Arrested Development and Racial Statistics

Oh boy, look at how gloriously specific that title is. It's like finding a shiny pokemon, we might never have minutiae this minute ever again. This is one of my top five gaming pet peeves though, easy.  I'm not a huge stickler for things making perfect logical sense. You guys know me, the person who rails against using "Well, logically..." as the primary factor to your decision making. However, racial stats sometimes have a really big tonal dissonance problem that we're going into today.

In a perfect world, a race's statistics inform you of their nature, and their culture. Really, you can do this a lot already. Humans are versatile and omnipresent, so they get a +2 to any stat, and bonuses that rely on varied choice: a feat and skill points. They can be good at anything and fit in anywhere. Dwarves are slow but deliberate: Literally as well as thematically. They get a dex penalty, but aren't slowed down by encumbrance. They're stoic and slow to adapt to new ideas, so they get a wisdom penalty.

But anyone who's ever turned on Fox News knows we're pretty fucking far from a perfect world.

Before I go any further, I want to make a note on theming. It means that anything a race has leads you to think about a certain thing. It doesn't mean I'm calling for it to "Make sense". When I say the theming is botched, it means that the racial statistics feel like they're chosen randomly or without regard to what the reader is going to think when he sees them.

Goblins are easily the worst ones for this. Pathfinder describes them as superstitious to an insane degree, such as thinking writing or books steal thoughts from your head. Due to being basically Paizo's mascots they're idiotic to the point of being lovably derpy, never rise above tribal society, and don't even like building their own buildings. Paizo's content is filled with hilariously stupid chants and battle-songs. They love fire to a near fetishistic degree and have incredible voracious appetites.

So what are their stats? DEX bonus, STR penalty, CHA penalty. Bonus to stealth and ride. Bonus move speed compared to other small creatures.  That's it. Their alternate racial traits are all either regional ones like City Dweller or physical in nature like Big Ears. They don't get an INT or WIS penalty or some sort of trait based on superstition. Keep in mind that some other races do: Hobgoblin and Dwarf both have alternate traits based around their mistrust of magic.

Their background information in any of the books I own doesn't even mention animals. Honestly, with the focus on them preferring a meat-only diet and seeing other intelligent races as sources of food, it kinda guides you toward thinking they don't keep livestock. For this info, you have to look up Goblin Dogs to find out they just let the things roam free in whatever community they have. It still doesn't gel with me, though. The race they describe doesn't seem like one likely to train animals for even basic riding. They also get a CHA penalty for being "generally unpleasant to be around". Put a pin in that idea for now.

It happens with hobgoblins and their militant, orderly society somehow granting them a bonus to stealth. Half Elves in 3.5 were described as standoffish loners who live on the fringes of society, then given a bonus to Diplomacy. Drow get dancing lights and faerie fire for reasons I've never really understood. Duergar can go invisible. Really, anything having to do with the Underdark is a train wreck in terms of society, but let's keep that to another day.

There's also a lot of dissonance in terms of CHA penalties. PF defines it as "Personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance." Because I live in a world that contains Kanye West and Kim Kardashian, I vehemently disagree with the CHA being tied to appearance. This also irritates me because it became an easy "Stat dump" for every goblinoid race. If it's an ugmo like Lisa Simpson, give it a CHA penalty and call it a day.

The game's not even consistent with this. CHA is also defined as personal life force, but only if you're undead. So, a horrifying dessicated living corpse animated with unholy magical power also gets to be better at social interaction, bard spells, singing...I could go on. So the idea that nearly every undead monster gets bonuses to CHA means it holds less water that races which don't adhere to conventional human ideals of beauty all get CHA penalties. Really, when you put it like that, I guess the argument makes itself. Remember how goblins get a penalty for being unpleasant to be around? You know what's generally unpleasant to be around? A mummy. They get a four point bonus to CHA.

So, what can we do about this problem? Unless you're creating your own setting and are free to define societies and cultures as you see fit, there's fuckall you can do. Cultures are often too ingrained into settings, and mechanics should be somewhat reliable. I personally think you should try and pare down on the amount of house rules your game has, for ease of understanding and play. This means that a "Racial Rebalancing Pack" is probably a non-starter. Really, I just wanted more people to be aware of this. If nothing else, keep this kind of thing in mind when you're creating your own settings and feel free to give yourself some leeway on cultures. Everyone else seems to.