Do you want Tieflings in the phb?

[Kae'Yoss]

The concept of a paladin-like class that represents the champions of various ethos is not lame. Still referring to them as 'paladins' is lame though.

No one complained when they ceased to be human only. And historical paladins were all human.

I don't think that paladin has to refer to LG champions of a divine cause. Why would other churches have no such champions?

 

[Klaus]

No one complained when they ceased to be human only. And historical paladins were all human.

I don't think that paladin has to refer to LG champions of a divine cause. Why would other churches have no such champions?

I dunno... the term "paladin" for me is inextrincably associated with the LG champion. I'd rather have the broader class named something else, like Divine Champion or Divine Knight, and save "Paladin" for the LG sect.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

I dunno... the term "paladin" for me is inextrincably associated with the LG champion. I'd rather have the broader class named something else, like Divine Champion or Divine Knight, and save "Paladin" for the LG sect.

Okay, but only LG human divine knight types get to call themselves paladins. The rest still must call themselves divine knight or divine champion, or whatever the class is officially called. Only if you're LG and human you may call yourself paladin.

I mean, if we play grognard, we may as well play with all the rules.

 

[Klaus]

Okay, but only LG human divine knight types get to call themselves paladins. The rest still must call themselves divine knight or divine champion, or whatever the class is officially called. Only if you're LG and human you may call yourself paladin.

I mean, if we play grognard, we may as well play with all the rules.

Cha 17 FTW, baby! Yeah!

 

[Nifft]

Only if you're LG and human you may call yourself paladin.

I'd buy that. It'd be fine if every race has some specific PrCs (and Paladin was a Human-specific PrC).

EDIT: And there were similarly powerful Divine Warrior options available for other races.

Cheers, -- N

 

[messy]

i voted "no." i'd reluctantly be ok with them only if aasimar are included, as well.

messy

 

[mhacdebhandia]

I guess I asked a slightly different question than I intended to, although I like the list you gave. If you were to say "okay, you can only play these eight races" to your players, which eight (or fewer) would you pick? If the answer is "it depends on the setting" (as it very well might be), suppose this is one of the first steps in creating a new one of your own.

The last time I kicked around some ideas for a setting, I used these races:

• Humans
• Changelings (Eberron Campaign Setting)
• Shifters (Eberron Campaign Setting)
• Poison dusk lizardfolk (Monster Manual III)
• Dromites (Expanded Psionics Handbook)

I suppose I would say that my personal tastes run to near-human or properly nonhuman creatures; I don't have that much interest in the "demi-human" range where elves, orcs, dwarves, and the like live. However, my previous post included those races based on the premise that I was deciding what would go in the first Fourth Edition Player's Handbook, which should cater to as many people as possible without giving up D&D's unique attributes.


I wouldn't like to see Dungeons & Dragons become a game that catered only to my tastes in fantasy - I'd just like to see it cater to my tastes more than it does. The inclusion of tieflings as a default PC race in the next edition is a welcome step in that direction, but I wouldn't want to cut the Tolkienoid races out just because *I* hate that crap. Besides, if they weren't in there, I wouldn't be able to be as impressed with Eberron's completely reinventing them as I have been.

 

[Nifft]

The last time I kicked around some ideas for a setting, I used these races:

• Humans
• Changelings (Eberron Campaign Setting)
• Shifters (Eberron Campaign Setting)
• Poison dusk lizardfolk (Monster Manual III)
• Dromites (Expanded Psionics Handbook)

If I were writing my next setting today, it would use these races:

• Humans
• Changelings (Eberron)
• Elan (XPH)
• Kalashtar (Eberron)
• Tieflings (homebrew, human transformational)
• Mojh (homebrew, human transformational, inspired by Arcana Evolved)
• Kobolds (homebrew, created by Mojh)
• Giants (homebrew, human transformational, inspired by Arcana Evolved)

... so basically all "races" could trace themselves back to humanity, including kobolds, each of whom would know which mojh calved it off.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Kaodi]

Someday, I think it would be interesting to try a game where the only races present were Changelings, Kalashtar, Shifters and Warforged.

What would be really nuts would be to say that the warforged had existed for eons after the fall of the old races, and had created those three, instead of being created by them, hehehe...