NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hong" data-source="post: 4192770" data-attributes="member: 537">A barrier to acceptance that applies equally is better than a barrier to acceptance that applies unequally.You can't create new content without breaking a bit of old content.There is also not much reason for illithids, githyanki, githzerai and displacer beasts to exist either. But you can't discard everything at once, or the fanbois will cry; so we start with rakshasas and move upward. Beholders are allowed, having taken on a life of their own in fantasy games other than D&D (and the same for drow).It is new created content that is consistent thematically with existing material in other forms.It would also be pretty pointless to say that stupid monsters must be kept without regard for the fact that they are stupid.Stupid monsters in profusion are most certainly a real barrier to acceptance, and prevent reasonable monsters from being designed to replace them.And there is no reason that reconcepted rakshasas cannot exist in D&D, as long as they are suitably modified and updated for the times.Like rakshasas.There is plenty of missed opportunity to turn rakshasas into something other than a D&D ananchronism.It is important that the name is linked with Eberron, why?Tch. The idea is to free the concept from needless specificity. If you tell me that rakshasas now need to have a hundred hands and a dozen heads, in keeping with the image of Ravana, I will tell you that you are merely substituting obscurity for anachronism.Rakshasas with backwards hands can certainly exist at the same time as rakshasas without backwards hands. As nature spirits, there is no reason why they shouldn't be able to take on a myriad different forms, on top of their shapechanging powers. But rakshasas with backwards hands have no reason to be held up as being more representative of such a race than other rakshasas.Give it time.Thus proving that Eberron, too, suffers from 25-year-old D&D anachronisms. And in fact adds on another layer of 8-year-old D&D anachronisms. by adhering to this idea that the rules inform the design of the world.And it could be significantly improved by removing these anachronisms.What?This is not new weirdness. This is old weirdness. This is outdated weirdness. This is outdated weirdness with no reason to exist other than one random source that EGG saw once upon a time. There is no reason to maintain this weirdness other than soppy sentimentality.You'll notice that I never said anything about Bahamut, who has indeed taken on a life of his own.You mean like Golden Wyvern Adept, White Raven Onslaught, and Exploding Fuchsia Midget...?If they need a non-core setting like Eberron to help them, then the concept has already failed.</blockquote>

Verification