Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Jeremy Crawford Discusses Details on Custom Origins
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8112064" data-attributes="member: 6801228"><p>Yes, but I'm know I'm going to get raked over the coals for it again. </p><p></p><p>It helps break through into the 16+ section of the scores. You can't do that by assigning high scores. And, I have had personal expeirence multiple times that tells me the math of the game really tilts towards being less effective and doing poorly when you only have a 14 or 15 in your highest stat. </p><p></p><p>I'll probably get called a power gaming munchkin (again) for this, but my tables have seen it multiple times, and we really and honestly have come to the conclusion that being actually good enough at something to feel competent beyond the lowest of levels in your primary class goals, requires having at least a 16 in your scores.</p><p></p><p>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>But tougher than a group of humans used to the same? </p><p></p><p>We have to keep in mind that a +2 is meant, mechanically, to be "better than human". And I don't think the Dwarves in the Hobbit show any more endurance or toughness than a similarly weathered group of humans.</p><p></p><p>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That's a fine goal, a commendable one even, but... I don't see it. </p><p></p><p>In fact, I literally cannot see it. the only people who can see you doing that are the people at your table. I can't see you pushing back against the culture that says Dwarves make poor wizards by playing your Int 14 dwarf and being a wizard. Which, despite me acknowledging that mechanically 14 is bad... Story-wise makes your Dwarf a very smart person. On the level of working scientists and researchers (I've been told 16 is around where "Genius" starts)</p><p></p><p>So, mechanically you've proven that the expectations are wrong, but also story-wise very smart dwarf can be a wizard isn't ground-breaking. </p><p></p><p>Also, you want to make a point. You want to make a statement about "differently abled" people... I want to play a dwarf wizard. If I want to make a statement with that character, I'll do something with the backstory, but I don't need to make this into something grand and big and a statement. </p><p></p><p>And, again, it is great you have an agenda by playing against type, but I can't make everything into an agenda. I think every race can be good at every role. I don't want there to be inequalities in my game so I can play against expectations and show there are no inequalities in the game.</p><p></p><p>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I see no reason that it actually makes the game worse. So, it is either neutral or a benefit.</p><p></p><p>And I've listed quite a few benefits, like an easier time showing plane-touched of various races, so High Elf Barbarians, but also High Elf Earth Genasi Barbarians. Seems like it is a net positive.</p><p></p><p>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Seeing more race/class combos that rarely get seen, but would expand upon the lore of the races in interesting ways is a net loss for the game? </p><p></p><p>Well, I could not disagree more strongly with this position if I tried.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Chaosmancer, post: 8112064, member: 6801228"] Yes, but I'm know I'm going to get raked over the coals for it again. It helps break through into the 16+ section of the scores. You can't do that by assigning high scores. And, I have had personal expeirence multiple times that tells me the math of the game really tilts towards being less effective and doing poorly when you only have a 14 or 15 in your highest stat. I'll probably get called a power gaming munchkin (again) for this, but my tables have seen it multiple times, and we really and honestly have come to the conclusion that being actually good enough at something to feel competent beyond the lowest of levels in your primary class goals, requires having at least a 16 in your scores. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- But tougher than a group of humans used to the same? We have to keep in mind that a +2 is meant, mechanically, to be "better than human". And I don't think the Dwarves in the Hobbit show any more endurance or toughness than a similarly weathered group of humans. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That's a fine goal, a commendable one even, but... I don't see it. In fact, I literally cannot see it. the only people who can see you doing that are the people at your table. I can't see you pushing back against the culture that says Dwarves make poor wizards by playing your Int 14 dwarf and being a wizard. Which, despite me acknowledging that mechanically 14 is bad... Story-wise makes your Dwarf a very smart person. On the level of working scientists and researchers (I've been told 16 is around where "Genius" starts) So, mechanically you've proven that the expectations are wrong, but also story-wise very smart dwarf can be a wizard isn't ground-breaking. Also, you want to make a point. You want to make a statement about "differently abled" people... I want to play a dwarf wizard. If I want to make a statement with that character, I'll do something with the backstory, but I don't need to make this into something grand and big and a statement. And, again, it is great you have an agenda by playing against type, but I can't make everything into an agenda. I think every race can be good at every role. I don't want there to be inequalities in my game so I can play against expectations and show there are no inequalities in the game. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I see no reason that it actually makes the game worse. So, it is either neutral or a benefit. And I've listed quite a few benefits, like an easier time showing plane-touched of various races, so High Elf Barbarians, but also High Elf Earth Genasi Barbarians. Seems like it is a net positive. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Seeing more race/class combos that rarely get seen, but would expand upon the lore of the races in interesting ways is a net loss for the game? Well, I could not disagree more strongly with this position if I tried. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Jeremy Crawford Discusses Details on Custom Origins
Top