No thats if they wanna appease the 3.x fans. Thats far from the same as being smart. LA was a horrible system and wasn't maintained well. The 4e system where each race occupies a more defined designed space is much easier to keep under control. Furthermore the 4e mm write ups were horrible half-assed heaps of hideous, unbalanced, uninspired, and ultimately unplayable. If wizards does that again I urge them to do a better job of it.
1 - I said the system wasn't the smoothest. It didn't work well. That is true. I said as much, and even went on to say "they should do it better though"
2 - What it did do though, was give a formulated method to play anything as a PC. 4e has 30 races. 3.5 had hundreds. Thats a huge draw. I
3 - Appeasing 3.X fans is a smart move. 3.5 and PF combined make up at least half the market space. Instead of debating numbers though, I will simply say "A large percent" which I think everyone can agree on. 4e didn't sell well enough (they rebooted it already) so clearly its fans aren't enough to keep a brand this big afloat. If you can win back a good enough percentage of 3.5/PF fans it can only help. I don't know anyone who plans to play 4e once 5 comes out, I know plenty who plan or would consider still running with 3.5/PF/2/1 if 5 isn't good. Converting as many of them as possible is a good idea.
5e comments and thoughts all in one place. Check it out to provide feedback, mock, or steal ideas. http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/28835423/Krusks_5e_Design_Goals?sdb=1
LA doesn't work for the same reason different exp charts for classes and split exp for multi-classers doesn't. It creates characters unable to funtion at the game's level or completely op.
Furthermore a race like a minotaur in 3.x is awesome for a fighter baralbarian or ranger at +2 la and six racial hd, but completely worthless for an arcane caster, and little better for divine. You can't go tossing huge bonuses around and expect them to even out in a few levels because each class will interact with that bonus differently.
You want powerful races, buy them with things that can be balanced against the benefits, feats, themes, racial powers, and such. It's not like la let you play them any sooner.
As for the mm write ups in 4e. They were short on features and those they had were unbalanced (oversized) or uninspiring (+2 initiative for gith) the racial powersetc when they were present were either op (kobold) or horrible (gnoll or minotaur). If 5e continues the practise I advise they step it up a notch and try to stop sucking at it.
5e comments and thoughts all in one place. Check it out to provide feedback, mock, or steal ideas. http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/28835423/Krusks_5e_Design_Goals?sdb=1
Ah I mistook the "it" in "They should do it better" to mean LA.
It is possible to balance races with stronger or weaker abilities, but LA isn't the way.
One thought I had was to consider a point method of creation where by ceratin races cost more points that could be spent on something else. Or a priority system where putting higher priority in race opens up more powerful options such as dreagloth or half-dragon.
But the days of a race, even a monster race doling out +4 strength, +2 natural armor, and - 2 dex need to stay over.
At the end of Monster Manual 1 and 2 in 4th edition, you got a couple of races you might wanna play ( MM1 has Bugbear, Gnoll, Goblin, Orc, etc. ) What would be nice is that all creatures have something like that in D&DN Monster Manual.
I remember Savage Species in 3rd was just too annoying to use! In 4th they came with an easy and balanced way to play a lot of different races.
In D&DN, they need to come with the same thing, but, a lot bigger!!! I know you can't play a snake or a Nightmare, but playing an Ogre or a Lizardman would be awesome! On every pages of every, let's say, humanoid creatures, you have an entry to play this race.
I've been all for this since day one. (I even took it a step further and moved every race to the monster manual.) The core rules should have the most basic of options available for character creation; basic classes, generic options and (if we must have them) classic races (dwarf, elf, halfling, and human.) Any thing else should come in later supplemental books. The Monster Manual would be the first.
If we keep the entries for each monster simple, then we can include some brief information on playing some of them as PCs. For the first manual, we can limit the amount of options to classic monsters: orcs, kobolds, goblins, (and IMO dwarfs, elfs, halflings, and even humans.) Later, we can expand on each race with its own supplement, providing more options for backgrounds, themes, etc. Then, as more manuals are released, we can have more "monster" races, and in turn more supplements.
It would allow each group, each player, and each DM, more control, more choices, and greater flexibility in selecting races for their PCs. Also, by following this format, if the manuals are kept fairly small, and the racial books smaller, they might see a bigger profit line; the printing and distribution costs would be smaller (more books can be printed and will fit in a box), and as players pick and choose the supplements they want, more books will be purchased overall (IMO.)
Sometimes the idea of playing a exotic monster PC is fun. Why? Because the same reason is funny dress up for Halloween or Carnival.
A option is creating "light" version of monsters, for example the rakastas (humanoid with tiger head from Red Seel/Savage Coast) and rakshasas (famous evil feline outsiders). It wouldn´t be the first time, like the spikers from Planar Handbook and blandelings from Monster Manual II (3rd Ed).
Other option would be monster type like core classes, for example a total 20-30 levels of fay, contructs, undead/deathless, dragon, outsider. A creture type could have got different classes (or build) if PC by the monster role (brute, soldier, artillery, controller, lurker, skirmisher). A mindslayer or a sprite can´t be like a brute, or a giant can´t be a lurker.
* Unearthed Arcana had optional rules about bloodlines and changing the system of Level Adjusment.
But...if monsters classes are allowed, and there will be a new official D&D videogame..How getting balance of power monster and no-monsters PCs for PvP combat?
And don´t forget magic to summon monsters. I say if for example DM allows a banshee bard PC, the evil necromancer nPC could summon his evil bard banshee too.
* I would like riding monster like videogame Golden Axe (like that giant mantis what spat fire). I could sue vernims with template "monstrous beast" from Savage Species, couldn´t I?
"Say me what you're showing off for, and I'll say you what you lack!" (Spanish saying)
Book 13 Anaclet 23
Confucius said: "The Superior Man is in harmony but does not follow the crowd. The inferior man follows the crowd, but is not in harmony"
What about templates for races? Should 5e have those? I personally like the halfbreed templates: (Half-celestial, half-elemental, half-dragon etc.)
And what about the Unearthed Arcana racial variants of 3.5 that are based on environment and bloodlines? There are the desert, arctic, and jungle variants of races to think about.
If they are templates for PCs it´s a great challenge for game designers. It´s about balance of power. Something has to be sacrificed to get the right balance of power. The normal PC ought have got something the "exotic" PC couldn´t have got. What?
Let´s imagine player spend XPs to get the benefits of power of quickly-regenerating by template half-template. What about level 5, or level 15? A power like flying would be powerful in low level but in the highest levels wouldn´t be anything.
A option would the usual PC could spent XPs to "buy" a special extra, like a prestige classe. For example paladin get "member of order of star", wizard get "member of guild of..", barbarian get "member of clan of bear..". The "exotic" PCs couldn´t get it because they have just "bought" their extra.
"Say me what you're showing off for, and I'll say you what you lack!" (Spanish saying)
Book 13 Anaclet 23
Confucius said: "The Superior Man is in harmony but does not follow the crowd. The inferior man follows the crowd, but is not in harmony"
At the end of Monster Manual 1 and 2 in 4th edition, you got a couple of races you might wanna play ( MM1 has Bugbear, Gnoll, Goblin, Orc, etc. ) What would be nice is that all creatures have something like that in D&DN Monster Manual.
I remember Savage Species in 3rd was just too annoying to use! In 4th they came with an easy and balanced way to play a lot of different races.
In D&DN, they need to come with the same thing, but, a lot bigger!!! I know you can't play a snake or a Nightmare, but playing an Ogre or a Lizardman would be awesome! On every pages of every, let's say, humanoid creatures, you have an entry to play this race.
I wouldn't say annoying but rather a sound idea that when printed was difficult to use and needed homebrew alterations to work effectively. Once we (me and a few DM friends) figured out what worked and what didn't work Savage Species became of our most used source books. So yes I'm all in favor of a 5e version of SS but it does need to be better written then the 3e one. But it should be a book of it own. Keep the MM just monsters as that will keep size down and hopefully cost as well.
"We are men of action, lies do not become us" ~ D.P.R.
Excuse me if I´m mistaken/wrong, but the stats of humanoid creatures from Monster Manual haven´t been designed to be used like PC races. (Yes, you could use/try it if you want, but the balance of power will not be totally right).
The point is not that you would use the monster statblock, but rather that each monster entry would include a section that says "This is the racial adjustments you make to the block of tofu character if you want to use this creature as a PC." The actual stats of the monster are irrelevant.
While an Ancient Red Wyrm might be an incredibly powerful entity, when your Red Dragon PC rolls up at level 1, it's going to get a couple stat adjustments and some minor bonuses, just like everyone else. That the Ancient Red Wyrm doesn't use these stats is irrelevant.
I mean, as an example, behold the "dwarf template" from 3e, from the SRD: DwarfShow
+2 Constitution, -2 Charisma.
Medium: As Medium creatures, dwarves have no special bonuses or penalties due to their size.
Dwarf base land speed is 20 feet. However, dwarves can move at this speed even when wearing medium or heavy armor or when carrying a medium or heavy load (unlike other creatures, whose speed is reduced in such situations).
Darkvision: Dwarves can see in the dark up to 60 feet. Darkvision is black and white only, but it is otherwise like normal sight, and dwarves can function just fine with no light at all.
Stonecunning: This ability grants a dwarf a +2 racial bonus on Search checks to notice unusual stonework, such as sliding walls, stonework traps, new construction (even when built to match the old), unsafe stone surfaces, shaky stone ceilings, and the like. Something that isn’t stone but that is disguised as stone also counts as unusual stonework. A dwarf who merely comes within 10 feet of unusual stonework can make a Search check as if he were actively searching, and a dwarf can use the Search skill to find stonework traps as a rogue can. A dwarf can also intuit depth, sensing his approximate depth underground as naturally as a human can sense which way is up.
Stability: A dwarf gains a +4 bonus on ability checks made to resist being bull rushed or tripped when standing on the ground (but not when climbing, flying, riding, or otherwise not standing firmly on the ground).
+4 dodge bonus to Armor Class against monsters of the giant type. Any time a creature loses its Dexterity bonus (if any) to Armor Class, such as when it’s caught flat-footed, it loses its dodge bonus, too.
+2 racial bonus on Appraise checks that are related to stone or metal items.
+2 racial bonus on Craft checks that are related to stone or metal.
Automatic Languages: Common and Dwarven. Bonus Languages: Giant, Gnome, Goblin, Orc, Terran, and Undercommon.
Favored Class: Fighter. A multiclass dwarf’s fighter class does not count when determining whether he takes an experience point penalty for multiclassing
Now, I'm not saying you can or should be able to apply this to any existing creature, but if you apply it to the raceless, formless entity that is your character before you make a race selection, you get a dwarf.
