Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Don Incognito" data-source="post: 4663414" data-attributes="member: 81448">WRONG.Or, at the very least, the evidence is inconclusive. The highest of the oversized PCs is only level 2, and nobody is going through the combat logs with a fine-tooth comb in order to make sure every PC is on the same level, damage-wise.Also, keep some things in mind. 1, the monster manual specifically states that the monster races aren't exactly balanced for PCs. I think people need to get that 3.5e notion out of their heads that a race that's acceptable for an NPC doesn't necessarily mean that's its balanced for a PC.  To quote it specifically, "note that these traits and powers are more in line with monster powers than with player chararcter powers...The DM SHOULD CAREFULLY CONSIDER WHICH MONSTER RACES, IF ANY, TO ALLOW AS PCS IN HIS OR HER CAMPAIGN."  This, to me, says that WotC KNOWS that the monster races (at least, some of them) are just straight-up BETTER than the one's in the Player's Handbook. My guess is that the Dragon article on minotaurs is an attempt to drag the race back in line with the more "normal" races. When Player's Handbook 3 comes out, I expect to see similiar changes to Githyanki and Shadar-Kai (and maybe even Kobold).2, WotC is less concerned about fixing broken gameplay than, say, Blizzard. In WoW, if the entire <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />ing community feels that a certain spec is OP (read: pre-wrath Ret Pallies), then Blizzard may have to nerf it. But if they do, their nerfs are going to be surgical; nerfing is never fun. WotC doesn't have that problem; due to the nature of D&D, the DM can just magically "fix" any problems that he or she (but let's face it, most likely he) encounters regarding power balance. Houseruling is fun like that. These nerfs (and I think we can all agree that the changes to the minotaur are nerfs) are suggestions as to how DMs can go about fixing the problem, rather than a stern "THIS IS HOW MINOTAURS WORK NOW".That said, I'm for the changes.</blockquote>

Verification