Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Igwilly" data-source="post: 7171337" data-attributes="member: 6801225">Honestly, don't become too attached to age while considering fans.Personal experience: I'm 22 years old. I started playing D&amp;D with 4e.I have found memories of 4e, and I think it did a lot things right.However, I'm reading a lot of AD&amp;D 2e. It has been a great experience to me because it opened my eyes to questions I thought I knew about, but have always being dissatisfied.One example: races. In many games, character race doesn't matter. I always hated it but now I know why.For example, I played a lot of Final Fantasy XIV (while I could afford it). There, race is pretty much cosmetic. Not only I thought to be a huge waste of design space, but there was the problem that *everyone* was a Miqo'te. The few who weren't were Lalafel Marauders (you can see how gnomes would look with gigantic axes). It got tiresome an annoying.On 3e and 4e: both games say that any race can be of any class, but that's not quite right.I had to deal with many (more than I want) players who were dissatisfied with their character simply because they chose the &quot;wrong&quot; combinations. Meanwhile, players who chose the &quot;right&quot; combinations were clearly outclassing other players.In the end, I want race choice to matter, but I don't want to make false promisses. Moreover, in my conception, what marks a race is not the miscellaneous benefits.&nbsp; Dwarves aren't unique because of their abilities with rocks; neither are elves with infravision. Their broad aptitudes with classes, be it Fighters, Archers, Mages, Priests, or other: that's what marks me.And hey, I'm a cool DM. If you want to &quot;fight against the odds&quot;, I'll support you. But in order to do that, there needs to be odds to fight against...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Igwilly, post: 7171337, member: 6801225"] Honestly, don't become too attached to age while considering fans. Personal experience: I'm 22 years old. I started playing D&D with 4e. I have found memories of 4e, and I think it did a lot things right. However, I'm reading a lot of AD&D 2e. It has been a great experience to me because it opened my eyes to questions I thought I knew about, but have always being dissatisfied. One example: races. In many games, character race doesn't matter. I always hated it but now I know why. For example, I played a lot of Final Fantasy XIV (while I could afford it). There, race is pretty much cosmetic. Not only I thought to be a huge waste of design space, but there was the problem that *everyone* was a Miqo'te. The few who weren't were Lalafel Marauders (you can see how gnomes would look with gigantic axes). It got tiresome an annoying. On 3e and 4e: both games say that any race can be of any class, but that's not quite right. I had to deal with many (more than I want) players who were dissatisfied with their character simply because they chose the "wrong" combinations. Meanwhile, players who chose the "right" combinations were clearly outclassing other players. In the end, I want race choice to matter, but I don't want to make false promisses. Moreover, in my conception, what marks a race is not the miscellaneous benefits. Dwarves aren't unique because of their abilities with rocks; neither are elves with infravision. Their broad aptitudes with classes, be it Fighters, Archers, Mages, Priests, or other: that's what marks me. And hey, I'm a cool DM. If you want to "fight against the odds", I'll support you. But in order to do that, there needs to be odds to fight against... [/QUOTE]

Verification