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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 3959896" data-attributes="member: 7635">No, it hurts those with an established homebrew setting and no interest in adapting it. As a starting DM, I would have KILLED for something mildly fleshed out in terms of a setting out-of-the-box. Best I had was my friends Cyclopedia (Mystara) and whatever the 2e core books assumed, which was tantamount to squat for years. Having something semi-solid as a "default" would have made making my own homebrew much easier, if for no other reason than to have a template to base a world, town, pantheon, etc off of. Bare in mind also that the terms of "acceptable fluff" have changed from edition to edition. Especially when it comes to how they affect game-rules. "Females have a lower strength threshold because women are generally weaker than males""Dwarves had no love, trust or aptitude for arcane magic and thus never are wizards""Elves have spirits, not souls, and cannot be raised from the dead except via a wish""Halfling refuse to wear shoes, having thick, leatherlike souls on their feet to protect them""Gnomes have an irrational hatred of kobolds over a long-standing feud between their respective deities. As such, gnomes attack them a +1 to hit""The somatic components of bard-spells are relatively simple, so they ignore spell failure in light armor (but not heavier armor or shields)"There is no reason for these rules other than fluff, but we have either accepted them or changed them as we saw fit. I see no reason why GWA is any different than ignoring race/class restrictions or that devil-born empires any harder to handwave than halfling cobblers.</blockquote>

Verification