Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Q&A: 09/27/2013
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 6190046" data-attributes="member: 1465"><p>The answer about the Human race being as it is because they want to provide an "easy" race is a bit of a bummer.</p><p></p><p>It's the same mistake as in previous editions thinking that the Fighter should be the "easy class". This was bummer because players should not be forced to think "I am a beginner, I should play a Fighter" or "I am an expert, I should not play a Fighter". People should play a Fighter if they want to play a Fighter, obviously! Then the best RPG will let them choose between an easy Fighter and a complex Fighter. It's ok if some classes like Mage are impossible to make simpler than a certain basis, it's not-ok if the designers start with the assumption that some classes should be simple and others should be complex. </p><p></p><p>So how about races then? Well it's less of a bummer, but still a bummer. It's ok to think that trying to <em>roleplay</em> an Elf who easily lives hundreds of years or a Dwarf who lived underground until yesterday is going to be more difficult than roleplaying a human. It's not-ok to make a race purposefully low-complexity, when players normally choose race for roleplay/concept reason (ok, many choose it for exploiting mechanical benefits and min-maxing, but it's not related to complexity).</p><p></p><p>So how about this... How about, instead of having a "simple" race which forces every Human character to be simple, instead having a Human race that is just as complex as the others, but then having an option for <em>everyone</em> no matter the race, to have +1 to all stats <em><u>instead</u></em> of all the racial benefits package?</p><p></p><p>Beginners could play a human, dwarf, elf, halfling or whatever just because of the image/concept, and instead of dealing with all those little bonuses, they just get to increase all scores by +1. This way, there is a simple, easy, low-complexity option for race, without forcing the character <em>concept</em> to be "human", and without forcing non-beginners who want to play a human PC to get the easy package.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Li Shenron, post: 6190046, member: 1465"] The answer about the Human race being as it is because they want to provide an "easy" race is a bit of a bummer. It's the same mistake as in previous editions thinking that the Fighter should be the "easy class". This was bummer because players should not be forced to think "I am a beginner, I should play a Fighter" or "I am an expert, I should not play a Fighter". People should play a Fighter if they want to play a Fighter, obviously! Then the best RPG will let them choose between an easy Fighter and a complex Fighter. It's ok if some classes like Mage are impossible to make simpler than a certain basis, it's not-ok if the designers start with the assumption that some classes should be simple and others should be complex. So how about races then? Well it's less of a bummer, but still a bummer. It's ok to think that trying to [I]roleplay[/I] an Elf who easily lives hundreds of years or a Dwarf who lived underground until yesterday is going to be more difficult than roleplaying a human. It's not-ok to make a race purposefully low-complexity, when players normally choose race for roleplay/concept reason (ok, many choose it for exploiting mechanical benefits and min-maxing, but it's not related to complexity). So how about this... How about, instead of having a "simple" race which forces every Human character to be simple, instead having a Human race that is just as complex as the others, but then having an option for [I]everyone[/I] no matter the race, to have +1 to all stats [I][U]instead[/U][/I] of all the racial benefits package? Beginners could play a human, dwarf, elf, halfling or whatever just because of the image/concept, and instead of dealing with all those little bonuses, they just get to increase all scores by +1. This way, there is a simple, easy, low-complexity option for race, without forcing the character [I]concept[/I] to be "human", and without forcing non-beginners who want to play a human PC to get the easy package. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Q&A: 09/27/2013
Top