Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 3452781" data-attributes="member: 957">The basis of the core should be transparent enough that any preferred adaptation is simple to achieve.  And on that front I think it is.  It could be more easy if the LAs were not so off and frequently so inconsistentl in how there are "calculated".  But, if you know what LA you want a monster to be, make the change and you are there. It seems WotC agrees with you and went "play core".  I think if you aim for slightly biased toward core races and erred that way you could get close enough to accomplishing both with reasonably minimal aggrevation.I agree 100%.  But it isn't just my preference I'm talking about here. God knows that D&D is a much more successful game than it would be if everything was built around what I prefer.  But I'm convinced that a core race bias serves the majority of D&D gamers best.  Mostly because it gives the kind of game that they want, but to a lesser extent because it also serves the starter and KISS groups the best.Again, I do think that the system could better faciliate play if the numbers were not so scewed.  And fixing that would reduce impairment of adapability.I agree.  And one could certainly push even further toward core only or even human only if they wanted.  But again, I believe that the game's popularity is best served by a slight bias toward core.  I think it would be better served that way than it would be with monster equity, and much better served than it is now with monster total shafting.</blockquote>

Verification