D&D General The Tyranny of Rarity

[Cadence]

Well that's the point


Elves and halflings are distinct.
My point is the distinction is small [...]

One lives the better part of a millenia, meditates 4 hours instead of sleeping 8 (and is immune to magic sleep), has unearthly grace, and darkvision.

The other has a bit over human lifespan, is small and agile, has uncanny luck, and normal vision.

Those are small distinctions?

 

[Minigiant]

One lives the better part of a millenia, meditates 4 hours instead of sleeping 8 (and is immune to magic sleep), has unearthly grace, and darkvision.

The other has a bit over human lifespan, is small and agile, has uncanny luck, and has normal vision.

Those are small distinctions?

yes.
Because it's quite easy for those aspects and traits to not come up in a session and the player can't invoke them either.

I have often forgot a PC was an elf or halfling. I've never forgot than a minotaur PC was a minotaur.

 

[Cadence]

yes.
Because it's quite easy for those aspects and traits to not come up in a session and the player can't invoke them either.

It feels like darkvision and only needing 4 hours would come up fairly often.

I have often forgot a PC was an elf or halfling. I've never forgot than a minotaur PC was a minotaur.

What did the minotaur do to stand out? (Haven't had one in a party).

 

[Maxperson]

yes.
Because it's quite easy for those aspects and traits to not come up in a session and the player can't invoke them either.

I have often forgot a PC was an elf or halfling. I've never forgot than a minotaur PC was a minotaur.

I've never forgotten what race a PC was once we were past session 1, and rarely even then. And those few times were the newness of the PCs, not what race they were.

And what you call minor, many of us don't.

 

[Minigiant]

It feels like darkvision and only needing 4 hours would come up fairly often.

Well everyone has darkvsion so that's not special.
And needing to only sleep 4 hour only matters when something interrupts an 8 hour sleep.

What did the minotaur do to stand out? (Haven't had one in a party).

They gore things, threaten to gore things, and look/beg for magical horn equipment every session.

 

[Cadence]

They gore things, threaten to gore things, and look/beg for magical horn equipment every session.

My son is all over searching for elf specific items, so I can feel that one.

 

[Lanefan]

No.
Klingons, Twi'leks, and Smurfs is better than Dwarf, Elf, and Halfling because Elf and Halfling are redundant as Dex/Agi races and Dwarf is a Con/Tough race and in D&D toughess is purely reactive and can't be leveraged for action.

Klingons, Twi'leks, and Smurfs have better active racial traits that are better leverages as adventurers and don't have overlapping aspects.

Any game-world that has both Klingons and Smurfs on it is impressively well designed in its ecology, in that there's a clear predator-prey relationship already established between the inhabitants.

Which is just big words for "Klingons eat Smurfs for lunch".

 

[Cadence]

Any game-world that has both Klingons and Smurfs on it is impressively well designed in its ecology, in that there's a clear predator-prey relationship already established between the inhabitants.

Which is just big words for "Klingons eat Smurfs for lunch".

Luckily the world is even more developed than that. My Smurf necromancer has seen pictures of a a story called "Aliens" and things the kids are calling "chest bursters".

 

[Lanefan]

I’ve not commented in a bit because there seems to be little point by now. But I want to say that expecting/asking/hoping the GM to allow some player input/choice/decisions doesn’t require the kitchen sink element that everyone seems so scared of.

Just…listen to what your players want, and consider that in making your decisions. That doesn’t open the door for everything.

Yes it does, and that's just the issue.

When you're in a situation where players certainly aren't going to have the same characters all the way through, and the game is highly likely not to even have the same players all the way through, the best option is to set the borders up front and stick to them. Otherwise, as players' ideas and wants change over the years and each new one is introduced the end result is that inevitably, if incrementally, you will end up with a kitchen sink whether intended or not.

It doesn’t have to “ruin” the GM’s idea of the setting.

That defense “I don’t like kitchen sink settings” doesn’t address the idea presented in the OP, or the criticism of any approach that gives the GM even more authority.

It strikes me….and I’ll admit I’m a bit biased in this regard, and maybe I’m not being entirely fair, but it’s a gut reaction….that the anti-kitchen-sink stance seems like an easy one to take in order to dodge the actual issue.

And what's the actual issue? If you're suggesting that "the DM controls the rules and the setting elements, including available species" is the issue, it isn't: the DM does control the rules and setting and that control gives her the right to design and tweak said rules and setting however she wants, and to allow or ban things at her whim. The only thing she has to be is consistent; that if something's allowed it's allowed and if something's banned it's banned.

 

[Greg K]

No.
Klingons, Twi'leks, and Smurfs is better than Dwarf, Elf, and Halfling

No, it is not.
For starters, any world with smurfs needs to either be instantly destroyed by a giant meteor or every smurf struck and killed by blue lightning bolts from the sky!