Racials Should be Changed

Kashya_Vulano · April 2018

Something that I feel has needed to be addressed lately is the way racials are implemented within the game; they're not immediate issues, or game breaking, but they are most definitely annoying and not intuitive or impressive. There are a few reasons that I think this should be changed, and I have a few ideas that could possibly get the ball rolling with that, which is why I feel that I need to drop an idea here; the intent of this post is to explain why racials are poorly implemented, and how we can change them to make them fun, interesting, and considerably more fun to choose from.

1. Racials are not 'Lore Friendly.'
Whenever you think of a magicka based BiS build, it's probably an Altmer. I get it, Altmer are stereotypically supposed to be these awesome, magic-toting superiors with a bad temper and a towering height. Not all of them are like that, though. Recall the Queen's Talons, for example, or even Altmer within the Fighter's Guild. This works both ways; one of the most renowned mages in the world right now is Shalidor, who is a Nord. Aren't Nords supposed to be these hearty, greatsword swinging, walking tanks, though? There's just a complex here that Zenimax fails to address, and leads to my next point.

2. This takes an aspect away from 'playing how you want.'
So, this whole topic seems to be really touchy. Whenever someone brings this argument up, there's a blaze of retorts from people stating that ZOS has to have limitations. Perfectly reasonable. However, this is one of those topics that I feel can be easily addressed with a skill line remodel and a skill point refund. Let's play an example out: I enjoy playing an Altmer. However, I have always loved stamina-based classes, Dragonknight in specific. There's an aspect of major constriction when I go to choose a class, because by default, my Altmer has no capacity to become a marathon runner. No matter how hard he or she tries, they are destined to be a magicka-based class through and through, and if I pick a class that is stamina-based, my endgame abilities are severely stunted. There's a barrage of players who like to argue with, "Ignore the racials!" There's a problem with that, however:

3. You can't ignore racials anymore, and it's causing people to stick to one race.
The more that time drags on, the more that Zenimax inadvertently puts a strain on players to really consider their racials. While you can definitely run a stamina based build on a race like an Altmer, you're going to be at a severe disadvantage in comparison to your peers, and in the realm of endgame content. Furthermore, you can't have every race as 'the meta'. One race is going to stick out like a sore thumb, and you can see that in races like Nords and Orcs. Seems harmless, yes. Just don't be a Nord or an Orc. That's all well and dandy, until there are only three 'meta' races running around, depending on what ZOS has patched this version to be the meta.

So, there are quite a few reasons why I think that racials just don't work. They cause race imbalances, they're a very annoying 'feature,' they're not 'lore friendly' as some people like to argue, and they force people to pick a side.

So, I've emptied my heart out on why racials are annoying, but it's not helpful if you don't offer a potential resolution. What's my resolution, you might ask? It's simple:

An unlocked list of racials that resemble a whole skill line of passives, which allow players to pick and choose what they want based on what class they play, with a very minor buff to a race's "specialty."
So, it's a no-brainer: Redguards are good at swinging swords, Altmer are good at throwing spells, and Nords are good at running headstrong into fights. These classes should be given a buff to what they're supposed to be good at. The problem is, Zenimax implements this in a way that makes it absolutely mandatory that you play the way a traditional, stereotypical race would do. These attributes should be much more insignificant, like the way Skyrim treated buffs. Not important. This is what I think should ultimately be done:

As a default, given passive ability, a race should be given no more than a 5% buff to whatever they're 'supposed' to be good at. Be it magicka, stamina, weapon damage, physical resistance, or so on, this still allows a race to get a buff while not making or breaking a build based on a race.

The new 'Racial' Skill line shouldn't be racial-based; it should be organized so that you can pick and choose what you want your character to be good at. Customization makes building your character entertaining. Line up seven to eight passives that all focus on different aspects of passive development, be it magicka, stamina, health, or so on. That can create a problem, though. You can just put points into all of these skills. Right? Well, there's a way around that in the next point.

Make the player choose what 'passive' line they wish to utilize. Allow this decision to be changeable at a Skillpoint Refund Shrine. New players may have some difficulty picking what they want at first, but that's alright. You don't have to throw this decision on them at the very beginning of the game. Some time around level 10 to 30, allow the players to unlock whatever skill line they want to specialize in: Stamina, Magicka, Health, etc. If they wish to change this decision later on, then simply go to one of the shrines of Akatosh/Stendarr to refund this decision, and get an opportunity to switch it when you refund your skill points.

Ultimately, you will have a passive line based on what you want to specialize in, with a very minuscule buff given to what your race is inherently good at. So, to lay this out, here's a really primitive, text-based look at what this skill line would look like. Let's go back to my example with the Altmer, and assume the following:

I have an Altmer, and have chosen to go with the Stamina line of passives. My skill line would look something like this:

O - Altmer Passive (5% Max Magicka)
O - Stamina-Based Passive (Increase Stamina Recovery by 6%)
O - Stamina-Based Passive (Increase Health recovery by 3%)
O - Stamina-Based Passive (Increase Weapon Damage by 5%)

Or, let's say I have an Orc and I want to run a Magicka line of passives. My skill line would look something like this:

O - Orc Passive (5% Increase of weapon damage)
O - Magicka-Based Passive (Increase Magicka Recovery by 6%
O - Magicka-Based Passive (Increase Flame, Frost, and Shock Damage by 5%)
O - Magicka-Based Passive (Increase Healing done by 3%)

That was a lot to explain. What do you guys think? Are racials something that need to be addressed? Leave some feedback!

xaraan · April 2018

Another one of "these" threads.

I'll say this: Too many players come in here with this argument trying to say that just b/c someone is a warrior from a magic rich culture or a mage from a warrior rich culture or whatever various combinations we want to throw in there and just assume that that means they should get custom passives. No, racial traits aren't from a short time of someone creating a royal guard, or a group of assassins or spending their life training as a mage - they come from centuries and centuries of a races overall leanings. Edit: to add - the traits you get from spending your own life in training in whatever guild you wanna use are already there, they are called passives from the various guild and class and pvp lines we pick up.

It actually makes you look more stereotypical that you cannot imagine a scenerio where you break out of the norm for a race and would actually take a different path if not given hand picked traits to go with it.

Changes like this actually would take away from the game and be less lore friendly. What would make a stam build of an Altmer interesting is the fact they get more magicka and could get more from using magicka abilities (like my stam DK has to do or my stamNB), same with a Bosmer sorc, you might not get the bonus damage, but having the bonus stam could pay off in other ways, etc. Those might not just give you a flat out top-end BiS numbers advantage when looking at only one thing like max damage output, but when looking at something like having stam for blocking and moving in crazy fights, that could make a difference.

In the end, no, I don't think they should give us custom passives. The racials as they are, are in a pretty good spot for once (maybe Nord could get some love) but they shouldn't be changed much and frankly, won't be.

VaranisArano · April 2018

I'm happy to tweak the existing numbers of passives if needed, but the existence of specific racial bonuses to skills and racial powers is an Elder Scrolls staple.

Kashya_Vulano · April 2018

Hey, Xaraan! Thanks for the feedback, but I'd like to point out some things.

xaraan wrote: »

Another one of "these" threads.

No, racial traits aren't from a short time of someone creating a royal guard, or a group of assassins or spending their life training as a mage - they come from centuries and centuries of a races overall leanings. Edit: to add - the traits you get from spending your own life in training in whatever guild you wanna use are already there, they are called passives from the various guild and class and pvp lines we pick up.

It actually makes you look more stereotypical that you cannot imagine a scenerio where you break out of the norm for a race and would actually take a different path if not given hand picked traits to go with it.

That's a very good point, they are built up from centuries of overall leanings. That is why I suggested to be rid of the racials line entirely, however, and in its place, utilize one minor skill to reflect that cultural leaning. As I have posted above in my example, the race gets one passive to reflect their racial talent (like a 5% max magicka boost for Altmer), and the remainder would be based on player choice.

Now, as for guild/class/pvp passives: These are all well and good, but they are not race exclusive. Anyone can obtain and use them, whereas racials are strictly prohibited to, well, the race that they are partnered with. This wouldn't be a big deal, but racials do play quite a bit of a role in endgame content. Which leads me to your next point:

xaraan wrote: »

What would make a stam build of an Altmer interesting is the fact they get more magicka and could get more from using magicka abilities (like my stam DK has to do or my stamNB), same with a Bosmer sorc, you might not get the bonus damage, but having the bonus stam could pay off in other ways, etc. Those might not just give you a flat out top-end BiS numbers advantage when looking at only one thing like max damage output, but when looking at something like having stam for blocking and moving in crazy fights, that could make a difference.

This simply doesn't work with some builds. Let's go back to the Altmer example I used in the first post, just because it works so well: If I'm playing a purely stamina based build, none of those magicka based passives are going to benefit me in any way possible. Perhaps I could utilize it in one or two magicka based skills, but even then, it's like playing without racials at all because I'm not going to be hurting for magicka, with or without these passives. That being said, we're back at square one, and at a pretty considerable disadvantage.

Guarlet · April 2018

Like it or not, the racials are very much lore-friendly. As has been said, Elder Scrolls games have always had race-specific passives. Also, just because a few individuals are good at something doesn't mean the whole race should suddenly be known for it. Jeremy Lin is a famous basketball player. Does that mean all East Asians should be known for their star basketball prowess/potential? No. That's not how it works, and you'd be silly if you think so.

Similarly, Shalidor is a stellar mage in spite of his Nord heritage, not because of it.

Racials can definitely be adjusted to make them more balanced, but they should never be overhauled like this.

Aliyavana · April 2018

No, racials are lore friendly

DaveMoeDee · April 2018

Nah. They shouldn't be changed anymore. There is already so much goalpost moving with skill modifications, but at least I can just respec after yet another annoying rebalance.

Doctordarkspawn · April 2018

I support the idea at it's core, even if this thread will likely just end up being "RACIALS ARE LOREFRIENDLY STOP SAYING OTHERWISE"

You can shout it, until your blue in the face. We can shout it, until we're blue in the face.

But the fact is that bethesda single player games kept them ambiguous, with no specific bonuses aside from starting skills and some minor utility powers, for a reason.

Recremen · April 2018

Racials aren't even lore-friendly so I don't see a problem with changing racials in some way. If you go look up the ones from Arena, Daggerfall, Morrowind, Oblivion, and Skyrim, they are powerfully inconsistent and worse, sometimes even contradictory. People cry "but the lore!!" yeah please go actually look at previous games, then read some books, then come to the realization that it's never been a solid rock to stand on.

WakeYourGhost · April 2018

Wow, this again? Same silly “points”, same flawed “arguments”, same cheap words.

Is a 2-5k dps boost really worth so many wasted words?
No doubt [x character] still has their normal racial bonuses - they just have a lifetime of skill and all the free-will choices we have to make them good at their chosen path, which doesn’t require racial passives to do.

No doubt [x Race] would appeal more to YOU because YOU can’t look past the tiny number bonuses to actually pick what you want, but [x race] works fine for me, and it’s off-standard passives are still useful to the creative and clever among us.

No, your Race-class OTP shouldn’t get a massive synergy buff just because you can’t find a way to look past very small numbers.

No, you don’t have Lore-based facts to support your lore-friendly or lore-accurate changes
Yes, their passives all call from lore of the ES series or previous game’s passives to take a basis for this game - It’s not 100% flawless, but it’s still more lore friendly than [x race] with inverted passives because “whaaa I wanna munchkin while being my favorite race”

xenowarrior92eb17_ESO · April 2018

magical orcs? never!

Kashya_Vulano · April 2018

Hi, Guarlet. I think you're misinterpreting what I'm stating. Please keep the unnecessary hostility to a minimum, as it's in no way productive to the discussion.

Guarlet wrote: »

Like it or not, the racials are very much lore-friendly. As has been said, Elder Scrolls games have always had race-specific passives. Also, just because a few individuals are good at something doesn't mean the whole race should suddenly be known for it.

I absolutely agree; Elder Scrolls has always had race specific passives. They have never been absolutely necessary to create a solid, endgame build like they do in ESO. Please read the remainder of my discussion, though! The goal here -is- to keep a racial passive, but not force it to take priority on creating an endgame-capable build.

emilyhyoyeon · April 2018

At the very least I think that current attribute-based racials should be toned down. 10% max magicka/stam is pretty huge for damage

Kashya_Vulano · April 2018

Hey Ghost. Again, please keep the hostility down. All that does is create an extremely toxic atmosphere in regards to the discussion.

WakeYourGhost wrote: »

No, you don’t have Lore-based facts to support your lore-friendly or lore-accurate changes
Yes, their passives all call from lore of the ES series or previous game’s passives to take a basis for this game - It’s not 100% flawless, but it’s still more lore friendly than [x race] with inverted passives because “whaaa I wanna munchkin while being my favorite race”

Please read what I wrote in the original post. I answer most of the points you bring up within it. Likewise, the aim here is not to 'invert' passives—races should, indeed, still keep a passive to reflect their cultural standing—but as it currently stands, the racials are much more essential to utilizing an endgame build in ESO, and this extra several thousand damage in DPS does have a very, very noticeable effect in endgame content such as trials.

AlnilamE · April 2018

The problem with your argument is that you think "Play as you want" means "any way to play is meta".

That's not the case.

There is no race and class combo in this game that does not allow you to clear content competently. If you are worried about squeezing out a couple of percentage points for leaderboards, then you will have to make a choice, but otherwise, play what you like.

WakeYourGhost · April 2018

Kashya_Vulano wrote: »

Hi, Guarlet. I think you're misinterpreting what I'm stating. Please keep the unnecessary hostility to a minimum, as it's in no way productive to the discussion.

Guarlet wrote: »

Like it or not, the racials are very much lore-friendly. As has been said, Elder Scrolls games have always had race-specific passives. Also, just because a few individuals are good at something doesn't mean the whole race should suddenly be known for it.

I absolutely agree; Elder Scrolls has always had race specific passives. They have never been absolutely necessary to create a solid, endgame build like they do in ESO. Please read the remainder of my discussion, though! The goal here -is- to keep a racial passive, but not force it to take priority on creating an endgame-capable build.

If racial passives are taking Priority in your End-game calculations, you're either unrealistically elitists or incredibly naive.
I haven't come across any End-game content in PvP or PvE that requires a specific race to really Lock you in as "Perfect". I mean, I've seen some crazy-good Khajiit Mag-Healers and some crazy-bad Altmer Sorcs. That's straight up a Skill issue, and no amount of tiny percentage more is going to make up for that skill, or be the make-or-break for a build.

Doctordarkspawn · April 2018

AlnilamE wrote: »

The problem with your argument is that you think "Play as you want" means "any way to play is meta".

That's not the case.

There is no race and class combo in this game that does not allow you to clear content competently. If you are worried about squeezing out a couple of percentage points for leaderboards, then you will have to make a choice, but otherwise, play what you like.

No one said that.

The OP said that it was retracting from what little player choice we had, wasn't lore friendly (It isn't.) and was causing people to stick exclusively to a few races for a few rolls (ARGONIAN TANKS, COUGH COUGH).

While we certainly dont hate the meta, we'd probably like for some actual choice instead of the 'myriad wrong choices' design that we've had up until now. And given ZOS has been doing their best to make under-utilized morphs appealing, I'd say giving us some choices as far as racials go would be right up their ally.

TheShadowScout · April 2018

Kashya_Vulano wrote: »

1. Racials are not 'Lore Friendly.'

Wrong.
They are an integral part of the elder scrolls lore, since every game so far has had them, keeping to the general theme of each race.

You are also confusing racial passives with personal features (aka, how someone spends their attribute points) and even profession, as many do. They are seperate, and one does in no way hay anything to do with the other!

The fact is that any of the people of tamriel can do any job, some just may have it easier to get good at it then others.
Take your altmer example...
- yes, the lore states that altmer are the most magically incluned people of tamriel, due to elf blood and heirs to aldmeris, and all that. Does that mean -every- altmer is a mage? Hardly! Some may be learning magic and getting good at it, others may train in the martial arts and become knights - they just do not get the extra advantage the altmer blood gives the altmer mages, and take a little longer to become as good at it, but its not like elves can't spend those extra years on that, right?
- yes, Shalidor is remembered and renowned. Why? Simply -because- he is a nord! Noone cares about all the powerful altmer mages - those are a dime a dozend throughout Tamriels history. But the one nord who through sheer will and determination managed to reach the heights of sorcery... that one IS remembered!

Kashya_Vulano wrote: »

2. This takes an aspect away from 'playing how you want.'

Not really.
You can still play as -you- want.

You can play any role you want, and even be super-effective at it if you choose the right race.

You can also play any race you want, any way you want, the only question is if you will have those extra percent effectiveness.
Some care way too much about min/maxxing. Others just have fun with khajiit spellslingers, breton knights, bosmer shamans, dunmer assassins or whatnot.

Kashya_Vulano wrote: »

3. You can't ignore racials anymore, and it's causing people to stick to one race.

...and here we come to a vaild concern.
And It's A Big One!
The racial predispositions are part of the lore, and removing them, or letting people cherry-pick their passives is a bad thing.
...but...
...HOW those racial affinities should be represented in the game is a different matter!
And one worthy of discussion, and in need of adjustment, I say!

Because as it is right now, they are just a decent percentage on top of everything, and that makes them way too "must have" for endgame characters - which IS a bad thing!

In past TES games, many of the racial attribute perks were merely "legs up" in the start, and all characters could learn anything they wanted to if they just put in the effort. Makes me wish it was the same here as well, that ESO has a "ceiling" to the stat effects (softcaps!) and racial boni just helped people reach this ceiling sooner... thus being a great boon in the beginning, but not really much in the endgame...

Kashya_Vulano wrote: »

So, there are quite a few reasons why I think that racials just don't work. They cause race imbalances, they're a very annoying 'feature,' they're not 'lore friendly' as some people like to argue, and they force people to pick a side.

Are lore friendly, are interesting, make for more diverse characters...
...
...but yeah, fail when it comes to pigeonholing some racial choices into some specific character roles.

So I say... they could work, but... not exactly like this.
Indeed, they should be changed, keeping to the racial theme, but adjusting the effect to be less of a "must have for endgame" concept...

Kashya_Vulano wrote: »

So, I've emptied my heart out on why racials are annoying, but it's not helpful if you don't offer a potential resolution. What's my resolution, you might ask? It's simple:
-snip-

I dislike any "let people cherry-pick their -racial- passives" concepts, skill line or none.
I agree with the "make them much more insignificant" part tho.

My suggestion would be as I hinted at - change things so the racial perks give a leg up in the beginning, but become insignificant in the end... possibly by changing the current percentage bonus to pre-assigned attribute points instead!

And then bring back attribute softcaps, that start giving diminishing returns at some point... meaning the racial affinities just let characters reach the point of diminished returns sooner, and thus have less and less effect at the end, but mean a -big- advantage at the start. (Which would also make hybrid characters viable again... just sayin...)

And then...
...add some more passives. Not racial ones... cultural ones; additional passives that -would- be freely selectable depending on character backstory.
Passives reflecting where a character was born, how they grew up, and what they did before they became involved with all the events of ESO... I mean, all characters had a life before becoming a sacrifice for Mannimarco and getting all vestige-heroic (or shipwrecking on vvardenfell if you start with the Morrowind tutorial), right?

So, I would imagine, one passive for birthplace, with something reflecting the region... like a lesser version of the nord cold resistance for other people born and raised in skyrim, or a lesser version of dumner fire resistance for others born and growing up in the shadow of red mountain, disease resistance for those who managed to live to adulthood in black marsh, etc. (possibly split these - take the current resistance and assign two thirds to race, one third to birthplace?)
It probably should not be a perk for every single map, but one per "region" - skyrim, morrowind, high rock, alik'r, valenwood, elsweyr, etc. Not even sure what perk it could be for some of them, but... the general concept is good methinks!

Then another passive for the type of childhood they had... those growing up as the children of nobles with access to a library and good tutoring might have an advantage in scholarly pursuits, and thus gain some magica bonus, while those growing up with commoner workers and help in the family business all day long during their childhood might gain some stamina perk from all the work, while those growing up as exiles or outcasts of some sort (no matter if breton country rube, nord mountain man or dunmer ashlander) might gain some perk in health/toughness... (this would be a good place to put percentile-based boni now, since that passive -would- be freely selectable!)

And finally there could be one more passive for their adult life pre-heroics. Reflecting what they did for a living before becoming all adventurery (though I guess being an adventurer back then as well would be an viable option - but so would librarian, carpenter, ratcatcher or blacksmith...). The possibilities here are endless, both for combat related perks, and non-combat perks. People could have been bandits, blacksmiths, farmers, librarians, soldiers, priests, hunters, tailors, housewives, merchants, whatever... and nthen they took a dagger to the chest, died, escaped coldharbor and became a hero. Doesn't mean their former lives never happened, right?
Also, I had been thinking about the idea of making those profession passives come with a drawback of sorts... like, anyone known as "former thief" might face higher bounty for offenses as the city guards "once a criminal, always a criminal" prejudices come into play, while others might have a lack in some skills (so for example a "barbarian warrior" combat-related perk might give you a crafting penalty, or a "bookish scholar" magica perk may give you a haggling penalty, or something along those lines... )

Anyhow, that would be my ideas on the whole "Racials should be changed" matter...

AlnilamE · April 2018

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

AlnilamE wrote: »

The problem with your argument is that you think "Play as you want" means "any way to play is meta".

That's not the case.

There is no race and class combo in this game that does not allow you to clear content competently. If you are worried about squeezing out a couple of percentage points for leaderboards, then you will have to make a choice, but otherwise, play what you like.

No one said that.

The OP said that it was retracting from what little player choice we had, wasn't lore friendly (It isn't.) and was causing people to stick exclusively to a few races for a few rolls (ARGONIAN TANKS, COUGH COUGH).

While we certainly dont hate the meta, we'd probably like for some actual choice instead of the 'myriad wrong choices' design that we've had up until now. And given ZOS has been doing their best to make under-utilized morphs appealing, I'd say giving us some choices as far as racials go would be right up their ally.

Oddly enough, I have 2 argonians and neither have ever been tanks.

The way things are now, at least we can tell from the race people pick for their characters if they are meta followers or if they actually play for fun. :-)

WakeYourGhost · April 2018

AlnilamE wrote: »

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

AlnilamE wrote: »

The problem with your argument is that you think "Play as you want" means "any way to play is meta".

That's not the case.

There is no race and class combo in this game that does not allow you to clear content competently. If you are worried about squeezing out a couple of percentage points for leaderboards, then you will have to make a choice, but otherwise, play what you like.

No one said that.

The OP said that it was retracting from what little player choice we had, wasn't lore friendly (It isn't.) and was causing people to stick exclusively to a few races for a few rolls (ARGONIAN TANKS, COUGH COUGH).

While we certainly dont hate the meta, we'd probably like for some actual choice instead of the 'myriad wrong choices' design that we've had up until now. And given ZOS has been doing their best to make under-utilized morphs appealing, I'd say giving us some choices as far as racials go would be right up their ally.

Oddly enough, I have 2 argonians and neither have ever been tanks.

The way things are now, at least we can tell from the race people pick for their characters if they are meta followers or if they actually play for fun. :-)

If I need a Random to fill out my Dungeon or Trail groups because some people aren't free in my Guilds and I don't have enough Friends online.. Well, I tend to look at Race-Class-Gear mix-ups.

If the Random is Max(Or very high)-CP, and went Hard Meta with their Race-Class-Gear, I'll watch 'em like a hawk. They tend to be insanely bad at the game and drag the entire party down. Shortly after, they almost always start complaining about how bad every else is, and how their choices are trash.
Guys who don't know how to dodge an AoE and like to face-tank hits because they're "BiS DPS" and that makes them Sithis' Gift to ESO sure love to throw around Shade when they can't keep up with us "play-for-fun" types.

Guarlet · April 2018

Kashya_Vulano wrote: »

Hi, Guarlet. I think you're misinterpreting what I'm stating. Please keep the unnecessary hostility to a minimum, as it's in no way productive to the discussion.

No hostility intended, apologies if it came off that way. If there was a tone, it was only because this discussion has come up in the forums many times in the past.

Kashya_Vulano wrote: »

I absolutely agree; Elder Scrolls has always had race specific passives. They have never been absolutely necessary to create a solid, endgame build like they do in ESO. Please read the remainder of my discussion, though! The goal here -is- to keep a racial passive, but not force it to take priority on creating an endgame-capable build.

But that's the thing- like others are telling you, unless your goal is to make it to the top of the leaderboards, to say it's "absolutely necessary" to create a solid endgame build is just false. The vast majority of the endgame is accessible and easy enough that min-maxing to this degree isn't necessary. And in general, your build and personal skill as a player will make far more of a difference than your choice of race.

Literally any race-class combo is endgame-capable.

Animus-ESO · April 2018

AlnilamE wrote: »

The problem with your argument is that you think "Play as you want" means "any way to play is meta".

That's not the case.

There is no race and class combo in this game that does not allow you to clear content competently. If you are worried about squeezing out a couple of percentage points for leaderboards, then you will have to make a choice, but otherwise, play what you like.

If it is not as important as you say, why are you so hell bent on maintaining this flawed system that obviously tons of players are not satisfied with. This change would not affect you at all. Not even a little bit. So stop being resistant to quality of life changes.

Iluvrien · April 2018

See currently active thread on exactly the same subject

DaveMoeDee · April 2018

jasonthorpeb14_ESO wrote: »

AlnilamE wrote: »

The problem with your argument is that you think "Play as you want" means "any way to play is meta".

That's not the case.

There is no race and class combo in this game that does not allow you to clear content competently. If you are worried about squeezing out a couple of percentage points for leaderboards, then you will have to make a choice, but otherwise, play what you like.

If it is not as important as you say, why are you so hell bent on maintaining this flawed system that obviously tons of players are not satisfied with. This change would not affect you at all. Not even a little bit. So stop being resistant to quality of life changes.

How many players is a ton? If we are going by weight, that is not many players.

Cheveyo · April 2018

The people claiming this game's racials are lore friendly are so full of ***.

No, they're not. Yes, the IDEA of racials isn't new and has been part of the ES games. But the way this game handles them is NOT LORE FRIENDLY.

At most what racials would do if we stuck to lore would be give certain races a bonus point or two in certain stats.

And then there's the fact that certain racials don't fit. Like Imperial racials, for example, don't fit with the way Imperials are supposed to be in lore. They're magicka users, ffs.

DaveMoeDee · April 2018

AlnilamE wrote: »

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

AlnilamE wrote: »

The problem with your argument is that you think "Play as you want" means "any way to play is meta".

That's not the case.

There is no race and class combo in this game that does not allow you to clear content competently. If you are worried about squeezing out a couple of percentage points for leaderboards, then you will have to make a choice, but otherwise, play what you like.

No one said that.

The OP said that it was retracting from what little player choice we had, wasn't lore friendly (It isn't.) and was causing people to stick exclusively to a few races for a few rolls (ARGONIAN TANKS, COUGH COUGH).

While we certainly dont hate the meta, we'd probably like for some actual choice instead of the 'myriad wrong choices' design that we've had up until now. And given ZOS has been doing their best to make under-utilized morphs appealing, I'd say giving us some choices as far as racials go would be right up their ally.

Oddly enough, I have 2 argonians and neither have ever been tanks.

The way things are now, at least we can tell from the race people pick for their characters if they are meta followers or if they actually play for fun. :-)

Cuz they lose aggro every time they go swimming

dodgehopper_ESO · April 2018

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Kashya_Vulano wrote: »

1. Racials are not 'Lore Friendly.'

Wrong.
They are an integral part of the elder scrolls lore, since every game so far has had them, keeping to the general theme of each race.

You are also confusing racial passives with personal features (aka, how someone spends their attribute points) and even profession, as many do. They are seperate, and one does in no way hay anything to do with the other!

The fact is that any of the people of tamriel can do any job, some just may have it easier to get good at it then others.
Take your altmer example...
- yes, the lore states that altmer are the most magically incluned people of tamriel, due to elf blood and heirs to aldmeris, and all that. Does that mean -every- altmer is a mage? Hardly! Some may be learning magic and getting good at it, others may train in the martial arts and become knights - they just do not get the extra advantage the altmer blood gives the altmer mages, and take a little longer to become as good at it, but its not like elves can't spend those extra years on that, right?
- yes, Shalidor is remembered and renowned. Why? Simply -because- he is a nord! Noone cares about all the powerful altmer mages - those are a dime a dozend throughout Tamriels history. But the one nord who through sheer will and determination managed to reach the heights of sorcery... that one IS remembered!

Kashya_Vulano wrote: »

2. This takes an aspect away from 'playing how you want.'

Not really.
You can still play as -you- want.

You can play any role you want, and even be super-effective at it if you choose the right race.

You can also play any race you want, any way you want, the only question is if you will have those extra percent effectiveness.
Some care way too much about min/maxxing. Others just have fun with khajiit spellslingers, breton knights, bosmer shamans, dunmer assassins or whatnot.

Kashya_Vulano wrote: »

3. You can't ignore racials anymore, and it's causing people to stick to one race.

...and here we come to a vaild concern.
And It's A Big One!
The racial predispositions are part of the lore, and removing them, or letting people cherry-pick their passives is a bad thing.
...but...
...HOW those racial affinities should be represented in the game is a different matter!
And one worthy of discussion, and in need of adjustment, I say!

Because as it is right now, they are just a decent percentage on top of everything, and that makes them way too "must have" for endgame characters - which IS a bad thing!

In past TES games, many of the racial attribute perks were merely "legs up" in the start, and all characters could learn anything they wanted to if they just put in the effort. Makes me wish it was the same here as well, that ESO has a "ceiling" to the stat effects (softcaps!) and racial boni just helped people reach this ceiling sooner... thus being a great boon in the beginning, but not really much in the endgame...

Kashya_Vulano wrote: »

So, there are quite a few reasons why I think that racials just don't work. They cause race imbalances, they're a very annoying 'feature,' they're not 'lore friendly' as some people like to argue, and they force people to pick a side.

Are lore friendly, are interesting, make for more diverse characters...
...
...but yeah, fail when it comes to pigeonholing some racial choices into some specific character roles.

So I say... they could work, but... not exactly like this.
Indeed, they should be changed, keeping to the racial theme, but adjusting the effect to be less of a "must have for endgame" concept...

Kashya_Vulano wrote: »

So, I've emptied my heart out on why racials are annoying, but it's not helpful if you don't offer a potential resolution. What's my resolution, you might ask? It's simple:
-snip-

I dislike any "let people cherry-pick their -racial- passives" concepts, skill line or none.
I agree with the "make them much more insignificant" part tho.

My suggestion would be as I hinted at - change things so the racial perks give a leg up in the beginning, but become insignificant in the end... possibly by changing the current percentage bonus to pre-assigned attribute points instead!

And then bring back attribute softcaps, that start giving diminishing returns at some point... meaning the racial affinities just let characters reach the point of diminished returns sooner, and thus have less and less effect at the end, but mean a -big- advantage at the start. (Which would also make hybrid characters viable again... just sayin...)

And then...
...add some more passives. Not racial ones... cultural ones; additional passives that -would- be freely selectable depending on character backstory.
Passives reflecting where a character was born, how they grew up, and what they did before they became involved with all the events of ESO... I mean, all characters had a life before becoming a sacrifice for Mannimarco and getting all vestige-heroic (or shipwrecking on vvardenfell if you start with the Morrowind tutorial), right?

So, I would imagine, one passive for birthplace, with something reflecting the region... like a lesser version of the nord cold resistance for other people born and raised in skyrim, or a lesser version of dumner fire resistance for others born and growing up in the shadow of red mountain, disease resistance for those who managed to live to adulthood in black marsh, etc. (possibly split these - take the current resistance and assign two thirds to race, one third to birthplace?)
It probably should not be a perk for every single map, but one per "region" - skyrim, morrowind, high rock, alik'r, valenwood, elsweyr, etc. Not even sure what perk it could be for some of them, but... the general concept is good methinks!

Then another passive for the type of childhood they had... those growing up as the children of nobles with access to a library and good tutoring might have an advantage in scholarly pursuits, and thus gain some magica bonus, while those growing up with commoner workers and help in the family business all day long during their childhood might gain some stamina perk from all the work, while those growing up as exiles or outcasts of some sort (no matter if breton country rube, nord mountain man or dunmer ashlander) might gain some perk in health/toughness... (this would be a good place to put percentile-based boni now, since that passive -would- be freely selectable!)

And finally there could be one more passive for their adult life pre-heroics. Reflecting what they did for a living before becoming all adventurery (though I guess being an adventurer back then as well would be an viable option - but so would librarian, carpenter, ratcatcher or blacksmith...). The possibilities here are endless, both for combat related perks, and non-combat perks. People could have been bandits, blacksmiths, farmers, librarians, soldiers, priests, hunters, tailors, housewives, merchants, whatever... and nthen they took a dagger to the chest, died, escaped coldharbor and became a hero. Doesn't mean their former lives never happened, right?
Also, I had been thinking about the idea of making those profession passives come with a drawback of sorts... like, anyone known as "former thief" might face higher bounty for offenses as the city guards "once a criminal, always a criminal" prejudices come into play, while others might have a lack in some skills (so for example a "barbarian warrior" combat-related perk might give you a crafting penalty, or a "bookish scholar" magica perk may give you a haggling penalty, or something along those lines... )

Anyhow, that would be my ideas on the whole "Racials should be changed" matter...

I agree with @TheShadowScout 100% on his points. I've even mirrored and stated similar concerns in the past. I want the races to be different but I don't want those differences to make Khajiit Mages so much more inferior than Altmer ones at end game. The points he make in this matter are rather important and I love the idea for other background generation differences that he delineates. This is what they should do and it would go a long way to still being balanced while giving people 'play like you want'.

dodgehopper_ESO · April 2018

Cheveyo wrote: »

The people claiming this game's racials are lore friendly are so full of ***.

No, they're not. Yes, the IDEA of racials isn't new and has been part of the ES games. But the way this game handles them is NOT LORE FRIENDLY.

At most what racials would do if we stuck to lore would be give certain races a bonus point or two in certain stats.

And then there's the fact that certain racials don't fit. Like Imperial racials, for example, don't fit with the way Imperials are supposed to be in lore. They're magicka users, ffs.

Actually, they were lucky jack-of-all-trades with definite bonuses toward combat and imperial legion type skills (One hand and shield, heavy armor, Restoration, Etc). I think the broad bonus to attributes and Red Diamond was intended to be 'luck' although I think they somewhat fail in this regard. The red diamond trait as well would be more interesting if it were a lot more like Adrenaline rush and possibly worked with strikes from all weapons.

Tasear · April 2018

How about racial ultimates!!!!

Drdeath20 · April 2018

Its never been about just trying to complete trials/dungeons/stuff. People spend years levelling up and farming sets to become stronger and get better. Only later to realize that the very 1st decision they made (before ever playing the game) is ultimately handicapping them.

Like everyone previously stated the racials should have only been a leg up at the begining of the game.

Now bcz racials make a significant difference in end game, we get metta builds. those metta toons bring about nerfs and they are usually the wrong kind of nerfs.

Numerikuu · April 2018

The whole Racial bonus thing is a tough cookie... While they shouldn't be changed to the point they no longer reflect their race, changes do have to be made imo--especially to Nord.