Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Henry" data-source="post: 1999089" data-attributes="member: 158">One has to remember that one extra feat, while good, is not gamebreaking because most really good feats require chains of at least one or more feats to gain. It will give a human a leg up, but the special abilities of most races will more than make up for it. Take power attack, which is less useful until you are higher than first level , or cleave, which gains more usefulness when you actually CAN take down a creature in one hit, or dodge, whose real strength is in feats like mobility, spring attack, etc. Compare it to halflings, who gain tons of bonuses directly relating to survivability. Compare to dwarves, which are the most ability-laden core race in the game. (And stonecunning is FAR more useful than you may realize, because STONE is probably the most common material besides wood ever encountered in a D&amp;D game. <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&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />) Dwarves gain bonuses against giants (to which trolls and ogres and hosts of others belong) and orcs, they gain stability, they have no encumbrance effectively, bonuses to saves, etc. Beyond this, humans SHOULD be a viable and desirable race to play in the game, unlike in previous versions of the game. Humans used to suffer from horrible ego problems in previous editions; at low level campaigns (the majority of those played), humans were the least played race in a plurality of campaigns. Now, people play humans because they want to, but also because it offers a slight incentive to play. D&amp;D keeping the humanocentric roots desired by the creator of the game is not a bad thing, IMO.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Henry, post: 1999089, member: 158"] One has to remember that one extra feat, while good, is not gamebreaking because most really good feats require chains of at least one or more feats to gain. It will give a human a leg up, but the special abilities of most races will more than make up for it. Take power attack, which is less useful until you are higher than first level , or cleave, which gains more usefulness when you actually CAN take down a creature in one hit, or dodge, whose real strength is in feats like mobility, spring attack, etc. Compare it to halflings, who gain tons of bonuses directly relating to survivability. Compare to dwarves, which are the most ability-laden core race in the game. (And stonecunning is FAR more useful than you may realize, because STONE is probably the most common material besides wood ever encountered in a D&D game. :)) Dwarves gain bonuses against giants (to which trolls and ogres and hosts of others belong) and orcs, they gain stability, they have no encumbrance effectively, bonuses to saves, etc. Beyond this, humans SHOULD be a viable and desirable race to play in the game, unlike in previous versions of the game. Humans used to suffer from horrible ego problems in previous editions; at low level campaigns (the majority of those played), humans were the least played race in a plurality of campaigns. Now, people play humans because they want to, but also because it offers a slight incentive to play. D&D keeping the humanocentric roots desired by the creator of the game is not a bad thing, IMO. [/QUOTE]

Verification