There is much talk of ogres being quite the strong race. Then why is their xp-pen so low? Maybe ogres shouldn't be gimped, just needs hi increase the xp-pen a bit.
Higher xp-pen for ogres
raise ogre, bmg, invoker, necro, ranger
lower half-elf, berserker, paladin, mino
Why the ? I would agree to any of those. Or some of them at least...
I think lowering everything that celerity said is right on target, esp berserkers, but the raising suggestions are not a good idea. for example necros are already hard to rank, esp illithid. and those who dont do illithid usually do avian or drow which already have a good penalty.
Def lower half-elf. Mino...not so much. paladin hell no. Paladins are neigh unkillable if played right. Zerks are easy as hell to rank with, and really strong if played right, so I think they are fine. Raise ranger...I could see that. With the paths they have now I would say they are strong enough to warrant a little increase. I don't see vokers as any stronger than zerks, so don't raise them past zerk level. Maybe to that point I would be fine with. necro's are gimped enough, no need to raise thier xp penalty. bmg's...Suck pre blades, so I'm fine with them.
Well, ogre is the only one I feel NEED raising.
Heh if you raise it try pinning an elven ranger--not that anyone would want to.
An ogre ranger pinns with around 570,000 exp already, thats basically as high as any race/class combo, except crusaders and stuff.
An ogre ranger pinns with around 570' date='000 exp already, thats basically as high as any race/class combo, except crusaders and stuff.[/quote']
It's not as high as any race/class combo, it might be an average though.
Seems like it is around a 500 exp penalty. That's really not that bad considering Ogres can get around 1400HP, have the highest Intelligence of all Giant sized races, can dual wield two handed weapons (used to be able to anyways), heal at an unheard of rate, dish out a decent amount of damage as well as some other things with only one drawback that is very easy to cover up with a minimum of -50 afflictive saves. Maybe up the penalty to 400-500 and it would suit the race more.
I had -90 afflictive saves on Kronit when you toss in saves vs. spell and believe me, I still took an exorbitant amount of damage from spells.
Figure it more along the lines of upwards of three pets, with an Ogre Ranger having a 50/50 hit/dam, even if you get hit with a lot of pain, you'd deal more damage to the mage and kill the mage before the mage ever killed you. Especially with thunderstorm, certain classes/races will be toast.
Every race/class can beat "certain classes/races", so that doesn't really prove anything.
I had an ogre ranger warmaster (Orlick) with 65/65 hit/dam and at least -45 svs against afflictive and fighting a savant invoker like Cylandas, who you can be sure has charged his staff right, was consistently an uphill battle for me.
Finally, how is your description any different from a necromancer? Just interchange 50/50 hit/dam with three very strong zombies, two golems, all of which can lag and strong offensive spells.
I'll take a drow battlemage against your ogre ranger anyday. Or a feral shaman. Or a duegar cleric. Or....
Maybe not the feral or duergar, but certainly the drow 
well equipped/prepared/played invokers will consistently beat similarly well equpped/etc ogre rangers
my thinking is that that the justification for c/c being tougher at the high ranks has always been that they have a harder time getting up there, so they reap the rewards (so viri said at least)
All the mage classes are zero exp...
if the exp pen is an indicator of general 'umpf' at 50, the obvious weaker classes/races should have the lower exp penalties
You guys are getting into the race/class combo deal again...you need to look at it as RACE and CLASS selections, not as a combo. Sure an ogre ranger can be killed and beaten. How does that ogre compare to the OTHER ranger choices at 50? THAT is what we need to base the exp cost on.
Because ogres are great (arguably the best) choices for EVERY class they can be, they definitely need to be up there with the other 'top' choices.
Half-elves, on the other hand, are probably consistently the WORST race to be for any class (maybe gnome warrior is worse?), so their exp needs to be lower. Does this mean the h-elf wars can't kill things? Of course not. What it means is that ogres are probably going to be the better choice...I see no reason why they should have the same exp penalty.
I feel paladins and dks should be equal. Zerks are typically a very terrible/difficult class...and so on
L-A used to say that dualing two smoking flails against an Invoker would beat them down fairly quickly. Reason being is that Invokers only have 1 defense and they dont know how to use flails. Depending on who plays the class as well will depend on how hard or easy the battle is.
Ogre Berserker will have automastered fast healing and regeneration as well as an even higher base HP than other Ogre choices. To top it off Ogres tend to blow off pain where once in a great while a really huge amount of damage will turn out to come out only as a graze/scratch. And if you choose a certain path, you'll do it even more now than in the past since the change.
Ogre Warrior is a better choice than say a Storm or Stone warrior simply because the Ogre has better stats as well as more HP. I'd still choose Fire Warrior over an Ogre simply because they have more defense against all non-magical weapons, as well as automasteries in some skills and they get a bonus use using fire weapons and to top it off their bash is VERY powerful. Only drawback is they're idiots.
Ogre Ranger again has a high base HP. Werebeast might be a close second for a Ranger then Human (unless of course you're Behrens, then Human is best). With the strength they have, they're more than capable to pull off a decent hit/dam, and if you know both the race and the class inside and out, you wont have a problem with various classes, and if you do, you can run off and camouflage and sleep it up and be ready to go again in far less time than your opponent.
As for fighting a Necromancer as an Ogre Ranger, make sure you're flying (there used to be a stave that you could brandish that granted lvl 50 flight which I wouldn't mind being brought back even though there is that one you can buy still) and granted you still might be dispelled, go addiction and smoke herbs for sanctuary and such. It comes in very handy at some points and make sure you have lots of cure blinds in inventory before fighting them so you can run off and cure it. You might not win every PK you have as an Ogre, but no one can win them all.
well smoking flails are two handed so that isnt possible anymore. ogres should be 500. was low because when they were tested there was not much pk skill. thats back from AR days. now we have a pbase that understands what saves are and there are more out there. this is what happens with changes. stagnation can keep balance but keep dull mud. and i know celerity, the races should be balanced on math not pbase skill, but when changes take place only the players can test every angle.
If a Race is best in class for all classes it can be, it should have a nice 500 penalty. Hell, Slith have it for being best in one class (Thief, though there is a case for BLM as well. I say Halfer, personally. Semantics.)
Hell, Illithid can ONLY BE ONE CLASS (Unless you go for PSI) and they get a 500.
They deserve it. It's a long time coming.
Feral shamans own ogres. Its just, all those invokers and bmages that destroyed my little shaman. 
I think the penalty is lower because they have an obvious and easily exploitable vuln. That's not true for sliths or illithids (it's obvious for illithids but not as easily exploitable). If you think about it no class is as vulnerable to as many things as an ogre.