|
1 year ago ::
Apr 27, 2012 - 1:03PM
#21
|
|
|
if you link rarity to campaign settings it can also have in game effects.
for example a rare race might not be seen as a normal part of the society,
the city guard might be on edge having one of these strange people inside the city walls.
And we need rules for this ... why?
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 27, 2012 - 1:06PM
#22
|
Date Joined:
May 18, 2002
|
for example a rare race might not be seen as a normal part of the society,
the city guard might be on edge having one of these strange people inside the city walls.
Do we really need to explicitly state (or rather: implicitly state, via an arbitrary 'rarity') that a Tiefling is probably going to get strange stares when walking down a street in Des Moines?
The only campaign setting that has any use for character "rarity" is Equestria.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 27, 2012 - 1:09PM
#23
|
Date Joined:
Aug 25, 2007
|
Hmm, let's change the labels for a second...
Common = Classic D&D or BECMI.
Uncommon = AD&D 1st Edition or AD&D 2nd Edition or early 3rd Edition.
Rare = Late 3rd Edition or 4th Edition.
Now how do they look?
The problem is it's still very setting dependent. I.e. that breakdown wouldn't work in a standard Dark Sun campaign. Gnomes would be common under that breakdown, they would be rare (at best) in Dark Sun. Muls would be rare (again, at best) in a regular campaign, but common in Dark Sun. and so one. Not to mention whatever racial mixes the thousands of players out there will come up with for their home campaigns.
So in the end, DMs will still be deciding on a case by case basis what races/classes are going to be in their campaigns, rarity labels or no. So I don't see where the value of the label really is.
I can only see the value of the rarity lable if it is combined with the campaign setting.
if a race is common for example warforged in eberon.
this means the campaign setting includes lore and history that suports this race and that the race is a major factor in the campaign setting.
your very likly to run into NPC's of this race.
if a race is uncommon:
there might be some lore about this race in the campaign setting but the race is not one of the major races that influenced the campaign setting
you could still run into npc's of this race in published adventures but it is more uncommon to do so.
if a race is rare:
the campaign setting does not have lore on this race.
when playing published advebtures you will probebly never run into another person of your race.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 27, 2012 - 1:10PM
#24
|
Date Joined:
Nov 13, 2011
|
i dislike the "tolkien" fantasy and loves me some eberron and dark sun. i like the warlock and warlord. i love the warden. give me warforged and dragonborn.
so what does rarity mean for me?
if it means nothing at all, then what's the point in having it? if it means limiting my characters no thank you.
if 5th ed truly wants to preach inclusiveness "these are normal, these are not, BEWARE!" is hardly the best way to do so
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 27, 2012 - 1:12PM
#25
|
|
|
if 5th ed truly wants to preach inclusiveness "these are normal, these are not, BEWARE!" is hardly the best way to do so
Another very good point. "Yeah, the race you like ... we're dumping on it. Have fun playing the game!" isn't going to get a lot of traction.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 27, 2012 - 1:13PM
#26
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
if 5th ed truly wants to preach inclusiveness "these are normal, these are not, BEWARE!" is hardly the best way to do so
Precisely this.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 27, 2012 - 1:16PM
#27
|
Date Joined:
Aug 25, 2007
|
if you link rarity to campaign settings it can also have in game effects.
for example a rare race might not be seen as a normal part of the society,
the city guard might be on edge having one of these strange people inside the city walls.
And we need rules for this ... why?
i would see it more as guidelines.
guidelines are very nice for people new to DnD or new to a specific campaign setting.
more experianced players like yourselve might not need these guide lines/ training weels.
but that does not mean they should not be available to those who might need them.
so that a player new to a campain setting knows that if he choses a common race he shoulden't run into to much truble and his race choice is fully suported by the campaign setting
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 27, 2012 - 1:17PM
#28
|
- VCL Emeritus
- The Inquisitor
|
If you take a look at the rest of the blog, Rob points out that everyone's "default" fantasy is different. How then, does D&D cater to such a diverse array of preferences when it comes to fantasy?
By presenting several defaults.
Each "level" of rarity presents a different sort of default. Common only presents a very different default than Uncommon + Rare. It allows the game to be different things to different people without completely excluding anyone.
Quentin Small
WotC Online Community Coordinator
All around helpful simian
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 27, 2012 - 1:18PM
#29
|
|
|
This idea is overly complicated. Instead of assigning each race and class a rarity, just include a brief sidebar at the beginning of the character creation section, like this: Dungeons & Dragons is a cooperative work of fantasy that, much like a short story or novel, has a unique tone and setting that is set by those telling the story. Players and DMs share the task of crafting the stories being told. Just as you wouldn't write up a story's characters without first knowing the setting, players should speak to the DM about the kind of setting and story they will all be engaged in. DM's are encouraged to be flexible and to say yes when they can, but Players must understand that some things just do not fit together well, or easily. Just as the DM is the final arbiter of the rules, he/she has the final say on setting as well, and that includes the races and classes avilable to the Players.
That's all we really need, just a simple section that sets out 1) the DM's right to say no, and 2) the DM's obligation to reasonably accommodate player requests when possible.
Why Mechanics-Alignment Integration is Bad
Show
so why even play a fighter if you can play the paladin the exact same way behaviorally and get added power to boot. "Paladin" is about accepting better game-enhancing mechanics at the price of more rigid in game behavior.
Really? So it goes something like this?
Fighter: "I want to be a paladin."
NPC: "Really?"
Fighter: "Yes."
NPC: "Very well." Starts reading from a holy book while still in-character "Do you accept having to choose and stick to the lawful good alignment, eventhough neither of us actually knows that it exists or what it is?"
Fighter: "I do."
NPC: "Do you reject good game balance because you accidentally rolled a high Charisma?"
Fighter: "What?"
NPC: "I don't know what it means either."
Fighter: "Oh. Umm, ok I do."
NPC: "In the name of all that is metagamey and broken, accept these better game enhancing mechanics."
Fighter: "These what?"
NPC: "Just get out there and try to fulfill a million different people's notion of good while not violating and part of any of them."
So the system is designed such that every single hit needs to be described to avoid confusion? Here's a scenario. The players are nudists, everybody in the world are nudists, it's not weird, it's totally normal in this land. They are naked and they fight drakes taking damage throughout, but healing up with surges. Later they meet the guy who raised the drakes.
Part 1: I didn't describe any of the hits. What does he see?
Part 2: Lets say I described the drakes as biting the players, yet they healed up. What does he see?
D20 Modern Toon PC Race.
Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 27, 2012 - 1:19PM
#30
|
|
|
If you take a look at the rest of the blog, Rob points out that everyone's "default" fantasy is different. How then, does D&D cater to such a diverse array of preferences when it comes to fantasy?
By presenting several defaults.
Each "level" of rarity presents a different sort of default. Common only presents a very different default than Uncommon + Rare. It allows the game to be different things to different people without completely excluding anyone.
Presenting no defaults accomplishes the exact same thing. All it needs is a small section on worldbuilding and making clear that such things are the purview of the game group.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
