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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 9078823" data-attributes="member: 7006">Here's the thing about mixing and matching species mechanics when creating a mixed ancestry... I'd have more of a feeling of it being important if those species mechanics didn't just suck.[USER=22779]@Hussar[/USER] is right... when a pair of skills (and not even defined species skills, but just two completely random skills) is considered a defining trait of a species... then the concept of game mechanics defining species is crap.Yes, some of you may find them still necessary for your own happiness.  I understand that and can sympathize.  But if it turns out the designers of D&D have also come to the conclusion that these tiny, inconsequential, barely-used game mechanics they have attached to these species in an effort to "define" them are also pretty much crap... you might have to just accept that things could change.Now that being said... despite my belief that the four game mechanics for each species that do almost nothing to truly "define" a peoples (and I'd be perfectly fine if game mechanics got stripped from all of them and your choice of species was just a narrative and fluff one)... I'm also fine with the idea of creating a mix-and-match pool of species abilities so that players CAN create mixed ancestry characters with a few abilities from each parent race.  That's fine.  The mechanics suck anyway so let people pick and choose.  Nothing's truly going to happen to cause problems with the game rules themselves.  Hell, if D&D allows minmaxers to multiclass Bards, Paladins, Sorcerers and Warlocks in all manner of ridiculous combinations for no other reason than they use CHA and thus you can powergame your way forward... there is not a single mixed ancestry the could be created that would even come close to breaking anything in the game.So just let those people have the opportunity.  It's fine.  It's pointless, but it's fine.</blockquote>

Verification