Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="kaomera" data-source="post: 3294899" data-attributes="member: 38357">I can understand this. However, so far the discussion seems to be one side saying &quot;The drow are hampered so much by their disadvantages that they are not a viable choice as a race.&quot; and the other side saying &quot;The disadvantages of the drow warrant the disadvantages they have been saddled with.&quot;. Both sides are looking at the same set of rules, there's no real confusion in that respect. However, what one side thinks is obvious and unarguable the other simply does not agree with.Myself I'm fine with drow the way they are. Two of my players are currently playing drow and they certainly seem to be having fun with their characters. Things went extremely rough on them when they where ECL 3, but I'm fine with that and they've continued playing the characters so I assume that they are too. I don't expect that my or their experiences are going to automatically reflect what others will get out of the same rules; IMHO the whole point of D&amp;D (or any RPG) is to take it and make it yours. However this experience (in part) leads me to feel that the best recourse for those who don't like the way the drow is balanced is to either re-balance it with house rules (or third-party products; both Goodman Games and Green Ronin have products out that might be of use, although I do not own them and therefore can't comment on any specifics) or else to simply not use the race. I simply don't see any other constructive options, myself. (Doesn't mean I'm right, just that I don't see them.)I don't think &quot;is this balanced&quot; really comes out as much of a rules discussion, as such. Both sides are working from the same rules, they just see the repercussions of those rules reflected differently in their games. Making statements that are (or get construed as) absolute about this sort of things just seems to end up with people getting hot under the collar.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="kaomera, post: 3294899, member: 38357"] I can understand this. However, so far the discussion seems to be one side saying "The drow are hampered so much by their disadvantages that they are not a viable choice as a race." and the other side saying "The disadvantages of the drow warrant the disadvantages they have been saddled with.". Both sides are looking at the same set of rules, there's no real confusion in that respect. However, what one side thinks is obvious and unarguable the other simply does not agree with. Myself I'm fine with drow the way they are. Two of my players are currently playing drow and they certainly seem to be having fun with their characters. Things went extremely rough on them when they where ECL 3, but I'm fine with that and they've continued playing the characters so I assume that they are too. I don't expect that my or their experiences are going to automatically reflect what others will get out of the same rules; IMHO the whole point of D&D (or any RPG) is to take it and make it yours. However this experience (in part) leads me to feel that the best recourse for those who don't like the way the drow is balanced is to either re-balance it with house rules (or third-party products; both Goodman Games and Green Ronin have products out that might be of use, although I do not own them and therefore can't comment on any specifics) or else to simply not use the race. I simply don't see any other constructive options, myself. (Doesn't mean I'm right, just that I don't see them.) I don't think "is this balanced" really comes out as much of a rules discussion, as such. Both sides are working from the same rules, they just see the repercussions of those rules reflected differently in their games. Making statements that are (or get construed as) absolute about this sort of things just seems to end up with people getting hot under the collar. [/QUOTE]

Verification