Search results

  1. F

    I don't get the arguments for bioessentialism

    So, if there are, say, 8 different races, that makes 32 classes. I think that makes it unwieldy by any reasonably objective metric. Any challenge can be solved if you simply handwave it away. There is a more classes you have, the harder it is to balance, With 4 races and 4 distinct classes...
  2. F

    I don't get the arguments for bioessentialism

    Sure, it is possible. Say you have four base classes: Fighter, Magic-User, Cleric and Rogue. If you were committed to making non-human races distinct, you could create non-human equivalences for each, say, Dwarf Shield-bearer, Dwarf Artificer, Dwarf Priest and Dwarf Crossbowman. However, this...
  3. F

    D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

    Well, Christopher Nolan’s version certainly departed from the core of the character, which was goofy inventions and Bat-puns. He didn’t even use the Bat-credit card!
  4. F

    I don't get the arguments for bioessentialism

    Way to miss the point. I was responding to a poster that advocated returning to species-as-class, then you respond with a paradigm that ISN’T species-as-class.
  5. F

    I don't get the arguments for bioessentialism

    That idea didn’t come out of nowhere. The system privileges combat by giving it longer and more detailed rules than anything else.
  6. F

    I don't get the arguments for bioessentialism

    If every dwarf gets the same abilities and levels, then you don’t have a species, and you certainly don’t have coherent society or fiction. Every elf is a cookie-cutter fighter mage, with no Druids, or bards or clerics.
  7. F

    D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

    I think this would be fine, if the proponents of the playstyle didn’t denigrate anything they perceived as outside the playstyle “changing the world” or “quantum cooks”.
  8. F

    D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

    I would argue that what you describe isn’t what is happening. Instead, what you get is more akin to “Trad DMs would never add setting details. Adding setting details is inconsistent with trad DMing” “But what about Jim. He describes himself as a trad DM and all other posters recognize him as...
  9. F

    Daggerheart General Thread [+]

    I mean, this is clearly better advice than suggesting that you limit the Fear within the scene. Recently, I ran a fight where the players were rolling on fire. 0 Fear generation and I had to use existing Fear to interrupt to attack, Following the book advice, the combat would have just been...
  10. F

    Daggerheart General Thread [+]

    I felt that the “How Much Fear per Scene” was the weakest part of the guidelines. Because the strength of individual Fear moves varies so much, it’s meaningless to classify difficulty based on Fear expended.
  11. F

    I don't get the arguments for bioessentialism

    It kind of makes your response irrelevant though. The thread is arguing in favour of bioessentialism, ie bonuses and penalties to various stats. This creates problems. Among others, the problem that certain races are penalized from taking certain classes, even when the principal stat for that...
  12. F

    Starting Daggerheart campaign. Any pitfalls?

    From the DM side, it’s really important to learn to pace your Fear usage.Don’t think that just because you are using enemies that generate Fear that you need to use all the Fear this fight.
  13. F

    I don't get the arguments for bioessentialism

    I don’t recall Dwarfs being barred from the Sorcerer class in 3e.
  14. F

    I don't get the arguments for bioessentialism

    Just building on this point. Klingons are great at taking punishment, with redundant physiology, and resistance to strong alcohols compared to humans, which could be represented with a +2 bonus to Con. But humans are descended from persistance predators, used to running and walking extreme...
  15. F

    Daggerheart General Thread [+]

    I would add that Age of Umbra has 7 player characters, so that definitely impacts balance concerns in a meaningful way compared to tables with 3 or 4 PCs.
  16. F

    Daggerheart General Thread [+]

    My personal experience on this has been inconsistent. In situations where I am DMing, combats either tend to go faster or simply “feel” faster (I’m not there with a stopwatch evaluating the respective durations). However, my son ran a couple of “by-the-book” combats, and they tended to go...
  17. F

    I don't get the arguments for bioessentialism

    It’s not only that, it’s also that some class choices are extremely disconnected from their main attributes. Dwarves are supposed to be gruff and unfriendly, that is why they get a penalty to Cha. But why the heck does this mean there are fewer Dwarf sorcerers and Dwarf sorcerers are less...
  18. F

    I don't get the arguments for bioessentialism

    Because no one ever argues that bonuses and penalties should be limited to physical traits, and when you bring in mental traits, it opens a whole can of worms.
  19. F

    I don't get the arguments for bioessentialism

    One of the problems with bioessentialism in the game is that it draws attention to how poorly defined the attributes are. Your species gets a +2 to Wisdom. What does that mean? Are they particularly spiritual? Do the have a particular connection to nature? Or are they just particularly...
  20. F

    D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

    Either at ENworlds, or at all other RPG forums, I have never seen anyone defending a player fudging die rolls as something positive. Other people have pointed to DM guides indicating that fudging is acceptable. Several GMs here and in other forums have indicated the circumstances they...
Top