Community

 
Jump Menu:
Post Reply
Page 2 of 22  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 22 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Please Bring Back Grey Elves and Hobbits.
1 year ago  ::  Feb 20, 2012 - 5:13PM #11
Tlantl
Date Joined: Feb 10, 2007
Posts: 504
There really isn't much difference between the elven races other than the dro and aquatic elves, I'd persomnally like the dro to return to the depths of the earth or where ever the reside on each world and stay the vile monsters they are.

I hate having to tell players that they will find themselves the victims of murdurous crowds and bounty hunters if they choose to play them as characters. 

I know that some are attached to them as a playable race, but I ain't.

If the racial limits of the older games is used then the different elves, halflings, and dwarves makes more sense since each had different maximums and available classes. I believe that the generic elf fills these niches as well by flavor as by rules.

Of course I already own the older books and have all of the race rules at hand already, one of the side effects of being around long enough to have collected three editions worth of stuff and a book or two from another. I have no problem using background rules other than from the curret edition, especially since all of those races already exist in my own homebrew world.
Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Feb 20, 2012 - 5:13PM #12
rampant
Date Joined: Oct 26, 2004
Posts: 8,093
The way I wanna see subraces handled is by breaking up races into inherent and cultural traits.

Inherent traits define you as a dwarf an elf or a human.

then every race has a pool of points whith which they can buy cultural abilities based on their subrace/civilization/whatever, so drow, grey elves, and sun elves are all elves, but they purchased cultural abilities from different lists. 
Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Feb 20, 2012 - 5:15PM #13
Qmark
  • vitriol and virtue
Date Joined: May 18, 2002
Posts: 16,733

Feb 20, 2012 -- 5:13PM, rampant wrote:

The way I wanna see subraces handled is by breaking up races into inherent and cultural traits.

Inherent traits define you as a dwarf an elf or a human.

then every race has a pool of points whith which they can buy cultural abilities based on their subrace/civilization/whatever, so drow, grey elves, and sun elves are all elves, but they purchased cultural abilities from different lists. 


Seconded.
Here's your species.  Build your own subrace.  Here's a short list of ideas.

Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Feb 20, 2012 - 5:31PM #14
Warunsun
Date Joined: Mar 5, 2010
Posts: 151

Feb 20, 2012 -- 5:13PM, rampant wrote:

The way I wanna see subraces handled is by breaking up races into inherent and cultural traits.

Inherent traits define you as a dwarf an elf or a human.

then every race has a pool of points whith which they can buy cultural abilities based on their subrace/civilization/whatever, so drow, grey elves, and sun elves are all elves, but they purchased cultural abilities from different lists. 



This would be fine. I am not sure about using "points". I would be perfectly happy with all elves having inherent elven traits with different cultural abilities based on whether they are wood, grey, high, dark, valley, or aquatic elves. There is no need for Grey/High/Eladrin or Drow to be considered a separate race. They should largely function as all other elves except for their specific cultural abilities in addition to the normal elven traits.
Tlantl, for my campaigns the dark elves or Drow have always been considered "monsters" by the world at large as in most editions of D&D. I don't buy into the Drizzt Do'Urden effect that many players like to embrace. Those novels even go through pains to show that dark elves are not a playable race and he is a particular special individual but people like to copy what they like.

Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Feb 20, 2012 - 5:39PM #15
CCS
Date Joined: Nov 27, 2006
Posts: 3,565

Feb 20, 2012 -- 4:33PM, Warunsun wrote:

Feb 20, 2012 -- 4:14PM, bone_naga wrote:

It's just a name. There is no reason to pay money just to use a name unless that name is going to draw in extra money. You can change the name yourself.



The reason is immersion. It has very little to do with money. If such a deal was struck it likely wouldn't involve much money at all. All that is required is some very basic permission and a disclaimer. WotC isn't spelling anything out to anyone. We all know where halflings came from. It would just be a nice acknowledgement and fun bit for the Player's Handbook and also helpful for fantasy newcomers.





No, using the term "Hobbit" has EVERYTHING to do with $ - from the only perspectives that matter on the topic (WoTC/Hasbro & the Tolkkien Estate).     

See, WoTC/Hasbro isn't going to spend ANY money to use the name "Hobbit". 
Not a lot of $, not some $, not even a little bit of $. 

Because even a dime spent on it is more than the end effect is worth. 
If it were worth the $ from a buissiness standpoint?  Then WoTC or Hasbro (or likely TSR before them) would've allready written the check & locked the deal in decades ago.
That they haven't tells the story.

Instead?  WoTC can simply show you a picture of a "halfling" - be it short & fat, short & slender, slightly taller, etc & let your imagination make the link that these are the same creatures JRRT wrote about.
And really, making that link's not that hard to do.
{Hmm, look; A short person with hairy bare feet.....  Didn't I see those in a few movies recently?  Or read about them in a book by some JR guy?  I wonder if whoever made this game saw those movies/read those books??}
I mean seriously, if you're already familiar with Hobbits you KNOW what halflings are.
And if you're SO new to fantasy that you don't know about Hobbits?  Then it doesn't matter that WoTC calls them halflings instead.

Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Feb 20, 2012 - 5:44PM #16
Andrelai
Date Joined: Nov 14, 2008
Posts: 1,565

Feb 20, 2012 -- 4:33PM, Warunsun wrote:

Feb 20, 2012 -- 4:14PM, bone_naga wrote:

It's just a name. There is no reason to pay money just to use a name unless that name is going to draw in extra money. You can change the name yourself.



The reason is immersion. It has very little to do with money. If such a deal was struck it likely wouldn't involve much money at all. All that is required is some very basic permission and a disclaimer. WotC isn't spelling anything out to anyone. We all know where halflings came from. It would just be a nice acknowledgement and fun bit for the Player's Handbook and also helpful for fantasy newcomers.


If your group wants to call them hobbits, there is nothing stopping you.  There is absolutely no reason to put it in the rulebook.  I personally like 4E halflings a LOT better than roly-poly hillbillies.

If your position is that the official rules don't matter, or that house rules can fix everything, please don't bother posting in forums about the official rules.  To do so is a waste of everyone's time.
Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Feb 20, 2012 - 5:57PM #17
rampant
Date Joined: Oct 26, 2004
Posts: 8,093
I always just called them orc-bait.
Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Feb 20, 2012 - 6:01PM #18
Warunsun
Date Joined: Mar 5, 2010
Posts: 151

Feb 20, 2012 -- 5:39PM, CCS wrote:

Because even a dime spent on it is more than the end effect is worth. 
If it were worth the $ from a buissiness standpoint?  Then WoTC or Hasbro (or likely TSR before them) would've allready written the check & locked the deal in decades ago.



I disagree. Hasbro hasn't owned D&D for even a single decade yet. They have the ability to make the deal if they were inclined to.

Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Feb 20, 2012 - 6:05PM #19
Samrin
  • Dragon Slayer
Date Joined: Jan 29, 2005
Posts: 6,882

Feb 20, 2012 -- 6:01PM, Warunsun wrote:

Feb 20, 2012 -- 5:39PM, CCS wrote:

Because even a dime spent on it is more than the end effect is worth. 
If it were worth the $ from a buissiness standpoint?  Then WoTC or Hasbro (or likely TSR before them) would've allready written the check & locked the deal in decades ago.



I disagree. Hasbro hasn't owned D&D for even a single decade yet. They have the ability to make the deal if they were inclined to.




Umm, WotC bought TSR in 1997, and Hasbro bought WotC in 1999. Well over a decade.

D&D Halflings have seperated themselves from the hairy foot hobbits, and that's a good thing. This is not Lord of the Rings: The Roleplaying Game. It's Dungeons and Dragons. If you want Hobbits, write "hobbit" on your character sheet. 

Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Feb 20, 2012 - 6:10PM #20
Salla
Date Joined: Apr 3, 2003
Posts: 23,557
Lord of the Rings has its own RPG.  You can go play that if you want fat, lazy, cowardly fatling hobbits.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 2 of 22  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 22 Next
Jump Menu:
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing