|
1 year ago ::
May 12, 2012 - 11:40AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Apr 21, 2011
|
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'm playing:
Abin Gadon, Halfling Bard
Winston "Slurphnose", Gnome Sorcerer
Pasiphaé, Minotaur Shaman
Eglerion, Elf Ellyrian Reaver (Ranger)
DMing:
Le Trésor du Fluide (Treasure from the Fluid)
Un Royaume d'une Grande Valeur (A Kingdom of Great Value)
La Légende de Persitaa (Persitaa's Legend)
Une Série de Petites Quêtes... (A serie of short quests)
Playtesting:
Caves of Chaos
We're building the greatest adventure ever known to DnD players!
Also playing Legend of the Five Rings and Warhammer Fantasy.
Sébastien, Beloeil, Qc.
I am Neutral Good and 32 years old.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 12, 2012 - 12:02PM
#2
|
|
|
I'd like to see nearly all of the humanoid races as possible PC races as well. However, I don't think the MM is necessarily the best place to put them. Unlike the PHB and the DMG, I don't think there will be a lot of trimming down of monsters in DDN with the exraneous bits put into modules in the back. I think the DDN MM will look very much like the 4e MM, and that there won't be much room in it for showing monster races as PC races.
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 ::
May 12, 2012 - 4:21PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
May 12, 2009
|
I liked how 4E MMs introduced Playable Monster Races and personally, i wish D&D Next handle it the same way.
Unless they plan to make a Complete Humanoid Handbook of some sort.
Yan
Montréal, Canada
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 12, 2012 - 9:52PM
#4
|
|
|
What will race rules look like? If they are compact (ie just an ability adjustment and a list of racial abilities) fitting them into the MM entries might be a good idea. That said, what do you do with the human, elf, dwarf, etc entries in the MM?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 13, 2012 - 5:28AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Jan 17, 2010
|
I hope the rules for races are compact (like Dreamstryder says), but flavorful, meaning they're easy to homebrew, just a few adjustments and maybe a feat or something. This would make it possible to put in it the MM with the monster entry, like in 3.5
I'm not sure if it's financially a good idea for WotC, but I'd LOVE a book like Complete Humanoid Handbook or Savage Species, containing lizardfolk, ogres and also different more obscure races, like Aarakocra, Warforged or Drow, races from all sorts of campaign settings. Since in 3.5 they did publish races multiple times (warforged had a full racial write up in the Eberron campaign guide, in Races of Eberron and a minor write up in one of the MMs), so it could work.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 13, 2012 - 5:47AM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Oct 24, 2007
|
I liked how 4E MMs introduced Playable Monster Races and personally, i wish D&D Next handle it the same way.
Unless they plan to make a Complete Humanoid Handbook of some sort.
I agree, I think the way 4e put stat blocks in for playable race versions of most of the humanoid monsters in the Monster Manual is a good way to go. Then they can tweak or add more detail to the more popular races as needed in Dragon articles or a Humanoid Handbook or whatever.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 13, 2012 - 6:56AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2006
|
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).
For example if centaur is a PC race, it will need special racial traits for quadruped humanoids. Bariaur of Planar Handbook had it but the centaurs from Monster Manual II 4th ed hadn´t.
Do rebember the racial traits of kobols from Monster Manual and Races of Dragons weren´t identical.
And always there will be somebody who would like try a powerful monster too much (dragon, genie, outsider..).
Let´s imagine mind slayer PC...and module of racial classes is allowed by DM. What about a 7 monster level of mindslayer +...x levels of wizard, monk, soulknife, batlemind, ardent... or 4 level of grig (small fay) +..
And don´t forget monster "templates" like vampires and werebeasts.
How to get the right balance of power monster and normal PCs? A option would be monster PC could sacrifice something the usual PC hasgot (for example about body slots to use magic item).
"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"
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 13, 2012 - 8:06AM
#8
|
|
|
The Monster Manual might not be the best place, as that shouldn't necassarily be a book players should buy or look through. And it eats up space in the book that should be devoted to more monsters and DM resources.
A big Dragon article might be the best place, with a stack of playable monsters.
Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: What Would Wrecan Say? My Webcomic: 5 Minute WorkdayUpdated every Tuesday and Thursday Spoiler:
Show
Updated Tuesday and ThursdayRead my blog on the WotC Community Site (updated irregularly to avoid spamming the "Featured Blogger" list). You can follow me on Twitter: "@DnDJester"
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 13, 2012 - 10:38AM
#9
|
|
|
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).
In 4e, there were PC race versions in the back of the book. I believe that's what's being referenced.
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 ::
May 13, 2012 - 11:11AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2006
|
A Monster Manual should be a book for DM but if you were WotC and think Monster Manual with things for PCs (pets, mounts, wizard´s familiars, summoned creatures, monster/racial classes, templates) would be better sold..what would you do?
A don´t forget the books in other languages. For example a new PC race in Dragon Magazine (gnolls) couldn´t be not (officially) translated to other languages. It has happened.
* Monster Manuals of 4th Ed had got a final pages of stats for monster characters, but ...was it for nPCs used by DM?
* A option could be articules from Dragon Magazine and the most popular monster classes would be published in a Dragon Magazine compedium.
* Other option would be create some "generic" monster classes like dragon, outsider, werebeast, sentient constuct, undead + deathless (from book of exalted deed), giant, troll, fay, genies.. For example you wish a oriental dragon (the lungs). You get the dragon class and add the special optional features for it (like a kit/build/theme). You want playing a werecrow... you get the class werebeast and choose the special features for werecrows. If you choose celestial outsider you must get the celestial outsider features, you can´t get the fiend monster class features.
"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"
|
|
|
