NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8110484" data-attributes="member: 6801228">I'm not a Tolkien Scholar, but I think if you have to get to the point of "but which elves were better in which ways" and "or did it all come from their personal and close relationship to their gods to get all that" I think we've moved beyond "Tolkien elves were dexterous and that was it"------------------------------------------------------------------------------Elves should get a +2 to Dex, because Elves are more dexterous as shown by their +2 to Dex. Circular logic doesn't seem like a great place to go, especially since, if we want to base this back into Tolkien inspiring Gygax I would point out that Hobbits (which are halflings) were not particularly dexterous. They weren't running over snow and ice and performing the feats Legolas did. And with this change, Elves can still be more dexterous than the baseline. But they can also be more graceful and beautiful, or stronger, or wiser or any of the other traits that Tolkien gave his elves. If I want to emulate Galadriel, I'm not exactly looking for her parkour abilities and her being an excellent shot with a bow.Edit: I see that you thinkthis is linear, because you start with your assumption assumed. That elves are in fact more dexterous. While this is generally true, it is not always true. I have read literature where elves are literal plant people, or in fact no more skilled than humans, just longer lived.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Okay, if you want to gimp your character to be weaker for story reasons.... you still can. You can still play that Dwarven Bard with +2 Strength and +2 Con and even put your lowest stat in charisma. The difference is that it is your choice now, not a restriction placed upon you by the system.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I feel like you entirely missed the point. The point isn't that an all-human team sucks. The point is that you can tell the difference between a human fighter and a dwarf fighter. They aren't the same character at all. Similiar? Of course, they are both fighters, but they are also very different. And if they aren't that it is a problem. And, like Cadence said. If DnD had not come out with the ability for people to play other races, and a different game did, then DnD would have to adapt or die. Most Fantasy and Sci-Fi TTRPGS allow for the players to be one of multiple "races" because that offers more freedom to explore the most common tropes of those genres.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I always have to chuckle when people quote this, because wow is there no good way for it to be taken. For example, it is rather easy to look at that quote, and the idea that making everyone have super powers and tech that would allow them to compete with mortal gods born with power unattainable, and say that equality is evil. After all, if everyone is equal, then no one is special and if no one is special that is bad. I mean, that was Syndrome's "dark future" everyone has the tech to be equal to a man born with the ability to bench press trains. Everyone has the ability to defend themselves against a woman who can turn invisible or a man who can cut stone with his eyes.Likely because it doesn't make sense from our perspective. I've never seen a Dwarven Wizard. It is unexpected for me. Seeing more of them will be interesting. But I have seen an Elven Rogue. Quite a bit. In fact, nearly all the time. High Elf rogue with Booming Blade. Yawn, boring, next please. More Dwarven Wizards and potentially fewer Elven Rogues (because people may want to try Tiefling Rogues, or Gnomish Rogues) sounds like a win-win-win for me. All of those "play against types" that you want to keep being able to play? I'd like to actually see them played. I'd like to finally see a Dwarven Wizard, but as things stand, no one at my tables wants to play one. If they become so common as to be boring... well, it least they are different than what is currently so common as to be boring.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------And honestly, I think this is where I differ from the detractors of Tasha's the most. I have never seen a Gnome fighter, A Dwarven Wizard, An Elven Paladin, or a Half-Orc warlock. I think those sound like fun concepts though. Those are characters I would be interested in seeing. And no, I'm not going to see them as is. It has been nearly 6 years, no one at my tables is going to go for playing a character with a 15 as their highest stat. We've tried that a few times, it was always an issue. Every single time, it caused the player to have less fun. Designing around challenges might be fun for people who like the mechanical puzzle of DnD, but that isn't a concern for me. I solved enough of those puzzles a long time ago in this edition. They don't interest me. Especially since, the clear answer is not to play against presumed type.The mechanical puzzle tells me that those characters are less optimal, and therefore should not be chosen. Tasha's gives those characters a chance to make it to the table. And maybe the future of DnD is now a grey wasteland where everyone is the same, and it is so boring to see your 8th Dwarven Wizard with yadda yadda yadda. And none of us will have fun anymore, because there is no challenge to design around. But, not only do I think that is not the case, I think I can prove it is not the case by pointing to another game that has existed for quite a few decades. Pokemon is not a hard game. In fact, beating pokemon as it is designed is trivially easy. When fans wanted more of a challenge, they came up with the Nuzlocke rules, which increased the difficulty of the game. So, in that grey wasteland of the future where everyone is bored because challenge no longer exists? I imagine we would invent our own challenge. Maybe by doing something radical, like not use the optional rules and have static Racial ASI's again. Just a thought.</blockquote>

Verification