What happened to my reptile man, man?

[TippetsTX]

The revised reptile man race from In the Labyrinth starts with ST 12, DX 8, and IQ 8, with 4 extra points to be added to any of these. His MA is 10.

The original version starts with ST 14, DX 8, and IQ 8, with 8 extra points to be added to any of these.

They were intended to be a powerful race (admittedly maybe a bit too powerful), but now they average out the same as everyone else. Why the drastic change?

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by TippetsTX

The revised reptile man race from In the Labyrinth starts with ST 12, DX 8, and IQ 8, with 4 extra points to be added to any of these. His MA is 10.

The original version starts with ST 14, DX 8, and IQ 8, with 8 extra points to be added to any of these.

They were intended to be a powerful race (admittedly maybe a bit too powerful), but now they average out the same as everyone else. Why the drastic change?

I mentioned this in the Errata and ITL impressions threads.

It's saying that if you want to play a reptile man, but your GM or players have the odd idea that every starting PC should be 32 points, those are the suggested numbers to use. So you're a pretty young or otherwise very unimpressive reptile man, indeed.

The big problem I see is that it now fails to specify what a typical reptile man's stats are like! Those are needed for the GM to make NPCs!

There is the same issue with gargoyles, who are also listed as 32 points, even though the "regular gargoyle" summoned by magic or listed as an exotic opponent in basic Melee is ST 20 DX 11 IQ 8 - 39 points. The old ITL specified ST 16 DX 11 IQ 8 and no extra points for starting PC gargoyles - 35 points.

The same problem, but less severe in terms of points, exists for goblins (now shown as 32-point PC suggestions) and halflings (now shown as 30 points), which is: where can GMs find the stats for typical members of the race?

[pyratejohn]

Originally Posted by Skarg

The same problem, but less severe in terms of points, exists for goblins (now shown as 32-point PC suggestions) and halflings (now shown as 30 points), which is: where can GMs find the stats for typical members of the race?

In my own noggin?

Fwiw, I don't see this as a problem. I don't need the book to tell me these sorts of things. I can use my own imagination to set them where I want them. This is an answer that won't sit well with most, but that's how I feel about it.

[tomc]

Originally Posted by pyratejohn

In my own noggin?

Fwiw, I don't see this as a problem. I don't need the book to tell me these sorts of things. I can use my own imagination to set them where I want them. This is an answer that won't sit well with most, but that's how I feel about it.

Just for perception's sake, I'll chime in that it's not a problem for me either.

As with most topics, those who have an issue with what's published are more inclined to speak up about it, but that's a self selecting sample, not a broad poll.

Also, a bunch of people weighing in with some variation of "I don't care/I don't mind" makes for bad forums, so I'll hush until I have something worthwhile to contribute. :)

Edited to add: for Reptile Men, use the original stats, or tone down the starting ST a few points to reflect the new 40pt (soft) cap on attribute totals.

[larsdangly]

I don't see any logical errors in any of these changes. Reptile men now start play with the same stat totals as humans but various special traits (e.g., giant toothy maw) but that is just a design choice. And I don't see why I shouldn't assume they are no different from any other human or humanoid race when it comes to setting NPC stat level: goofs are a couple of points lower, those with 'adventurer' potential are as listed, and formidable examples a few points higher.

Same story with hobbits and goblins. Goblins are now a more powerful race than they were in the original edition, but that is just a design choice, not a logical problem.

As for gargoyles, I just assumed that the sort of gargoyle summoned in exchange for the spell's cost is more powerful than a nominal 'starting' gargoyle. You could imagine a version of the spell that summons a weaker one, but I would say that should have a lower cost, like similar to summon myrmidon. That said, it is misleading to use the word 'regular' to describe the summoned version.

[Keysh]

Originally Posted by larsdangly

I don't see any logical errors in any of these changes. Reptile men now start play with the same stat totals as humans but various special traits (e.g., giant toothy maw) but that is just a design choice. And I don't see why I shouldn't assume they are no different from any other human or humanoid race when it comes to setting NPC stat level: goofs are a couple of points lower, those with 'adventurer' potential are as listed, and formidable examples a few points higher.

Same story with hobbits and goblins. Goblins are now a more powerful race than they were in the original edition, but that is just a design choice, not a logical problem.

I think the problem is that it makes things more difficult for the GM when it comes to NPCs and random enemies. Are you supposed to give Reptile Men opponents more points than Goblin opponents? How much more? Or is the implication that "typical" Goblins, Hobbits, and Reptile Men really all are equally capable?

Originally Posted by larsdangly

IAs for gargoyles, I just assumed that the sort of gargoyle summoned in exchange for the spell's cost is more powerful than a nominal 'starting' gargoyle. You could imagine a version of the spell that summons a weaker one, but I would say that should have a lower cost, like similar to summon myrmidon. That said, it is misleading to use the word 'regular' to describe the summoned version.

Note that this means an illusion of a gargoyle -- which, being an illusion, is supposed to be what the wizard and witnesses consider an "average" of its type -- must be weaker than the summoned version, which contradicts the way it works in Wizard.

[Skarg]

Everyone commenting here is an experienced TFT player. We can read a description and know how to make up some appropriate stats. We can also look at our old books. Or house rule whatever we want.

But that doesn't help out new GMs or players, or even experienced GMs unfamiliar with TFT and who don't have the original books.

It also helps for situations where even an experienced GM thinks something like this perfect example:

And I don't see why I shouldn't assume they are no different from any other human or humanoid race when it comes to setting NPC stat level: goofs are a couple of points lower, those with 'adventurer' potential are as listed, and formidable examples a few points higher.

i.e. by not listing appropriate stats for typical members of the race, even experienced TFT GMs who know that Reptile men were like humans in DX & IQ but with +6 ST, may decide that a race described in the book as giant muscular monsters who have a multiplier to their armor weight because they are so huge, are appropriate to have average members of their race now be 30 point characters "like every other humanoid". If the average stats were listed, this GM would get a clearer chance to notice that his assumptions don't match the description, so that even if he still wants 30-point reptile men, he'll more likely see the need to tell the players it's a change from what is described.

It is missing information.

[TippetsTX]

And what is so wrong with allowing powerful starting races anyway? The XP rules keep them from advancing much until the other characters can catch up.

[larsdangly]

I follow what you are saying, but I have to say none of this struck me as a problem when I was just reading and playing the game.

[TippetsTX]

In the other threads where this has come up, did Steve Jackson or another official source comment on their justification for these changes?