Imagine two characters, one human and one orc, who were malnourished prisoners for approximately the same time in a single cell. When they'd be brought to the strength test, both being at their weakest point, the orc will still score better. Well this is the representation of the racial difference. If it is not represented via abilities, I suggest we st least come up with a mechanic that underlines those differences.
I don't want to get rid of differences between races. Multiple times I stressed how racial features were better than stats in every possible way. The weakest orc should be able to lift more than the weakest human? I can get behind that, I even agree with that. The issue is that "+2 STR" is the wrong way to do it, and I'd rather have a good game that ignores some situations, than a bad game that covers limits scenario like the one exposed by you. An orc should have "they counts as a size larger for lifting weights", "they have advantage on athletics checks", "they have proficiency in athrletics", "they have advantage in strenght checks". There are various way you can achieve that goal, but +2 STR is more limiting than meaningful. Bounded accuracy is a really delicate and strong system at the same time. the difference between 15 and 16 is just a +1, it seems small, but if you think that the most powerful weapons in the universe gives you just a +3 (which I love) it helps you to put in scale the real meaning of these numbers. The difference between the strongest human (20) and a terrasque (30) is just a +5. A +1 to hit, and to DC, is massive and changes completely your gaming experience, you can't gatekeep it behind a race or another.
Originally Posted by neprostoman
The other one is about self-restrictions. Self-restricting implies that it is your idea of fun, right? It will only be a viable option if this idea is shared among the whole table. If at least one player is a munchkin, then he'll take the best abilities and will possibly get the most value and spotlight for his character. This is not a very good way to setup a system, if one needs to compromise to have fun and be at disadvantage after. When there is a universal restriction, the system becomes a bit more rigid, yes, but it also becomes more fair.
I admit that I haven't understood a thing about what you are saying here.
Originally Posted by neprostoman
Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
Luckily ... It seems like character creator lists all your proficiencies, no matter if they are duplicate. Ands it seems to be written in order class > race
So ... in version we have seen in PFH. All races got fluid +2 and +1 ... And humans got polearms proficiency (spears, spikes, halbeards, glaives) and light armor proficiency.
Honestly, it doesnt seem like very good deal to me. :-/
Actually, this is not the worst trade-off in the world, even on the roleplaying sense. I can always think of humans as those generic city guards wielding polearms. And gameplay-wise pikes are one of the best two-handed weapons in the game, Larian gave them the best weapon actions for Martial Classes.
I completely agree. Weapons proficiency are little to meaningless not only to most class, but to description of a race or another. A good feature is something that makes you better at something (advantages, resistences, free skill proficiencies), or gives you new options (darkvision, flying, breath weapons). Humans should have extra proficiencies or, more easily, a free feat.
