Excerpt: Racial Benefits

[MindWanderer]

Not impressed not depressed. My only thought is how will they balance the classes with 2 bonus stats vs the one. Even if the one is floating its no where near as good as 2 +2s.

Lets say player X wants to be a mighty warrior, and wants to be big and strong.

I'll play a Human and put by floaty stat bonus into strength.

or

I'll play a dragonborn get +2 to strength and +2 to charisma or whatever.

Dragonborn is at a clear advantage here, will the other racial benefits of the human make up for there lacking in the attribute department. ( I'm kind of curious if any races other abilites will stack up against the dragonborns. A breath weapon is fairly slick, getting natural flight at higher levels is slick as well.)

This is especially true when the 2nd stat bonus is a kind of universal benefit stat. Eladrin seem to be at a kind of suck point in that both of there +2 to stats are the reflex defense booster, but at least there are some skill benefits. But lets say you are a Elf cleric, you get your fancy +2 wisdom, but also gain a +2 dex and who doensn't like a +1 to reflex saves.

Not necessarily. Cha is a dump stat for fighters (Wis is more useful to them), so you have to decide whether the human's other bonuses--an extra feat, an extra skill, an extra at-will power (the only way we know of to get one of those), and +1 to all defenses, are worth the stuff you get for being a dragonborn (breath weapon, Dragonborn Fury, Draconic Heritage, and +2 to two skills).

I think WotC realized exactly what you're getting at, which is why they gave humans a blanket +1 to all defenses. Unless you really want the crazy Reflex defense of a halfing (+1 racial, +1 dex), a human remains a viable choice.

 

[Torchlyte]

A) It's a collaborative game. If the players and the DM aren't on the same page or aren't willing to meet each other halfway, no one is going to have any fun.

B) DMing is work. It's rewarding, but it's still a lot of effort running a game. If you're not willing to DM, you're not really in a position to criticize IMO. Go run your own game if you don't like it (with people who are on the same page as you, see point A).

C) Everyone has a point where their versimilitude snaps. If you prefer "low-weirdness" then stuff like dragonborn goes past that point for you. For others it's no big deal, but at some point they too will draw the line. "What do you mean I can't play a space marine with power armor and rocket launcher, who crash landed on this backwater fantasy world when seperated from his company by evil space-elves? Stop making me a pawn in your intellectual masturbation!!!"

A) True enough, but sometimes as a DM you'll have a better time if players enjoy their options. This point isn't black and white.

B) Players have to please a DM to some extent, but the DM has to please players as well. I would say the DM has to try harder than the players to please the other party.

C) As long as crash-landed space marines aren't Core, this point is too far removed from the norm to be valid.

Personally, I think Dwarves are a dumb, cliche, single-character race. I've considered ruling them out of games, but then I decided that it wasn't worth it. If nobody wants to play a Dwarf then I'm being a hardass for no reason. On the other hand, if someone does want to play a dwarf then I'm making them that much less happy to play the game. I think the tradeoff for this kind of restriction just isn't worth it unless the race clashes with something fundamental.

Not necessarily. Cha is a dump stat for fighters (Wis is more useful to them), so you have to decide whether the human's other bonuses--an extra feat, an extra skill, an extra at-will power (the only way we know of to get one of those), and +1 to all defenses, are worth the stuff you get for being a dragonborn (breath weapon, Dragonborn Fury, Draconic Heritage, and +2 to two skills).

I think WotC realized exactly what you're getting at, which is why they gave humans a blanket +1 to all defenses. Unless you really want the crazy Reflex defense of a halfing (+1 racial, +1 dex), a human remains a viable choice.

In a point buy system all the stat bonuses are useful, because I can use the points I would have spent putting CHA at 10 to raise STR or whatever. Honestly, I think humans are getting the shaft.

 

[hong]

And really, you just "don't like it"? How do you think WE feel about getting our creative jusices flowing on a character concept and you say "No, not in my world". Is our creative choices really so devalued in comparison to yours? Are we your pawns in your intellectual masturbation, or do we have the right to have fun?

Yes.

 

[drjones]

Wow. That is incredibly offensive.

Why on earth would the way I envision my gamewolrd be offensive? You are expressing that you like this particular race but are tired of others and that is fine but you are offended that I have different tastes? Unless you are playing games with me I really cannot imagine why you would ever give a flip.

 

[drjones]

And really, you just "don't like it"? How do you think WE feel about getting our creative jusices flowing on a character concept and you say "No, not in my world". Is our creative choices really so devalued in comparison to yours? Are we your pawns in your intellectual masturbation, or do we have the right to have fun?

Dude, no one is making you play with any DM, if you really are not having fun you should not be playing with them. There is a big difference between a DM on a power trip who does not give a rip if you have fun and one who has a coherent idea for the gameworld they want to create and encourages players to get into it.

But mostly I think the DM is also playing the game, they have just as much desire to have fun as the player and are probably investing considerable time and effort into making the game fun for everyone. Dosn't everyone who tries dnd act as a player and as a dm at some point? If you really can't find someones game to get into that fits what you enjoy why can't you start your own?

I mean if I want to play a warforged in a Forgotten Realms Campaign and the DM points out that they are really an Eberron thing and he/she does not think it would be a good fit then they are some huge jerk for not letting me do whatever I want? Get real.

 

[Ten]

For all those who replied, excuse me, I am nerdraging, I am sure you can sympathize. I have had more than a few bad DMs in the past, it is really frustrating to come into a game excited about playing, lets give a crazy example, a Tiefling and the DM says "I'm sorry, I don't personally like tieflings so it doesn't matter how you feel about them, they don't have any place in my game". I know that following the logical progression of my arguments could lead to "lol spacemarine in forgotten realms", and for that I am sorry, but really, I did not seek to imply that the player be given cart blanche to do stupid crap.

I DO agree that gaming needs to be cooperative, I simply decided to take it a bit further since these boards are pretty much 90% DMs. It really just gets old hearing things like "I don't like X so my players can't play X in my games". Perhaps because I extrapolate it to my own experiences with DMs. And sadly, "Get another DM" simply isn't a very good answer. I play with friends, and however good or bad they may or may not be at DMing, I can't exactly find another gaming group off the street.

Anyway, the crux of the issue to me is that blanket banning of a race or a class in a general fantasy world (In which neither are overpowered or RADICALLY out of sync) with no attempt to compromise is ridiculous. It is the equivilent of the DM saying "As you are speaking to the king, a kobold dressed in finery approaches from the rea-" with the player suddenly breaking in "I'm sorry, but Kobolds don't exist in this world. They don't fit in with my vision of how things are run. I've spent hours and hours running through this campaign, working on the state of things. Pick another race for this NPC".

DMing is a lot of one-sided propositions intrinsically, and I have just seen too many issues become one-sided that should have been compromised.

 

[hong]

For all those who replied, excuse me, I am nerdraging, I am sure you can sympathize.

No.

 

[Sammael]

No.

Seconded (even if it makes me hong's bitch).

 

[beverson]

Actually, you are making an assumption that I believe to be incorrect. You can only retrain 1 feat per level, hence why you can only have 7 Paragon Feats at level 14. Once you hit paragon tier at 11, and then 12, 13, 14 you retrain a heroic feat into a paragon feat. This does not necessarily make any implications whatsoever as to how many feats are available at heroic tier, except that there are obviously at LEAST 4. Of course, you could be 100% correct, but that excerpt certainly doesn't set anything in stone as far as heroic feat numbers go. I'm still guessing it'll be 6 (1,2,4,6,8,10), but time will tell.

Not to mention the fact that we've heard a WotC employee blog stating that his 10th level playtest character had 6 feats, which is another strong indicator that the progression is 1,2,4,6,8,10.

 

[katahn]

OK, lets look as the actual prerelease information. From the Tier Excerpt:



Notice the part about 7 feats, 3 from Paragon levels. That means that a regular character will get 4 (5 for human) feats in its first 10 levels. I don't know whether are at 1st, 3rd, 6th and 9th level, but I would give him the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise. Please try not to ridicule another poster before you have all of the facts about the game.

That's seven paragon feats, not seven feats period. Three feats come from paragon levels, up to four others can be retrained into paragon feats, the rest presumably can be left at the heroic tier.