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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Shades of Eternity" data-source="post: 9543597" data-attributes="member: 10869">...and people complained when I built a strength-based spellcaster. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />*******************The truth is adventurers are special snowflakes, but you need something to measure your special snowflake meter off of.They got rid of species stereotypes only to put them back in the background. At least the species sort of made sense.They fixed it and then immediately forgot.I would keep Tashas (A floating +2/+1, or three +1s, that aren’t attached to any other character creation step) and then list common bonuses under the species as "guidelines."That Way, when you build that one orc who becomes a mighty wizard and likes to terrorize an elf who keeps crying, "Excuse me, princess,"  you should be able to respect the concept.Because most orcs like to hit things with sticks, it makes your orc even more special for wearing a skullcap and stealing the Triforce.I like the species stereotypes, but only to make it easier to play and something to subvert.   For example, I did a small-sized species with a strength bonus (little bears) because the species goes against the common defaults.But there are several quirks to this.One of the side effects is that allowing attributes to be attributed somehow ended up making halflings the furry-footed master race because their luck was supposed to compensate for their lack of height and upper arm strength.</blockquote>

Verification