Flavor Mish-mash and favored classes (what 4e got wrong)

[Klaus]

I didn't see this posted anywhere, so forgive me if I'm rehashing..

Consider that the devs know what iconic class/race combinations are and wrote the bonuses to specifically play against it. Given the ferocity of min-maxing in D&D ::raises hand:: if the Dwarf was built to play a fighter, you would probably see 90% dwarf fighters and only a smattering of other classes. By writing the stats against type, it encourages those of us who game primarily because we like math to try a wider variety of class/race combos.

To stay on the Dwarf for a moment:

Sure, the Dwarf doesn't have a bonus to Str. BUT:
- They have bonus to Wis and Con, the two secondary abilities of Fighters. One helps with Combat Superiority, the other with HP and additional damage from hammers and axes (the traditional dwarven weapons).
- They can heal themselves as a MINOR action.
- They aren't slowed down by heavy armor.
- They are good at resisting forced movement.

All that works in favor of the Fighter. Specifically, the iron-clad, axe-wielding archetype.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Plus some people are acutely aware of what it's like to be human and don't see a reason to bother pretending anything if they're just going to replicate the experience of their real life all over again.

Sure, because your life is exactly like a human's might be in say, Greyhawk, Blackmoor, Forgotten Realms, Eberron. . .

And only some people (i.e., humans) 'are acutely aware of what it's like to be human'. . .? Niiiice.

 

[xechnao]

another angle is contemplation of what the life of a different kind of creature would be like...

Plus some people are acutely aware of what it's like to be human and don't see a reason to bother pretending anything if they're just going to replicate the experience of their real life all over again.

But these creatures do not exist. They are the product of mythology or fiction which is always originated from human sensibilities. What you are talking about is better served by studies or documentaries regarding actual animal wild life and the like. I am not sure what you are saying here is really valid.

 

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

Sure, because your life is exactly like a human's might be in say, Greyhawk, Blackmoor, Forgotten Realms, Eberron. . .

But I can still imagine what it is like to be them physically and psychologically in a short amount of time, no point in playing a long game like that for me. I want a life I can't comprehend on a minute or two, and for that I need something different from a human.

And only some people (i.e., humans) 'are acutely aware of what it's like to be human'. . .? Niiiice.

Okay, that was stupid of me to say. What I really meant was that there are some people who aren't comfortable with their current bodies (including its humaness) and like to explore what another kind of body, another kind of existence, would be like.

But these creatures do not exist. They are the product of mythology or fiction which is always originated from human sensibilities. What you are talking about is better served by studies or documentaries regarding actual animal wild life and the like. I am not sure what you are saying here is really valid.

I am saying that the point of playing a non-human is to contemplate what it would be like to be them from the inside. What you seem to be saying is that if you are not something you should never try that, you should only look at a subject from the outside. Based on that logic no one should ever play a character that is not very similar to themselves.

 

[xechnao]

I am saying that the point of playing a non-human is to contemplate what it would be like to be them from the inside. What you seem to be saying is that if you are not something you should never try that, you should only look at a subject from the outside. Based on that logic no one should ever play a character that is not very similar to themselves.

I am just saying what seems to naturally appeal to me. And I understand there is something to it more than what you are saying since Dragonborn were made with breasts for a reason.

When you are saying "to play a character", "play" may hold many meanings some of which are valid, some not so. For gaming-gamist reasons races a variety of races as a choice could hold some interest for example.

OTOH to socialize with other humans (players) as if I were a different creature, while a human being passes on relevant information (DM) is something really impossible IMO.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Okay, that was stupid of me to say. What I really meant was that there are some people who aren't comfortable with their current bodies (including its humaness) and like to explore what another kind of body would be like.

Thanks for having the courage to admit to that, and for explaining further. I was about to hit the 'off switch' otherwise, to be honest.

And hey, FWIW, I have no issue at all with people (including me, or at times, my players) playing nonhumans. Also, yeah, there are some very interesting aspects to doing that, among them exploring the nature of such beings, from the inside out, as it were.

But, there are times where - in my opinion - 'humans only' is equally not only a valid decree, but indeed, more appropriate. Sometimes, singularly appropriate. Which, again IMO, is the worldbuilder's and/or GM's call.

Er, or game designer's. . .

 

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

Thanks for having the courage to admit to that, and for explaining further. I was about to hit the 'off switch' otherwise, to be honest.

Yeah, I'm quite guilty of doing this a lot.

But, there are times where - in my opinion - 'humans only' is equally not only a valid decree, but indeed, more appropriate. Sometimes, singularly appropriate. Which, again IMO, is the worldbuilder's and/or GM's call.

I agree that it's a perfectly valid setting idea, I can understand that, even if I prefer another way. I was trying to give someone who didn't understand non-human races a similar insight into the opposite playstyle.

 

[rounser]

Sure, because your life is exactly like a human's might be in say, Greyhawk, Blackmoor, Forgotten Realms, Eberron. . .

And only some people (i.e., humans) 'are acutely aware of what it's like to be human'. . .? Niiiice.

The human condition weighs much heavier on some of us, Aus Snow, and makes us long for the Shakespearean pathos of roleplaying a monotreme dragonman with dragonmanboobs.

Personally, there's no other outlet for the angst I feel every minute of every day, in this mortal coil, living like Conan, having to fight off giant snakes in the supermarket on the way to the milk aisle. The alternative is to have to cry into my pillow at night while whispering "oh the humanity" to the sound of the ever ticking clock, over and over again.

You wouldn't understand. You wear your humanity lightly, and skip with gaiety under it's purvue, whereas for some of us it weighs beyond measure and brings us down, down, down.

 

[xechnao]

I was trying to give someone who didn't understand non-human races a similar insight into the opposite playstyle.

Well my-life-with-master (an indie game) or even white wolf games where dramatics are more focused and established make more sense to me than following the adventuring career of an elf as an adventurer-elf. In fact while D&D wants to provide some rules and fluff for this it really can not play like this: people play and follow the adventuring career of an elf as an adventurer, not as an elf. This means that "elf" is a trait of their "adventurer" identity, not the other way around.

 

[billd91]

Which is why goblins are more charistmatic than devas.

The little buggers have personality and the confidence to know it. Makes sense to me if that's how 4e is defining goblins.