[4e] 4th ed Living EnW - Char. Creation: VERDICT->CORE + mildly scrutized MM RACES

Graf · Jul 24, 2008

PLEASE NOTE: THE POLL IS MULTIPLE CHOICE
PLEASE NOTE: THERE IS A SHORT INTRODUCTION TO 4TH EDITION ENWORLD. It's is only partially complete, but it's an easy way to find out about what we're talking about.

These are series of polls regarding the creation of a new PbP ENWorld Living World, using the new 4th Edition rules. If you are not familiar with the idea of a PbP Living World, check out the already created (and highly active) Living ENWorld, Living Eberron, and Living Superheroes.

The possibility of a new Living World using 4th Edition rules (L4W, for short) has been discussed extensively in this thread. If you are interested in playing in L4W, please vote here and consider joining the discussion.

The first poll result has indicated that the community would prefer to develop a new setting.

This is the second poll, it's not about the setting, though we hope to have one of those out soon.
[There are several different proposals/suggestions floating around including the Transitive Isles, Daunton and the Alliance, and the Broken Seas. (if you want to get involved and put your stamp on the world early visiting the discussion thread and putting in your two cents would be an easy way to do that)]

This is a poll about character creation. There are two different subjects being discussed. (There is a cleaner version of the poll on the wiki.)

The "Universe" of Choice: Which books will be available to players when they create their characters?
If some/all non-core books are going to be allowed we will consider timing later.

Limited Access to "unusual combinations": Some members have mentioned that they find it disruptive to have lots of "improbable" characters in a setting. A few examples

A Living FR Game with many "good drow rangers who dual wield scimitars".
a Living Game with a high percentage of a 'rare' race, such as warforged in a Living Eberron game.

Should the community try to limit access to those races in some fashion? If so, which combinations should be encouraged/discouraged/prohibited/etc? And how?

[d]--[/d]
The poll is less skewed toward core than it looks. Several people (including me :blush:

) clicked on core only but want to include other things. Currently the verdict is: CORE + MM RACES with SOME SCRUTINY OF MM RACES. My tortured rationalizations here.

[sblock=How stupid am I?]Obviously the answer is pretty stupid; deliberately picked the wording. Ah well.[/sblock]

It's a public poll so you can see who voted for what.

covaithe · Jul 24, 2008

I think the important thing is to get the ball rolling. Hence, I prefer to keep it simple: PHB races/classes, no limits. Later, once we have some actual games going and a structure for proposing and voting on changes, we can talk about adding other options or restricting the existing options.

I'd be open to the option of the variant races from the MM, but again I think it should be added later as a proposal, not built in from the start.

Brother Shatterstone · Jul 24, 2008

Graf said:
PLEASE NOTE: OPTION 11 SHOULD READ: instead of negative penalties positive rewards for approved combos (specifics TBD later)

That's funny... Option 11 says just that for me.

Note: For the record there was no votes for option 11 when I edited the poll.

renau1g · Jul 24, 2008

I'm thinking that we should only use the PHB races, otherwise most melee characters will go for the minotaur (and their larger weapons), and the other races have been said not to have been balanced/tested as PC races... just my 2 coppers.

garyh · Jul 24, 2008

renau1g said:
I'm thinking that we should only use the PHB races, otherwise most melee characters will go for the minotaur (and their larger weapons), and the other races have been said not to have been balanced/tested as PC races... just my 2 coppers.

I voted for PHB/MM/DDI as options. However, I'd also think maybe restricting races to those with full PC writeups could be a good option, to avoid situations like this. As of now, that's the PHB eight + the DDI warforged. I believe the FRPG will add Drow and Genasi (and Swordmage on the class side). Thus, this will eventually include current MM races who are given PC treatment in a campaign book or future PHB.

Zweischneid · Jul 24, 2008

PHB & original L4W stuff only IMO.

Already it is a hassle for DMs to keep ahead of different powers, paths and races published in DDI.. add another year of freebies, books, magazines, etc.., and noone in his right mind will be willing to DM, let alone do administrative things like judge or approve characters. Also, books beyond the core should not be required to play.. thats what more specific games on the general PbP boards can cater to by setting up Eberron or FR games, etc...

Therefore, PHB RAW only, and possibly stuff written, approved and published & available specifically for and in the L4W game as part of the 'living world'.

Velmont · Jul 24, 2008

As there will be many master, we need to make sure every master have access to all the information to run a game. It was in that spirit LEW have been build and have been succesfull. All things was avalaible on the net: SRD and homebrew race/class/feat/spells...

In case of L4W, there likely will be no SRD, but we can asusme that every master will have teh three basics books (PHB, DMG and MM). Over that, any official publication that is avalaible on the net could be added, but I think judges should approve it first.

garyh · Jul 24, 2008

Zweischneid said:
PHB & original L4W stuff only IMO.

Already it is a hassle for DMs to keep ahead of different powers, paths and races published in DDI.. add another year of freebies, books, magazines, etc.., and noone in his right mind will be willing to DM, let alone do administrative things like judge or approve characters. Also, books beyond the core should not be required to play.. thats what more specific games on the general PbP boards can cater to by setting up Eberron or FR games, etc...

Therefore, PHB RAW only, and possibly stuff written, approved and published & available specifically for and in the L4W game as part of the 'living world'.

But what about when the PHB2, 3, etc. comes out? I see no reason not to allow at least what's in there, even if for some reason you wanted to draw a line at campaign books (though you'd be missing out on perfectly good drow, genasi, swordmage in FR, and artificer in Eb).

Graf · Jul 25, 2008

Brother Shatterstone said:
That's funny... Option 11 says just that for me.

Note: For the record there was no votes for option 11 when I edited the poll.

Thank you!

Graf · Jul 25, 2008

renau1g said:
I'm thinking that we should only use the PHB races, otherwise most melee characters will go for the minotaur (and their larger weapons), and the other races have been said not to have been balanced/tested as PC races... just my 2 coppers.

I'm curious who said that. (Not doubting it's been said, just curious about context -- the warforged was actually given a power boost in the article.)
I've been off the boards proper for a bit now.

Is the minotaur really such a dominate melee force? An eladrin spear fighter or a dwarven axe wielder is going to have around the same damage output with a feat (that +2 is sweet) plus a lot of extra racial powers.

Though it's not a very popular option in the poll right now one choice would be to have regional positive benefits limited to certain race class combinations.

For example, if there is an Imperium in the game (which is not decided) then anyone who places a "preferred combination" (eladrin, human, half-elf) and (paladin, cleric, wizard) could receive the following (selected at random from the FR preview guide) for their character

Regional Benefit: Add the higher of your con or wis score to your starting hit points (instead of automatically adding your Con). Healing surges unchanged.

A h-e cleric isn't going to be doing as much damage as the minotaur of course, but they get something specific reward to play an otherwise weak combination (both clerics and half-elves are, IMHO, a bit weak).