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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="useridunavailable" data-source="post: 3717712" data-attributes="member: 53676">Well, Drow as a core race would probably be an effective tactic to increase the popularity of the game.  After all, there is a certain dark-skinned, scimitar-wielding individual who is presumably recognizable to a much broader audience than are most other available character archetypes.  I would guess that a large number of new players come into the game saying, "I want to play a drow."  IMO, at least without the UA option to decrease LA at higher levels, Drow in 3.x were essentially unplayable at +2 LA, especially when compared to certain other races (*looks accusingly at the guy with the +6 dex bonus and inertial armor*.)As I see it, like it or not, the game's most recognizable character is a drow.  As a company justifiably interested in making money, why would it not be the absolute best possible strategy for WotC to introduce drow as a core character option?  For the most part, new players won't notice that gnomes are missing, and those who would notice their omission can just as easily get their stats from the MM.  So what's the problem?  That gnome lovers will have to wait an extra month to be able to play their favorite characters?Personally, I would see it as a huge mistake for a company hell-bent on increasing the fanbase of D&D not to:1) Include drow as a core race.2) Make drow not suck mechanically.3) Make rangers not suck mechanically (not really related to the thread's topic, but relevant to this tangent.)</blockquote>

Verification