Preface: No I will not use Tasha's to handwave Ability Scores.
So I was working on a campaign setting which has been developing over time. In the world a group of Half-Elves (+2 Cha, +1 Con/Wis or +1 to any 2) and a group of Rilkans (+2 Dex) crossbred into a subspecies (+2 X, +1 y/z).
Additionally a homebrew race called the Krosians (+2 Cha, +1 Con/Wis) and Winter Eladrin (+2 Dex, +1 Cha) also crossbred (+2 A, +1 b/c).
These two subgroups them merged with each other. I find using Punnett Squares to accurate determine general ability scores seems to fail, probably with my overall lack of general knowledge beyond the basics.
Asking for advice from other DM's, what would you say the stats would likely be in the new cross race?
Side Note: the final product has evolved/adapted somewhat to living in tundra and taiga and retains some manner of fey appearance.
By "overall lack of general knowledge" do you mean of genetics & Punnett squares? Because ability scores do not boil down neatly into purely inherited genes with dominant/recessive alleles that lend themselves well to a Punnett square-type analysis.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Helpful rewriter of Japanese->English translation and delver into software codebases (she/e/they)
By "overall lack of general knowledge" do you mean of genetics & Punnett squares? Because ability scores do not boil down neatly into purely inherited genes with dominant/recessive alleles that lend themselves well to a Punnett square-type analysis.
genetics beyond basic punnett squares.
Assume for the sake of argument, that any ability score granted "inherently" to a race is there for the purpose of evolutionary biology (as they would be in real life species that adapt to varying environments, say birds).
Example: An elf type species receives +2 to dexterity as what I assume would be a dominant trait for it's kind (while differing ability scores for sub traits are derived from subspecies adaptations and would not inherently overrule a dominant trait but ride along with the dominant trait). It its here my understanding of what to do next breaks down. Many times in real life two competing dominant traits are equally expressed (Red Rose + White ROSE = Pink Rose) But I don't know how to graph options for the rider traits well enough to come out with a likely ability score combination for the final offspring race.
By "overall lack of general knowledge" do you mean of genetics & Punnett squares? Because ability scores do not boil down neatly into purely inherited genes with dominant/recessive alleles that lend themselves well to a Punnett square-type analysis.
genetics beyond basic punnett squares.
Assume for the sake of argument, that any ability score granted "inherently" to a race is there for the purpose of evolutionary biology (as they would be in real life species that adapt to varying environments, say birds).
Example: An elf type species receives +2 to dexterity as what I assume would be a dominant trait for it's kind (while differing ability scores for sub traits are derived from subspecies adaptations and would not inherently overrule a dominant trait but ride along with the dominant trait). It its here my understanding of what to do next breaks down. Many times in real life two competing dominant traits are equally expressed (Red Rose + White ROSE = Pink Rose) But I don't know how to graph options for the rider traits well enough to come out with a likely ability score combination for the final offspring race.
Your hypothesis that racial +2 ASIs are dominant traits breaks down immediately if you compare Elves with Half-Elves. Half-Elves, by definition, have an Elf as a parent (or at least ancestor), so if +2 DEX means DEX is a dominant trait and homozygous among the Elf population, then Half-Elves with one Elf parent must have a DEX ASI as a racial trait; yet they don't, they have +2 CHA and +1 to a different ability score. The reason given for +2 CHA in the Rules is that Half-Elves are stuck between two different societies, and thus need the charisma to get along in both/either of them. This points to the +2 CHA "racial" bonus being a matter of life experience and/or upbringing, not genetic inheritance.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Helpful rewriter of Japanese->English translation and delver into software codebases (she/e/they)
By "overall lack of general knowledge" do you mean of genetics & Punnett squares? Because ability scores do not boil down neatly into purely inherited genes with dominant/recessive alleles that lend themselves well to a Punnett square-type analysis.
genetics beyond basic punnett squares.
Assume for the sake of argument, that any ability score granted "inherently" to a race is there for the purpose of evolutionary biology (as they would be in real life species that adapt to varying environments, say birds).
Example: An elf type species receives +2 to dexterity as what I assume would be a dominant trait for it's kind (while differing ability scores for sub traits are derived from subspecies adaptations and would not inherently overrule a dominant trait but ride along with the dominant trait). It its here my understanding of what to do next breaks down. Many times in real life two competing dominant traits are equally expressed (Red Rose + White ROSE = Pink Rose) But I don't know how to graph options for the rider traits well enough to come out with a likely ability score combination for the final offspring race.
Your hypothesis that racial +2 ASIs are dominant traits breaks down immediately if you compare Elves with Half-Elves. Half-Elves, by definition, have an Elf as a parent (or at least ancestor), so if +2 DEX means DEX is a dominant trait and homozygous among the Elf population, then Half-Elves with one Elf parent must have a DEX ASI as a racial trait; yet they don't, they have +2 CHA and +1 to a different ability score. The reason given for +2 CHA in the Rules is that Half-Elves are stuck between two different societies, and thus need the charisma to get along in both/either of them. This points to the +2 CHA "racial" bonus being a matter of life experience and/or upbringing, not genetic inheritance.
That is a remarkably valid point. However it is oddly it's own outlier as Half-orcs inherit their own stat bonuses from their orcish parentage, as did Mul in 4e from their dwarven heritage, I acknowledge the statement though. Disregarding the argument of upbringing for half-elves entirely in that matter, I've sort of closed the argument by getting more research and work done in the last night or so. Your insight is useful, but I've closed the matter. Thank you for the enlightening responses though.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Preface: No I will not use Tasha's to handwave Ability Scores.
So I was working on a campaign setting which has been developing over time. In the world a group of Half-Elves (+2 Cha, +1 Con/Wis or +1 to any 2) and a group of Rilkans (+2 Dex) crossbred into a subspecies (+2 X, +1 y/z).
Additionally a homebrew race called the Krosians (+2 Cha, +1 Con/Wis) and Winter Eladrin (+2 Dex, +1 Cha) also crossbred (+2 A, +1 b/c).
These two subgroups them merged with each other. I find using Punnett Squares to accurate determine general ability scores seems to fail, probably with my overall lack of general knowledge beyond the basics.
Asking for advice from other DM's, what would you say the stats would likely be in the new cross race?
Side Note: the final product has evolved/adapted somewhat to living in tundra and taiga and retains some manner of fey appearance.
By "overall lack of general knowledge" do you mean of genetics & Punnett squares? Because ability scores do not boil down neatly into purely inherited genes with dominant/recessive alleles that lend themselves well to a Punnett square-type analysis.
Helpful rewriter of Japanese->English translation and delver into software codebases (she/e/they)
genetics beyond basic punnett squares.
Assume for the sake of argument, that any ability score granted "inherently" to a race is there for the purpose of evolutionary biology (as they would be in real life species that adapt to varying environments, say birds).
Example: An elf type species receives +2 to dexterity as what I assume would be a dominant trait for it's kind (while differing ability scores for sub traits are derived from subspecies adaptations and would not inherently overrule a dominant trait but ride along with the dominant trait). It its here my understanding of what to do next breaks down. Many times in real life two competing dominant traits are equally expressed (Red Rose + White ROSE = Pink Rose) But I don't know how to graph options for the rider traits well enough to come out with a likely ability score combination for the final offspring race.
Your hypothesis that racial +2 ASIs are dominant traits breaks down immediately if you compare Elves with Half-Elves. Half-Elves, by definition, have an Elf as a parent (or at least ancestor), so if +2 DEX means DEX is a dominant trait and homozygous among the Elf population, then Half-Elves with one Elf parent must have a DEX ASI as a racial trait; yet they don't, they have +2 CHA and +1 to a different ability score. The reason given for +2 CHA in the Rules is that Half-Elves are stuck between two different societies, and thus need the charisma to get along in both/either of them. This points to the +2 CHA "racial" bonus being a matter of life experience and/or upbringing, not genetic inheritance.
Helpful rewriter of Japanese->English translation and delver into software codebases (she/e/they)
That is a remarkably valid point. However it is oddly it's own outlier as Half-orcs inherit their own stat bonuses from their orcish parentage, as did Mul in 4e from their dwarven heritage, I acknowledge the statement though. Disregarding the argument of upbringing for half-elves entirely in that matter, I've sort of closed the argument by getting more research and work done in the last night or so. Your insight is useful, but I've closed the matter. Thank you for the enlightening responses though.