rather take human, than dwarf. Of course, without anyway to respec, <ahem> there is no way for him to now change his mind after a change of game rules without years of work.

Ok, sure, now we're talking 79 hp instead of 99, but still, at some point there is a breaking point, where that is depends on the utility of the player involved.