Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="touc" data-source="post: 9474633" data-attributes="member: 19270">A few thoughts.One, since Roger Moore didn't write the Greyhawk setting, I'd imagine he didn't want to tread on Gygax/Kuntz's original work too much. However, WOTC is not so bound. Moore's concern seemed to be that any new races for players make sense for how Greyhawk was written (e.g. a derro playing as a popular, law-abiding crusader of the Sun God was "illogical").Two, AD&D's non-human races had all the cool powers. Humans had nothing except unlimited leveling and dual-classing. So, there needed to be hesitation about introducing even more races with more powers. That's why he mentions, in this setting, playing a "dragon" would be out of line (both for relative abilities and the setting itself). I remember a gamer at my table who always wanted to play the next great race, regardless of whether it made sense. Who wouldn't want to adventure with his wemic? It has lion's claws! I run a human-centric game, and my gamers and I like classic settings where races have very unique niches with rich, well-developed histories, customs, slang, habits, and so on. Dragonlance and Dragon Age are our most recent ventures. Having a plethora of races just to have a plethora of races doesn't appeal to us. Except, maybe corgi wizards. Cause why not...[ATTACH]381683[/ATTACH]</blockquote>