Search results

Well... it's whatever the players make of it, too. The DM makes the experience for the players, taking "control" like that isn't in the collaborative spirit of the current TTRPG experience.

I can only half accept one of those points. "No evil" for me would be more about the choices of the Players in scene, not their Characters or character goals. I just wouldn't want to play limited race for anything more than a one-shot or something, and so it seems, neither would anyone with a...

Still misrepresenting the point, and that's not what we're "demanding." The DM doesn't want certain behavior, ban the behavior, not the tool which still can be used in other ways. Just because the DM has the final say doesn't mean that what they say makes sense. If I said something silly to my...

We could play the quotation game all day, but this is misinterpreting. If Orcs exist in setting, why would they not be able to be played? That's the question. We have a right to ask a question about a strange decision.

Not personally, but that doesn't mean that expected manners and topic-restrictions, and similar things weren't in place. Still not a good place for refusing in-universe races to not be PC-able- just because most people of the X empire are bad, doesn't mean a PC X is evil too. At that point, they...

Seconded, and you said it better than me. If they're in the setting, then them not being playable probably won't have a good justification. Why would a whole species have to be exclusively NPCs or villains?

When I see Gith, Drow, Yuan Ti etc. also being mentioned, that's where I'm getting the vibe from. The options deserve to exist if people want them, and I find it hard to believe that, out of a whole race or civilization, not one can be on a journey as a PC for reasons. A party can be all Human...

I can respect that. I don't have a problem with settings that don't permit certain things, I just think (as a concept) the idea of "the bad guy races shouldn't be playable" to be weird, which is a vibe I'm picking up in the thread. If we're excluding races based on villainy, then what's the...

Here's the thing- out of those races, I don't see why one member from them couldn't have a journey to go on. So why shouldn't they be playable?

The idea of tolerating other people's fun/choices becomes more relevant when table-option banning is done on false premises, like a Tortle somehow being the straw that breaks the camel's back in terms of believability in a DnD campaign. If you're going to cut something, cut it because you don't...

I think this is actually quite relevant to your problem with caricatures/stereotype players. First, I will add that a player playing a stereotype or not is equally accessible regardless of character race. Even Human is a stereotype. Not the point. People who write fiction, be it a DnD...

I'd prefer to lead with it'll try to do 44 damage per turn, and 100 hp (even with regen) can be chewed out in a turn or two with the right barbarian or fighter. Or better yet, the Slaad can be ignored by something fast enough. I'm not denying that economy summoning isn't super strong, but other...

I agree with this. I don't believe a class restructuring would necessarily change anyone's fun, just the method for how it is reached, while opening up new avenues. I don't think we have terms to describe how exactly this could work. I want to make an example, but I can't put something through...

I think some sort of fundamental restructuring would be beneficial. If there's a way to reduce redundancy while giving a broader scope of possible game play features, I'd be happy. I think Warlock is an interesting example, here. You have the subclasses (patrons) and then larger archetypes...

give me psionics I need it Edit: To actually give an opinion on the topic of Psionics, I really think they're fun and I adore the far realm and Aberrations general connection to the topic. Tasha's Cauldron of Everything gave a lot on the surface level, but I can't help but think that there...

Opportunity reply, and I'm procrastinating: There's no reason to say that intellect and understanding are unrelated to the brain, though everything else undoubtedly is. Why would it be separate? Like I said, radically different animals to us aren't even alien, so something that's basically the...

You're lucky I didn't log out yet, so I'll reply. My "similar" and your "different" are on different scales. If a gorilla has observable parallels to the Human brain, you can bet something much more related to us would be even similar. They were similar enough to us to assimilate populations...

Warhammer's in an interesting place. I've definitely seen it attract unsavory people interested in some of the less tasteful elements. When people seriously raise a banner of something that's supposed to be a caricature of their bad opinions, then your satire just became their propaganda. cough...

These points do paint a complete picture when in the context of my previous comments. Neanderthals had cultures and rituals and comparable anatomy and genetics to contemporary humans. If they act like human people in almost every regard, and have extremely comparable anatomy, were they not...

The Human Mind as you know it is not limited to humans because non-human creatures are capable of being virtually identical "people" without being actual Humans. A Neanderthal could be a person, an artificial "human" could be a person. So if Jimmy is playing an Elf, he can simulate that...