|
1 year ago ::
Jan 20, 2012 - 6:54PM
#171
|
|
|
Kobold, it'll be easy to implement if you just say that they serve all dragons not just the evil ones and have their gnome rivalry be more like the rivalry between dragonborn and tieflings, rather than "we kill them when we see one"...also kurtlemak should be LN or unaligned depending on what system they use.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 20, 2012 - 9:28PM
#172
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2004
|
For regular games:
Dragonborn (with a more frequently useable breath weapon and earlier access to wings), Kobalds, and Lizardfolk
Werewolves and other weres
Sure, warforged while we're at it, though perhaps under a different name
For specialized or higher power games
Dragons! Dragons! Dragons! :D
Giants
Ghosts and similar, as an alternative to Raise Dead
Fey and rules for the political intricacies of the Fey Court, and guidelines for making up your own inane rules as well
Also Dragons
"I don't want to fight dragons." - Hiccup
If dragons are to be invovled, I much prefer to play as a dragon, dragon rider, dragonslayer-slayer, dragonfriend, or anything else *but* a dragonslayer.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 20, 2012 - 9:42PM
#173
|
Date Joined:
Jul 17, 2007
|
We don't need the Folk part added. Squirrels. Squirrels and OTTers. That's what we need in 5E. Of course you must realize that if we include OTTers, and especially squirrels, the whole idea of game balance goes out the window into a dump-truck that takes it to the dump and burries it under 1000' of trash.
Well I've never been one that needed 'balance' so I don't really care about any of that, but ...
I think we have to keep the 'people' or 'folk' part of the names. While you and I would be plenty comfotable playing an OTTer or a Squirrel, I fear too many players just wouldn't be. They need to feel more like a person. An animal (or OTTer) is just too far from their base perception. So, if we ugly 'em up just a touch and make 'em 'folk' and 'peoples', it would probably cater to a wider audience. I think we have to wait for 6e (or maybe 5.5) to ask for what it is we're really after.
I think with minor changes you make a squirrel feel like a person
Show
Or maybe 5E could just have monsters as playable races in core. That would make it much easier to play the character you want from the start.
Nut Eating Resident Sociopathic Eye Forker
2346-strong Squirrel leigon of DOOM
Squirrel Overlord of the House of Trolls
Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber. ~Plato
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy. ~Ernest Benn
The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove the crabgrass on your lawn. The Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it. ~P.J. O'Rourke
"I actually held public office and I left the only way a politician should, in handcuffs." ~ Chael Sonnen
It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it! ~ Upton Sinclair
Kicked Adam and Eve out of Missouri.
Wears flip-flops in church buildings.
Official troller of Kolob.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 21, 2012 - 9:28AM
#174
|
|
|
ScaleyBob, I wouldn't consider Half-Orcs a freak race, because of their "default" nature. And I'm not sure about Drow either, given that I consider them too damn pretty to be a "freak" race. Ask yourselves, would Drizzt have his legions of fans if he were, say, a Bugbear? A goblin? Or even a Kobold?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 21, 2012 - 9:47AM
#175
|
Date Joined:
Aug 18, 2007
|
All of the following are cool races, there are others I really like, but you said to limit it to four.
Centaur
Thri Keen
Shardmind
Pixie
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 21, 2012 - 6:14PM
#176
|
|
|
ScaleyBob, I wouldn't consider Half-Orcs a freak race, because of their "default" nature. And I'm not sure about Drow either, given that I consider them too damn pretty to be a "freak" race. Ask yourselves, would Drizzt have his legions of fans if he were, say, a Bugbear? A goblin? Or even a Kobold?
Of course he wouldn't because most of his fans are only his fans because he's an elf. At least the ones I know in real life. Can't speak for the rest, but wouldn't be surprised if it were similar reasons.
Resident Grouch and Corrupting InfluenceA Monster AppearsI'm Black and Blue how 'bout you?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 21, 2012 - 7:41PM
#177
|
Date Joined:
Nov 24, 2009
|
I dont want freak races out of the box or core rules.
I want...
Humans
Halflings
Elves (high, grey, and wood)
Dwarves (hill and mountian)
Half Elves
Half Orcs
Gnomes
as the only PC races to start...
If people wanna play a monster race I say make em a supplement, or make notes in the MM to make any monster a playable race.
I agree 100%
Make a suppliment or add them into the end of the MM as to which races are allowable PCs.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 22, 2012 - 2:01PM
#178
|
Date Joined:
Apr 28, 2009
|
Even though I didn't vote for them, I'm kind of bummed my probable 5th choice, minotaur, placed so poorly. Conceptually, I love them as powerhouses from a monstrous culture. However, I feel 4e did them a disservice with such a poor racial (seriously, how is it much better than a regular MBA charge, and maybe you don't want to be a charger).
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 22, 2012 - 8:56PM
#179
|
|
|
Well, I do think that they'd be better suited for later books. And also, if we're gonna seperate the monster races int othe monster manual, then it'd be nice if they added feats and Paragon Paths for said monster races. Would be a bit more costly, but well worth it for both DMs and players.
And Baalbamoth, I gotta ask you: Why must you denigrate other's fun? You've been insulting any innovations or attempts to diversify the races as being "Not true D&d", and I whole-heartedly disagree. Why can't the Tolkinean races co exist with the likes of the Dragonborn, the Warforged, and the Thri-Keen? Does the thought of people having their fun with the weird races decrease the amount of fun you have with the standard ones?
Look, 4e was my first Tabletop RPG and I will defend it to the death, but I'll admit that there are things that Pathfinder does better (Fluff, class diversity and spellcaster customizability) and problems with 4e (Rituals... just... rituals), but there are also some things that 4e did great (Like adding the new races, the Nentir Vale/Points of Light setting, martial classes with a more diverse movepool, Essentials-style stats, and general game balance), and I would love to see all those good parts polymerized into one great new edition. I can accept taking innovations from older editions, why can't you accept the good things about the new editions?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 23, 2012 - 8:37AM
#180
|
Date Joined:
Dec 24, 2007
|
I think with minor changes you make a squirrel feel like a person
Show
Or maybe 5E could just have monsters as playable races in core. That would make it much easier to play the character you want from the start.
True. Plus making stuff like OTTers and Squirrels and Trolls and Hags and stuff monsters will make the people that are scurred of 'em happy and make the people that wanna play 'em happy, too. I mean, the real goal is total acceptance but if we have to take a baby step like this, I suppose I'd be ok with it.
Resident Prophet of the OTTer.Section Six Soldier Front Door of the House of Trolls If you're terribly afraid of your character dying, it may be best if you roleplayed something other than an adventurer.
|
|
|
