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

garyh said:

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).

Click to expand...

I would vote against using material from PHB 2, etc.., for the reasons outlined above. PHB, and thats it.

I know thats a choice that wont be popular (no Druids??? no Bards??) but I think it would suit the concept best.

Graf said:

Is the minotaur really such a dominate melee force?

Click to expand...

Maybe but not enough to make me take it over another race... but I've never really been draw to certain builds do to its mechanics so I'm probably not the right one to ask.

Brother Shatterstone said:

Maybe but not enough to make me take it over another race... but I've never really been draw to certain builds do to its mechanics so I'm probably not the right one to ask.

Click to expand...

I think it's instructive to compare it to something like the Goliath from 3.5. Holding everything else constant the Goliath is simply a better melee fighter than any phb race. Buckets more damage, better chance to hit, access to some truely abusive feats, same hit points and ac.
Even accounting for the la they're problematic. (oh and they don't have any interesting fluff)

You can, I believe, build a phb fighter with virtually the same combat profile as a minotaur. And the phb character will have extra powers that are probably equal to the Minotaur's charge. Especially since they have no racial feats.
Just my feeling...

Graf said:

You can, I believe, build a phb fighter with virtually the same combat profile as a minotaur. And the phb character will have extra powers that are probably equal to the Minotaur's charge. Especially since they have no racial feats.

Click to expand...

To be honest, if I'm reading it right (which could be suspect) the Minotaur's (goring) charge isn't anything too bad... I would be more worried about ferocity.

If we want to include other books (like PHB2) than the three basics (PHB,MM,DMG), we should make sure that the book is very popular among the players/masters. That would means to wait at least a few months before considering to accept it. And we should limit a lot the approval of new sources that is not avalaible on the net. It should be an exception and not a rule to adds books. We don't want to force people to buys every book that come out.

For sources avaliable on the net, that should be more easily added.

The only problem with sources from the net is that Dungeon/Dragon are going to be a fee based system going forward and based on the quality of the material coming out, I'm not sure that I want to subscribe (and that would run into the same problem as the source books of forcing people into it)...so I'm not sure what other sources we'd consider kosher?

Correction to my last post: FREE web material.

I voted on core + fan created. While I'd love to play a gnome illusionist, or a warforged artificer, I'm in support of the view that we need to be as consistent as possible for DMs. There will always be other games for people to play those types of characters. L4W needs consistency for those who run it and those in charge of approving characters. Having been a character judge for LEB I can tell you its hard work to always have a dozen books on hand when running through an approval.

Also, I would also add that you could.. in theory.. always add stuff later, while it'll be much harder to cut it out again.

So why not start core-only, and when you do have a lively and stable base of players and DMs who played themselves out on the core choices and are getting ready to retire their old heroes, you can get back to the issue of 'do we want to add more stuff now?'

I can see the attraction and value of adding Warforged, Swordmage and more, if there's already half a dozend of each core class/race combination running around at all tiers and diversity is called for. But L4W is certainly far from that point.

But to get started, the easiest and most convenient way would be IMO core only. You get characters approved quickly, you cut time for DMs and Judges, you keep the option for more stuff later.. What's not to like?

This is why someone smarter than I should be doing polls

Only CORE
Atanatotatos, Bialaska, covaithe, Drowned Hero, Erekose13, Graf, Kobold Stew, NakuruSai, renau1g, The Goblin King, Velmont, Voda Vosa, Zweischneid

CORE + MM RACES
Brother Shatterstone, covaithe, garyh, Graf, Kobold Stew, NakuruSai, Redclaw, Reveille, Velmont


Cutting out the people who voted for both (including me, ) from CORE ONLY we have

Atanatotatos, Bialaska, covaithe, Drowned Hero, Erekose13, Graf, Kobold Stew, NakuruSai, renau1g, The Goblin King, Velmont, Voda Vosa, and Zweischneid = 8

Brother Shatterstone, covaithe, garyh, Graf, Kobold Stew, NakuruSai, Redclaw, Reveille and Velmont. = 9

Technically Core + MM is the "winner" but its very tight.

[d]---[/d]
Atanatotatos, Bialaska, covaithe, Drowned Hero, Erekose13, [/s]Graf[/s], Kobold Stew, NakuruSai, renau1g, The Goblin King, Velmont, Voda Vosa, Zweischneid =11
Choice: ... material from other official published WotC books
arcanaman, Atanatotatos, garyh, Graf, Halford, Redclaw, Reveille
= 7 votes.

Even assuming that Ata and Graf weren't voting for it Core only dominates.
[d]---[/d]
Atanatotatos, Bialaska, covaithe, Drowned Hero, Erekose13, [/s]Graf[/s], Kobold Stew, NakuruSai, renau1g, The Goblin King, Velmont, Voda Vosa, Zweischneid =10
Choice: ... material from official online material (dragon/dungeon)
arcanaman, Atanatotatos, garyh, Graf, Redclaw, Reveille, Velmont

We've swapped Halford for Velmont but still have 7 votes.

So Core Only dominates this catagory.
[d]---[/d]

Looking at the Limits section we see
Limits: I'd like to have improbable combinations scrutinized more carefully but not banned
Brother Shatterstone, NakuruSai, Redclaw, serow

Limits: No restrictions -- totally free arcanaman, Atanatotatos, Erekose13, Graf, Reveille, The Goblin King

Again, fairly close BUT, several of the "totally free" people have voted for phb only (they're in strikethrough).
So it's a tie.

My interpretation

• Any PhB-only combination will be approved (provided the character has a functional backstory); character may be submitted and approved prior to setting creation (as discussed in the roadmap)
• PhB + MM races will be permitted with some scrutiny*
• other materials will not be available at game start**

*= Yeah, ok, so its a bit weasily. But what am I going to do? You have to find a middle ground, right? I don't think anyone minds having their character looked at a bit. The best thing to do would be for the onus to be upon the "objector". The objector must raise substantive, real concerns that can be classified and addressed.

Three possible areas

• Balance: Is your character too far off the "power curve". (Can a PhB character be created with the same combat profile - roughly the same AC/hit points/damage output/role effectiveness (defender, striker, etc)?
• Appropriateness: Does your character fit within the setting? Are there a lot of similar characters already out there? If your character is "rare" (good drow) do you have a convincing rational for your character's existence.
• Good RP: Is the character interesting to RP with? To read about? (A hostile psychotic who throws their weight around isn't tremendously interesting to play with)

Personally I think that only Balance problems should be a reason to reject a character. If the player can demonstrate that their character's combat profile is not out of synch with the PhB (demonstrate a PhB character with similar combat stats) then the character judges should work together with the player to overcome the other two points.

[d]---[/d]
**=Several people have indicated that they are voting for core-only to make it easier to start the setting. Perhaps we should revist the issue three months or so after the setting has started (i.e. #11 in the roadmap)