Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Verequus" data-source="post: 1841563" data-attributes="member: 9135">So would you don't allow mount buff spells for non-equines or would you require to develop a new spell respectively new spells, which cover the rest? The first is flavor-vise(?) acceptable, but the core-rules shouldn't be shoe-horned (pardon the pun) into a particular flavor (IMO, there are still too many legacy-things to be really world-neutral, but discussing that would be off-topic in this thread.). The latter... It wouldn't make much sense, because the effect is geared for mounts in general.Ehm, I don't want to change D&amp;D into a lecture of Biology in other universes. It may be interesting and realistic, but for a game I don't need a level of that detail.I thought, that you were listing possible subtypes, which should be used instead of Mammalian.While I don't see a real counter-argument for having a broader brush in areas farther away from the humans, I don't know a good reason for being that detailed - Humanoid (Anthropoid) wouldn't change, that humans are the center of the scale and the other races aren't so far away from the center, that it would be to have such a fine division even with a humanocentric view. Magic items, which are geared towards a certain race, can still be made, and a Favorite Enemy (Humanoid (Anthropoid)) is more reasonable, as the alternative Favorite Enemy (Outsider) exists, because Outsiders can be encountered in far more shapes - four-legged equines like Nightmares are the same as the humanoid Thri-Keen.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Verequus, post: 1841563, member: 9135"] So would you don't allow mount buff spells for non-equines or would you require to develop a new spell respectively new spells, which cover the rest? The first is flavor-vise(?) acceptable, but the core-rules shouldn't be shoe-horned (pardon the pun) into a particular flavor (IMO, there are still too many legacy-things to be really world-neutral, but discussing that would be off-topic in this thread.). The latter... It wouldn't make much sense, because the effect is geared for mounts [I]in general[/I]. Ehm, I don't want to change D&D into a lecture of Biology in other universes. It may be interesting and realistic, but for a game I don't need a level of that detail. I thought, that you were listing possible subtypes, which should be used instead of Mammalian. While I don't see a real counter-argument for having a broader brush in areas farther away from the humans, I don't know a good reason for being that detailed - Humanoid (Anthropoid) wouldn't change, that humans are the center of the scale and the other races aren't so far away from the center, that it would be to have such a fine division even with a humanocentric view. Magic items, which are geared towards a certain race, can still be made, and a Favorite Enemy (Humanoid (Anthropoid)) is more reasonable, as the alternative Favorite Enemy (Outsider) exists, because Outsiders can be encountered in far more shapes - four-legged equines like Nightmares are the same as the humanoid Thri-Keen. [/QUOTE]

Verification