Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8386517" data-attributes="member: 6801228">So, you deny Moradin Forge Clerics just because the PHB didn't print them? Fine. Light Clerics then. Same thing, and those ARE in the core rulebook.And if Dwarven clerics aren't a common sight, then why are they an archetype the game made sure to reinforce?So... again, which is it? Do they exist and therefore the monsters aren't surprised by them? Or do they not exist because of the limits of ASIs and the ignoring of rolled stats? You can't have both.So, are you trying to say my human wizard didn't struggle and work hard because he has a +1 INT and could get that 16? Are you saying that the struggle and striving for recognition can't mean that the character achieved a 16 INT before level 1? Would you be stunned and shocked if I could find a professional basketball player from Quebec? I'd guess not because you literally said "they'd have to move to the US" so you clearly expect there to be some of them. So, again, why is a dwarven wizard so shocking? They should exist, they do exist, and there is no reason for them not to exist. The only issue is that mechanically we are punished for trying to do it. Partially because people can't accept dwarves being sages and using intelligence, partially because long-dead traditions want to force them into easier and smaller boxes, and partially because people start going on about how they want the joy of struggling to prove themselves by mechanically having a smaller number, that doesn't actually matter anyways and can't really impact your game play. You guys twist yourselves into knots over this, to the point that it gets hard to even follow what you are arguing for anymore, just that you are against change.Too bad. This discussion has ranged far beyond the core rulebooks and I'm not going to stuff the genie back in the bottle just because you don't wish to discuss things that challenge your view of the game.I don't "want" to change things. Things have changed. If you are looking at adventurers there are only 13 out of 114 subclasses that are not explicitly magical. That is 11%, meaning that 89% of all adventures would have magic of some sort. And you can shrink that by remembering to add in feats, because there are close to a dozen feats that give you magical abilities. Looking at DnD 5e and saying that most adventurers don't use some form of magic is ignoring the reality of the game. Humans have a huge reputation for magic, they are likely the second most common magic users after elves. Tieflings in 5e are mostly a subrace of humans, with only occasional forays into other races. Same with Aasimar and Genasi. Heck, magical potions are on the common shopping list of the game, right in the PHB.I can't stop you from keeping them, or stop you from having this bizarre monster metagaming where hyper-intelligent creatures aren't aware of how magical the world is. But I am perfectly fine trading perception and a cantrip for poison resistance and +1 hp. That is a trade-off. I don't need every character of mine to struggle against the outdated views of society, risking it all to prove that, yes, cats can dance and dwarves can do magic. I'd rather just play a dwarven wizard and focus on how that is a unique magical viewpoint and tradition, instead of making it some grand quest to prove myself equal to my peers.</blockquote>

Verification