Need help to work out how to make races and species

[PauliusTheMad]

Hello, 
I am fairly big newbie to BRP, but I do like the look of it, and I had at times wrote fantasy settings for my own campaigns and had few that didn't fit usual systems, so wanted to ask if there are any good guides/directions on making up whole races/species in context of a setting for my players and me to use? 

For reference, closest I got I guess is playing a reasonable amount of warhammer fantasy and I am somewhat aware that that system is somewhat related to BRP via runequest being starting point for WHRPG as a system, but also I am guessing it is quite different. 

Any help, direction to where to go to look for this stuff would be helpful.

 

[Joerg]

3 hours ago, PauliusTheMad said:

Hello, 
I am fairly big newbie to BRP, but I do like the look of it, and I had at times wrote fantasy settings for my own campaigns and had few that didn't fit usual systems, so wanted to ask if there are any good guides/directions on making up whole races/species in context of a setting for my players and me to use?

You can look at bestiaries for related games like the Cthulhu or Dreamlands field guides (although 7th edition stats need to be divided by 5) or the RuneQuest: Glorantha bestiary for ideas how non-human humanoids and less humanoid entities may be statted. Cthulhu doesn't give location hit points, though. One of the older contributions is the RQ2/RQ Classic Gateway Bestiary which offers some non-Gloranthan critters.

Start with a fitting body plan. Add or substract straight bonus points or dice for characteristics you want to modify.

Skill defaults and magics are a bit harder, as is a general cultural description. Possibly their religion, the powers of their specific deities or spirits, and how these translate into their specific magic (or other such powers).

No species exists in isolation, and stereotypical relationships with others (at least the usual contacts) should be defined.

If you can just use almost-human stats, things are easiest.

 

[Atgxtg]

To add to the mix:

• First off make sure you got a good idea of your species and what it can and can't do in your head. Game stats will work themselves out if you understand your creation and have a idea of how big, strong, smart, etc. it is. 
• Second, look at the existing species write ups to see what thier stats are and compare your creation to them. Of particular note, since they are the "default" species are humans. The human average for most attributes is 10.5 or 13 for SIZ and INT. STR and SIZ double in ability for every 8 points in the 8-88 range. You can use this to stat your species characteristics relative to humans. So if your creation is twice as strong as a human then it should have an average STR or around 18-19. 
• You can also look at animal or monster stats if it fits your creation. For instance if your species is "a large as a bear" then you might want to look up the SIZ of a bear for your species. Note that stats outside of the normal 3-18 range might make your species very powerful compared to other species, which might lead to playability issues. For instance, a race of PC giants with STR & SIZ in the 60 range will one shot kill most humanoid foes.  So be very careful of creating anything that is superior to the existing species, they might seem cool when you come up with them, but they can risk making everyone else obsolete in play.. 
• Next look at some pre-existing BRP setting that has non-human species and new cultures to help get an idea of how it has been done in the past.  Note that this includes BRP related games such as RuneQuest or Strombringer as they both deal with adapting existing fantasy settings into BRP terms.. QUASAR has a  lot of Sci Fi Alien species to look over and has a preview. The idea is to see how it's been done to give you hints as to how you can (and should) do it. 
• Once you get something written up, review it to see how well it fits in with the pre-existing stuff. Playtest it if you can. Often an idea that seemed fantastic in your head or when put down on paper falls short in actual play.
• When you got something in the works show it to other GMs get their feedback. Often a second set of eyes will pick up on some obvious flaw that the creator overlooks. Players will somehow detect this flaw almost instantly in play, so it's best to beat them to the punch. You might not agree with other GM's assessment of your creation, but at least it will give you a different perspective, and a heads=up on any future problems, and possibly point out something you hadn't considered.
• As with most everything else, you get better at it by doing it, so the whole process will get easier and the results better as you do more and more of them. Eventually you might even revisit your early creations to revise them. 

Edited March 17 by Atgxtg

[PauliusTheMad]

On 3/17/2024 at 5:04 PM, Atgxtg said:

To add to the mix:

• First off make sure you got a good idea of your species and what it can and can't do in your head. Game stats will work themselves out if you understand your creation and have a idea of how big, strong, smart, etc. it is. 
• Second, look at the existing species write ups to see what thier stats are and compare your creation to them. Of particular note, since they are the "default" species are humans. The human average for most attributes is 10.5 or 13 for SIZ and INT. STR and SIZ double in ability for every 8 points in the 8-88 range. You can use this to stat your species characteristics relative to humans. So if your creation is twice as strong as a human then it should have an average STR or around 18-19. 
• You can also look at animal or monster stats if it fits your creation. For instance if your species is "a large as a bear" then you might want to look up the SIZ of a bear for your species. Note that stats outside of the normal 3-18 range might make your species very powerful compared to other species, which might lead to playability issues. For instance, a race of PC giants with STR & SIZ in the 60 range will one shot kill most humanoid foes.  So be very careful of creating anything that is superior to the existing species, they might seem cool when you come up with them, but they can risk making everyone else obsolete in play.. 
• Next look at some pre-existing BRP setting that has non-human species and new cultures to help get an idea of how it has been done in the past.  Note that this includes BRP related games such as RuneQuest or Strombringer as they both deal with adapting existing fantasy settings into BRP terms.. QUASAR has a  lot of Sci Fi Alien species to look over and has a preview. The idea is to see how it's been done to give you hints as to how you can (and should) do it. 
• Once you get something written up, review it to see how well it fits in with the pre-existing stuff. Playtest it if you can. Often an idea that seemed fantastic in your head or when put down on paper falls short in actual play.
• When you got something in the works show it to other GMs get their feedback. Often a second set of eyes will pick up on some obvious flaw that the creator overlooks. Players will somehow detect this flaw almost instantly in play, so it's best to beat them to the punch. You might not agree with other GM's assessment of your creation, but at least it will give you a different perspective, and a heads=up on any future problems, and possibly point out something you hadn't considered.
• As with most everything else, you get better at it by doing it, so the whole process will get easier and the results better as you do more and more of them. Eventually you might even revisit your early creations to revise them. 

Thank you, I am mostly wanting to make some humanoid species in spirit of animal people so going for halfway between human and animal might be the best idea then I guess?

[Atgxtg]

9 hours ago, PauliusTheMad said:

Thank you, I am mostly wanting to make some humanoid species in spirit of animal people so going for halfway between human and animal might be the best idea then I guess?

Yeah, or maybe 2/3 human, 1/3 animal or  better yet 3/4 human 1/4 animal if you want something that is basically humanoid but with animal ears, claws, a tail, etc. Especially if you want the species to be able to use the same gear and vehicles as other humanoids. For example, some sort of Ursine species might have a SIZ score between than of a human (13) and a brown bear (32). If you go halfway you'll get SIZ 22-23, with S TR 21 which is playable but at 2.5 meter tall and 175kg will probably be too big to fit inside a Mini Cooper. So you might want to tone it down to SIZ 18 or 19, along wit STR 16.Very big for a human, but not too big to handle a Miata or wear a human's breastplate. 

But it all depends on what you got in mind for your bear people, if they can use human armor or not, and so on. 

OH, BTW, natural armor for larger animals was usually based on the animal's damage bonus times some multiplier. For example a bear was db+1 point. There was a progression for natural weapons, too, but I'd have to look it up.  But basically if your animal people are smaller than the animals they are based on thier armor and natural weapons should be scaled down, too.

  

There are stats for were-people in some books, and Larry Niven's Kzinti (big cat people) in Ringworld. If you want info on something and don't see if, ask and someone here can dig up the info for you.

[g33k]

9 hours ago, PauliusTheMad said:

Thank you, I am mostly wanting to make some humanoid species in spirit of animal people so going for halfway between human and animal might be the best idea then I guess?

So you're drawing inspiration from the old Greco-Roman myths (examples would be centaurs, fauns, harpies, mermaids, minotaurs, etc)?  Maybe also Cernunnos from Celtic belief, or Ganesha from Hindu (though they are gods, so...); and in general the "half-form" lycanthrope trope?

Or are you thinking more of "anthro's" & "furries" -- anthropomorphic "Aesop" style animals, such as in Usagi Yojimbo, Wanderhome, etc?

One issue you'll need to clarify, I think, is how faithful to the animals they are?
As wolves prey on deer, do wolf-people prey on deer-people?  Can a mouse-person do anything physically-meaningful on a bear-person scale?

I do agree with @Joerg above, who's pointing to various Bestiaries that already exist for BRP-engine games (but also to setting/design issues); and @Atgxtg's points about design, playtest, etc.
 

[PauliusTheMad]

8 hours ago, g33k said:

So you're drawing inspiration from the old Greco-Roman myths (examples would be centaurs, fauns, harpies, mermaids, minotaurs, etc)?  Maybe also Cernunnos from Celtic belief, or Ganesha from Hindu (though they are gods, so...); and in general the "half-form" lycanthrope trope?

Or are you thinking more of "anthro's" & "furries" -- anthropomorphic "Aesop" style animals, such as in Usagi Yojimbo, Wanderhome, etc?

One issue you'll need to clarify, I think, is how faithful to the animals they are?
As wolves prey on deer, do wolf-people prey on deer-people?  Can a mouse-person do anything physically-meaningful on a bear-person scale?

I do agree with @Joerg above, who's pointing to various Bestiaries that already exist for BRP-engine games (but also to setting/design issues); and @Atgxtg's points about design, playtest, etc.
 

I am thinking closer to mythological take yes, to be honest, inspiriation was dwarf fortress where it's very much bigger or smaller things with their own kit, equipment, culture and relations mixing beast and man in how they operate.

Was mostly looking for where to look for examples and got some leads already so thanks for that.

[Mugen]

On 3/17/2024 at 9:33 AM, PauliusTheMad said:

For reference, closest I got I guess is playing a reasonable amount of warhammer fantasy and I am somewhat aware that that system is somewhat related to BRP via runequest being starting point for WHRPG as a system, but also I am guessing it is quite different. 

The only similarities between both games I can think of are the use of a d100 roll under core mechanism, and localized armor.

RuneQuest 3 had stats for Orcs, Halflings and Dwarves in its Gateway bestiary. There's also an Elf, but it's a short and agile one, not the tall and noble Tolkienish elf from Warhammer.

Their stats were reprinted in Mongoose RuneQuest bestiary, and also in Mythras.

I guess they're also in Magic World.

You can also use the stats for mostali, ducks and tusk riders from RuneQuest Glorantha...

[g33k]

8 hours ago, Mugen said:

... RuneQuest 3 had stats for Orcs, Halflings and Dwarves in its Gateway bestiary....

<NIT>
Gateway Bestiary was a 1980 book, published by Chaosium, for the RQII rules.
AH's RQ3 came a few years later.
</PICK>

 

 

[NickMiddleton]

10 hours ago, Mugen said:

…RuneQuest 3 had stats for Orcs, Halflings and Dwarves in its Gateway bestiary. There's also an Elf, but it's a short and agile one, not the tall and noble Tolkienish elf from Warhammer.

Their stats were reprinted in Mongoose RuneQuest bestiary, and also in Mythras.

I guess they're also in Magic World.…

Yup - I think pretty much everything from the RQ3 Monsters Book / BRP Creatures Monograph made it in to the 2012 Magic World book. I listed them for some reason here: 

 

[Mugen]

2 hours ago, g33k said:

<NIT>
Gateway Bestiary was a 1980 book, published by Chaosium, for the RQII rules.
AH's RQ3 came a few years later.
</PICK>

 

 

Err... I only own french versions of the RQ3 books, and in this case the monster book I had in mind (Monster Colosseum ?) was not translated as part of a bigger book, le Maître des Runes.

 

[soltakss]

What I tend to do is to look for something similar and base the race on that, with adjustments based on what the race is like.

So, a race might be like an Elf but stronger, or like a human but bigger, so add a D6 to the STR or SIZ stat.

If you use hit locations then choose the best fit, or make something up if the race is unusually-shaped. Many races will be humanoid, or humanoid with a tail, or humanoid with wings, or a humanoid with four arms, so those are generally available.

Choose base skills as appropriate. A feline race might have heightened senses so might get bonuses to Scan, Listen, and have a new Smell skill, for example. Background/Cultural skills could be generic or specific, depending on your setting. So, a feline race of humanoids might be brought up in a Civilised or Barbarian culture, or might have specific cultures of their own.

Magic entirely depends on your setting and how you have spells. Do you have RQ-style Cults? Is magic generic and freely available? Is magic only taught in specialist schools? Do different races and cultures have different magic?

[PauliusTheMad]

On 3/21/2024 at 9:05 AM, soltakss said:

What I tend to do is to look for something similar and base the race on that, with adjustments based on what the race is like.

So, a race might be like an Elf but stronger, or like a human but bigger, so add a D6 to the STR or SIZ stat.

If you use hit locations then choose the best fit, or make something up if the race is unusually-shaped. Many races will be humanoid, or humanoid with a tail, or humanoid with wings, or a humanoid with four arms, so those are generally available.

Choose base skills as appropriate. A feline race might have heightened senses so might get bonuses to Scan, Listen, and have a new Smell skill, for example. Background/Cultural skills could be generic or specific, depending on your setting. So, a feline race of humanoids might be brought up in a Civilised or Barbarian culture, or might have specific cultures of their own.

Magic entirely depends on your setting and how you have spells. Do you have RQ-style Cults? Is magic generic and freely available? Is magic only taught in specialist schools? Do different races and cultures have different magic?

So as an example of idea I am working with (this was my first to try for campaign): 

I wanna go semi-modern (interwar for example level of tech), and i wanna be working with human like creatures, something akin to lizardmen and plant like larger things, I say wanna put in range of lizard things to be both smaller and bigger then humans, so perhaps I could do it by doing their size dice as lower number but higher value dice (not 3d6 but like 2d10 for example) and then play with culture and maybe mutation flaws or powers to balance them out to be weaker or stronger in one way or another?

[svensson]

Interesting stuff.

Welcome to the board, and I hope the guys have been helpful.

[Atgxtg]

12 hours ago, PauliusTheMad said:

So as an example of idea I am working with (this was my first to try for campaign): 

I wanna go semi-modern (interwar for example level of tech), and i wanna be working with human like creatures, something akin to lizardmen and plant like larger things, I say wanna put in range of lizard things to be both smaller and bigger then humans, so perhaps I could do it by doing their size dice as lower number but higher value dice (not 3d6 but like 2d10 for example) and then play with culture and maybe mutation flaws or powers to balance them out to be weaker or stronger in one way or another?

For this sort of stuff you might want to familiarize yourself with the cube-square law. If you double the size of an object you cube it's mass and square it's STR.

Basically, if you cn somehow take an object (or creature) and make it twice as big (twice as tall/long, twice as wide, twice as deep) then it has 8 times the mass, and four times the strength (RQ giants get 8 times the strength but they are magical, and couldn't existing real life). Most animals in BRP tend to have STR roughly proportional to their SIZ. Since the SIZ table is logarithmic this means that for every doubling the creature would get +24 SIZ and +16 STR.

 

For example you big creature on the left is about 1.75 times the height of the one on the right, so if they were clones of the same creature,  the one of the left would weight 5.35 times as much for about +18 SIZ and +12 STR. Note that this isn't taking into account the variances between individuals (the 3D6 rolls) which explains why bigger isn't always stronger. 

 

I find the above very helpful when I want a creature that is   similar to an existing creature (that I have stats for) , but larger (or smaller). There are a few other tweaks, such as armor is usually tied to damage bonus in some way, larger creatures tend to have a higher damage die with natural attacks, larger creatures tend to have a lower DEX, but the cube-square law is the big takeway.

Edited April 8 by Atgxtg

[PauliusTheMad]

12 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

For this sort of stuff you might want to familiarize yourself with the cube-square law. If you double the size of an object you cube it's mass and square it's STR.

Basically, if you cn somehow take an object (or creature) and make it twice as big (twice as tall/long, twice as wide, twice as deep) then it has 8 times the mass, and four times the strength (RQ giants get 8 times the strength but they are magical, and couldn't existing real life). Most animals in BRP tend to have STR roughly proportional to their SIZ. Since the SIZ table is logarithmic this means that for every doubling the creature would get +24 SIZ and +16 STR.

 

For example you big creature on the left is about 1.75 times the height of the one on the right, so if they were clones of the same creature,  the one of the left would weight 5.35 times as much for about +18 SIZ and +12 STR. Note that this isn't taking into account the variances between individuals (the 3D6 rolls) which explains why bigger isn't always stronger. 

 

I find the above very helpful when I want a creature that is   similar to an existing creature (that I have stats for) , but larger (or smaller). There are a few other tweaks, such as armor is usually tied to damage bonus in some way, larger creatures tend to have a higher damage die with natural attacks, larger creatures tend to have a lower DEX, but the cube-square law is the big takeway.

So for sake of example, taking that first creature (as the lizard like critter can use mostly more random set of human stats) if I make em smaller for sake of trying to balance it? Or should I give em decent stats but give em some flaws of mental nature? 

STR - 3d6+6
Con - 3d6+4
SIZ - 3d4+14 

INT - 2d6+4
POW - 2d6+3
DEX - 1d6+3
APP - 1d6

[Mugen]

4 minutes ago, PauliusTheMad said:

APP - 1d6

Note that if you use APP and not CHA, it is meant to be a measure of one's attractiveness inside its own species. If a troll's tusk disgust you, it may be attractive to members of its own species.

5 minutes ago, PauliusTheMad said:

So for sake of example, taking that first creature (as the lizard like critter can use mostly more random set of human stats) if I make em smaller for sake of trying to balance it? Or should I give em decent stats but give em some flaws of mental nature? 

STR - 3d6+6
Con - 3d6+4
SIZ - 3d4+14 

INT - 2d6+4
POW - 2d6+3
DEX - 1d6+3
APP - 1d6

You will never be able to balance these 3d4+14 in SIZ.

SIZ is used in HP and damage bonus calculations, which makes it twice as valuable as STR and CON for a melee fighter.

Its drawback is that you're clumsy and hard to hide.

[PauliusTheMad]

1 hour ago, Mugen said:

Note that if you use APP and not CHA, it is meant to be a measure of one's attractiveness inside its own species. If a troll's tusk disgust you, it may be attractive to members of its own species.

You will never be able to balance these 3d4+14 in SIZ.

SIZ is used in HP and damage bonus calculations, which makes it twice as valuable as STR and CON for a melee fighter.

Its drawback is that you're clumsy and hard to hide.

This is mostly for set up for investigitve semi-modern games, where melee combat being good is not as good since a lot of the time you aren't getting much out of it, so something being better at fighting is not biggest of problems? But I can reduce it a bit. 

As for apperance, the species in question at least in current write up aren't really big on cooperating with each other or even liking each other.

[Zit]

I'm not sure you should balance the stats. Species are as they are, some are luckier than others.

For your lizard-like creatures, you may want to have a look at the RQ's dragonewts.

[Joerg]

1 hour ago, Zit said:

For your lizard-like creatures, you may want to have a look at the RQ's dragonewts.

Or rather at the Slarges (which come in two different sizes, at least the larger of which might fit the upper range).

[Atgxtg]

9 hours ago, PauliusTheMad said:

So for sake of example, taking that first creature (as the lizard like critter can use mostly more random set of human stats) if I make em smaller for sake of trying to balance it?

THat depends on what you want for your game. The key thing though is to be familar enough with how the game mechanics work to know how it will play out. For instance, STR - 3d6+6,  SIZ - 3d4+14 , means an average STR+SIZ of 38 for an average damage modfier of +1d6, with +2d6 only three points away. So "Lizard Critter" is going to do a bit higher damage than a normal human, and a strong lizard creature can easily kill a man on a unparried hit, and is going to brush through parrying objects and do damage. 

Now there is nothing wrong with that (RQ Trolls are very similar), provided you are aware of it, and plan for it in your game. If not you could be very surprised when what you designed as a "tough opponent" wipes out a few PCs. 

9 hours ago, PauliusTheMad said:

Or should I give em decent stats but give em some flaws of mental nature? 

It depends on what you want. Again, there is nothing wrong with creating a powerful species, just as long as you know how the game works. A troll in BRP is more dangerous than one in D&D. A 15-20 point hit in D&D hurts and might even drop a wounded or inexperienced character. A 15-20 point in in BRP in BRP that isn't parried will probably drop or kill a character, even an experienced one. As long as you are aware of that, and okay with it, "Lizard Critter" is fine. It that wasn't what you were going for, then not so much.

But as long as you're getting the creature that you wanted to create, everything is good.

 

 

[Atgxtg]

9 hours ago, Mugen said:

Note that if you use APP and not CHA, it is meant to be a measure of one's attractiveness inside its own species. If a troll's tusk disgust you, it may be attractive to members of its own species.

That's not entirely true, as some species (ducks, orcs and cave trolls for instace) had a lower species APP.   

9 hours ago, Mugen said:

You will never be able to balance these 3d4+14 in SIZ.

Not against normal humans, no. It will be unbalanced, the question is whether or not it is okay for it to be unbalanced. It's starts aren't much different that a Dark Troll, and not as tough as a Great Troll so it within the realm of playabiliy.

9 hours ago, Mugen said:

SIZ is used in HP and damage bonus calculations, which makes it twice as valuable as STR and CON for a melee fighter.

Its drawback is that you're clumsy and hard to hide.

Which might not be a drawback if you're tough and can snap a human with just a punch (1d3+2d6 hits like a battleaxe).Your observations are all quite correct. The question is if the poster is okay with such a species, or if they'd rather something closer to human with say a couple of points higher in one stat but lower in another. 

[PauliusTheMad]

13 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

That's not entirely true, as some species (ducks, orcs and cave trolls for instace) had a lower species APP.   

Not against normal humans, no. It will be unbalanced, the question is whether or not it is okay for it to be unbalanced. It's starts aren't much different that a Dark Troll, and not as tough as a Great Troll so it within the realm of playabiliy.

Which might not be a drawback if you're tough and can snap a human with just a punch (1d3+2d6 hits like a battleaxe).Your observations are all quite correct. The question is if the poster is okay with such a species, or if they'd rather something closer to human with say a couple of points higher in one stat but lower in another. 

So the idea I am operating under is that species aren't really fair in terms of stats and abilities, however they need to operate in a sociaty after a great big bloody war (think world war 1 but worse so now world is in state of rebuilding), so while big strong scary monster is well...scary, it's more that you can't solve all your problems by braking them in half. 

So I don't mind unbalanced layout myself, thus I will keep it in mind, however, this come with sorta culture question, since whilew ritting up the giant tree creatures, I realized they got this mental flaw where they will go insane easier if they don't have something to do for a long time (as in they get stir crazy and actually go insane), thinking if perhaps that would fit as a rule just "sanity rolls while unable to particiapte in set number of activities"? 

Also, greatly stronger creatures is sorta neat idea, lets me throw monster things at the biggest target to show other players how bad things are perhaps?

Maybe I should just write all of this down, note down cultures and history of these species and post it up somewhere to be peer reviewed basically?

 

Edited April 10 by PauliusTheMad

[Atgxtg]

13 hours ago, PauliusTheMad said:

So the idea I am operating under is that species aren't really fair in terms of stats and abilities, however they need to operate in a sociaty after a great big bloody war (think world war 1 but worse so now world is in state of rebuilding), so while big strong scary monster is well...scary, it's more that you can't solve all your problems by braking them in half. 

THe potential pitfalls, if any, to this are all out oc character stuff.Basically making sure each player feels like they can contribute, and being aware of the on hit kill potential. In game everything works out fine.  Guess who the archers shoot at, Joe Average or Godzilla?

13 hours ago, PauliusTheMad said:

So I don't mind unbalanced layout myself,

Then you're golden. My concerns were making sure that your were aware of how it will work out according to game mechanics and that you were getting the results you wanted. I've seen plenty of GMs (self included) who created something and got blindsided by how it affected gameplay. It's very east to get a TPK in BRP, especially for those more accustomed to D20 style games. 

But as long as you know how things work, go for it!

 

Hmm, ya know, a BRP game where everybody played Giants could be fun.  

 

 

Edited April 10 by Atgxtg

[soltakss]

On 4/8/2024 at 6:45 AM, PauliusTheMad said:

So as an example of idea I am working with (this was my first to try for campaign): 

I wanna go semi-modern (interwar for example level of tech), and i wanna be working with human like creatures, something akin to lizardmen and plant like larger things, I say wanna put in range of lizard things to be both smaller and bigger then humans, so perhaps I could do it by doing their size dice as lower number but higher value dice (not 3d6 but like 2d10 for example) and then play with culture and maybe mutation flaws or powers to balance them out to be weaker or stronger in one way or another?

So, assuming the one in the middle is human, the one on the left is Great Troll sized in Glorantha, so I'd go with SIZ and STR 4D6+12. If you want average health stick with CON 3D6, if tougher than usual use CON 2D6+6, or if mega tough 1D6+12 or 3D6+6. It looks clumsy, so maybe 2D6. Int of 2D6+6 for humanlike intelligence, or 3D6 for humanish range but less smart on average.

The one on the left looks humanlike in SIZ and STR, if they are more agile than humans make DEX 2D6+6, same thing with CON and INT as above.

You could use different dice, Stormbringer used 2D8 for SIZ, for example. I think it adds complexity but it should work OK. I am so used to variants of 3D6 that I think in those terms.