Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Crit" data-source="post: 8152707" data-attributes="member: 7027023">The only thing moved around right now is ASIs and alignment. I looked at a lot of the races, and to me, 90% of their identity is other things. The origins and engrained features (flight, powerful build, innate spell casting, teifling heritage, Simic Hybrid anatomy) are still the same. To me, those matter the most as well as whatever the setting says. I don't think a Custom Lineage &quot;Elf,&quot; depending on how the DM treats Trance + Fey Ancestry, is really the same as a normal Elf. Age is only immutable if you decide Trance and whatever else to be disposable, which has to be chosen. What it means to play each race depends on stuff like that-- I personally would put Custom Lineage forward only for non-existing races and species. Not to mention, Custom Lineage does seem to lack a lot of meat-on-the-bone compared to actually playing a regular race. I don't think these things are on their way out.The reason ASIs and Alignment were tagged out was because there wasn't much of a reason for them to be coupled as they were. I agree with the idea of ASIs and alignment being determined by environmental factors, rather than unnecessary mention where not needed. Why list something like alignment statistics per race if it, frankly, offers so little? Should it not be a DM's prerogative to say what place or culture results in what alignments? Separately, if you had an Elf who was solely raised amongst Gnomes, why would they know Elvish and not Gnomish?&nbsp; I think that's better- the race alignment suggestions, I think, encourage the generalizations into existing.I don't agree with that. Nothing was &quot;broken&quot; from &quot;power gaming.&quot; I think it's more than fair that no-one is mechanically punished or disadvantaged from race choice. Now you are free to pick whether or not you're disadvantaged, by moving around your ASIs.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Crit, post: 8152707, member: 7027023"] The only thing moved around right now is ASIs and alignment. I looked at a lot of the races, and to me, 90% of their identity is other things. The origins and engrained features (flight, powerful build, innate spell casting, teifling heritage, Simic Hybrid anatomy) are still the same. To me, those matter the most as well as whatever the setting says. I don't think a Custom Lineage "Elf," depending on how the DM treats Trance + Fey Ancestry, is really the same as a normal Elf. Age is only immutable if you decide Trance and whatever else to be disposable, which has to be chosen. What it means to play each race depends on stuff like that-- I personally would put Custom Lineage forward only for non-existing races and species. Not to mention, Custom Lineage does seem to lack a lot of meat-on-the-bone compared to actually playing a regular race. I don't think these things are on their way out. The reason ASIs and Alignment were tagged out was because there wasn't much of a reason for them to be coupled as they were. I agree with the idea of ASIs and alignment being determined by environmental factors, rather than unnecessary mention where not needed. Why list something like alignment statistics per race if it, frankly, offers so little? Should it not be a DM's prerogative to say what place or culture results in what alignments? Separately, if you had an Elf who was solely raised amongst Gnomes, why would they know Elvish and not Gnomish? I think that's better- the race alignment suggestions, I think, encourage the generalizations into existing. I don't agree with that. Nothing was "broken" from "power gaming." I think it's more than fair that no-one is mechanically punished or disadvantaged from race choice. Now you are free to pick whether or not you're disadvantaged, by moving around your ASIs. [/QUOTE]

Verification