Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Next Blog: Tone and Edition
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Saracenus" data-source="post: 5893596" data-attributes="member: 47839"><p>I think the whole "rarity" system for races and classes is just PR.</p><p></p><p>There are competing groups of folks: DM/Players that want only "classic" PCs and Classes, those that just don't care, those that care only if it impacts the story elements of their game, and those who want the everything and the "kitchen sink."</p><p></p><p>By making an arbitrary rarity system it allows folks like me who don't care to restrict what's playable unless the story elements of our game require it (say if i am running the G series of modules and I don't want player's playing Drow) to have their Race cake while others who want a 1st Edition feel to the race list can say no rare races.</p><p></p><p>My problem with this is, there is a implicit power in saying that one race is common or rarer than the other. It puts an assumption in the mind of the DM and players that somehow Dragonborn are extra while Humans are always there. That decision should be in the hands of the DM and players.</p><p></p><p>If you are going to have a rarity system is should tie in with default assumptions of WotC's published material. Let's say they call for a Dungeon article and they don't want rare races in it, that is a handy short hand for it.</p><p></p><p>Personally I want the all options in the PHB because I want the choice to use all, some or none of the races provided. Let me make the choice.</p><p></p><p>To those that want to deny me the choice of what races start in the PHB, it really goes against the spirit of the 5e design goals, which is an edition for everyone. I will fight you tooth and nail on putting your limited scope in the PHB.</p><p></p><p>My two platinum pieces,</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Saracenus, post: 5893596, member: 47839"] I think the whole "rarity" system for races and classes is just PR. There are competing groups of folks: DM/Players that want only "classic" PCs and Classes, those that just don't care, those that care only if it impacts the story elements of their game, and those who want the everything and the "kitchen sink." By making an arbitrary rarity system it allows folks like me who don't care to restrict what's playable unless the story elements of our game require it (say if i am running the G series of modules and I don't want player's playing Drow) to have their Race cake while others who want a 1st Edition feel to the race list can say no rare races. My problem with this is, there is a implicit power in saying that one race is common or rarer than the other. It puts an assumption in the mind of the DM and players that somehow Dragonborn are extra while Humans are always there. That decision should be in the hands of the DM and players. If you are going to have a rarity system is should tie in with default assumptions of WotC's published material. Let's say they call for a Dungeon article and they don't want rare races in it, that is a handy short hand for it. Personally I want the all options in the PHB because I want the choice to use all, some or none of the races provided. Let me make the choice. To those that want to deny me the choice of what races start in the PHB, it really goes against the spirit of the 5e design goals, which is an edition for everyone. I will fight you tooth and nail on putting your limited scope in the PHB. My two platinum pieces, [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Next Blog: Tone and Edition
Top