Community

Feb 10, 2012 -- 2:48PM, bengilmer wrote:

I'm opposed to sorting racial rarity the way they've suggested for classes simply because they seem to be tying that concept to complexity.

A Dragonborn having more complex options than a human is going to anger both camps.  Some people would be angry that you have to spend more time in character creation to make a Dragonborn, while others will hate having to play a class they don't like to get the most customizable character.

If the class rarity concept is untied from mechanical benefits, you get a strange sort of elitism feel.  "these are the real races, and those others are for [insert your favorite insult here].

I'd rather see the PHB state that some races may not be allowed in your DMs world, ortheir lore may varysignificantly, and be done with it. 

I personally will never play in a game where the dm limits races and classes.  IF the phb or dmg tells dms to restrict things then the whole tone of the game sets my teeth on edge from the get go.

Feb 10, 2012 -- 4:07PM, nedhr wrote:

Feb 10, 2012 -- 2:48PM, bengilmer wrote:

I'd rather see the PHB state that some races may not be allowed in your DMs world, ortheir lore may varysignificantly, and be done with it. 

The Player's Handbook doesn't need to specify that. DM's have always been free to disallow anything they didn't want in their game. I once played in a game where the DM thought Half-Orcs were too monstrous a race and disallowed them.

Feb 10, 2012 -- 3:15PM, greatfrito wrote:

However, their larger goal isn't to create a game for just traditional fantasy - it's to create a game that appeals to a wider audience base, and to be usable for different kinds of games.  To this end, I think it would be a better idea to include a few "non-standard" races.

I agree, and it is even possible to include non-standard races while also keeping the traditional fantasy feel (which the Player's Handbook should in fact have). And if they include race options in the Monster Manual like they did in 3e and 4e, they can even satisfy those who want a little more strange in their games.

In the PHB you'd have Humans, Halflings, Elves, Dwarves, Gnomes, Hobgoblins, Orcs, and maybe Gnolls.

In the Monster Manual you'd have Bugbears, Goblins, Kobolds, Dragonborn, Tieflings, Minotaurs, Doppelgangers, Drow, Genasi, Warforged, Bullywugs, Ogres (or half-ogres), and a number of themes (aka templates) that can alter your choice of race like Half-Dragon, Planetouched, etc.

I feel that if it's smaller than Large size and it has a language, it should be a race.

Drow tieflings dragonborn, lizard folk, orcs, half orcs should all be in phb not mm.

Feb 10, 2012 -- 4:16PM, wuzzifizit wrote:

While I certainly would like there to be a wide variety of races to choose from when D&DN is released, I certainly want all of the races to be "DM-Optional".  My preferred campaign setting is a gritty one.  A great device for a gritty campaign is to involve racial tensions.  It becomes difficult to have a game such as this if all the characters in the party are different races.  To me, this makes the game feel somewhat like a Saturday Morning Cartoon, which interferes with the kind of game I want to play.

Having a wide variety of races is a nice thing, but shoehorning them all into the same setting can make it difficult for a DM set the stage for the story he/she wants.

I personally will never again play in a game where the DM doesn't limit the races and classes.  In my experience, if the DM doesn't take the time to make the setting his/her own--and this includes established settings like Forgotten Realms, Dark Sun, or even Star Wars--then I find the DM hasn't come up with a compelling enough story, and the game ends up being a boring hack-and-slash, anything goes game.

You can make the setting your own without limiting player creativitiy.  I hate being limited in what I can come up with I also really don't like human centric settings I prefer a very high fantasy high magic feel to it.  Low magic doesn't interest me in the least.  Typically dms who limit things are dms with limited imagination who cant find ways of fitting stuff into a campaign world 

Feb 10, 2012 -- 4:29PM, wuzzifizit wrote:

Feb 10, 2012 -- 4:23PM, williamhm75 wrote:

Feb 10, 2012 -- 4:16PM, wuzzifizit wrote:

While I certainly would like there to be a wide variety of races to choose from when D&DN is released, I certainly want all of the races to be "DM-Optional".  My preferred campaign setting is a gritty one.  A great device for a gritty campaign is to involve racial tensions.  It becomes difficult to have a game such as this if all the characters in the party are different races.  To me, this makes the game feel somewhat like a Saturday Morning Cartoon, which interferes with the kind of game I want to play.

Having a wide variety of races is a nice thing, but shoehorning them all into the same setting can make it difficult for a DM set the stage for the story he/she wants.

I personally will never again play in a game where the DM doesn't limit the races and classes.  In my experience, if the DM doesn't take the time to make the setting his/her own--and this includes established settings like Forgotten Realms, Dark Sun, or even Star Wars--then I find the DM hasn't come up with a compelling enough story, and the game ends up being a boring hack-and-slash, anything goes game.

You can make the setting your own without limiting player creativitiy.  I hate being limited in what I can come up with I also really don't like human centric settings I prefer a very high fantasy high magic feel to it.  Low magic doesn't interest me in the least.  Typically dms who limit things are dms with limited imagination who cant find ways of fitting stuff into a campaign world 

I find that incredibly insulting.  Limitations are a wonderful thing for creativity.  Have you DMed much yourself?

No but I see no reason for races/classes to be limited.  To my mind that really limits the kind of stories possible.  People should be free to use their imaginations and all human campaigns are incredibly dull.

Feb 10, 2012 -- 4:34PM, wuzzifizit wrote:

Feb 10, 2012 -- 4:31PM, williamhm75 wrote:

Feb 10, 2012 -- 4:29PM, wuzzifizit wrote:

I find that incredibly insulting.  Limitations are a wonderful thing for creativity.  Have you DMed much yourself?

No but I see no reason for races/classes to be limited.  To my mind that really limits the kind of stories possible.  People should be free to use their imaginations and all human campaigns are incredibly dull.

Then I suggest you come up with a campaign setting and run it for a year just to see how difficult it is to make something your own when you are limited to allowing exactly everything that the books contain.

I just find the dm telling me what I can and can't play completley makes me combative and not want to play in that game ,it  literally kills any desire I have to play.  As I like to play more exotic character types and such as most dms limit stuff to create a tolkienesque world which I find boring to play in.  Heck I don't even like Tolkien.