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: 8114203" data-attributes="member: 6801228"><p>While I agree with some of your thrust, there are reasons to make strength a consideration. </p><p></p><p>Of the Simple weapons, only the dagger is a finesse melee weapon, making strength important in that respect. </p><p></p><p>Strength is needed to get the best ACs. Platemail's requirement of 15 Str is actually high enough that you are better off just doing a strength build if you are planning on having heavy armor. Additionally, While Plate, Shield, and Defensive gets you 21 AC, studded leather and Dex gets you 17, which is a signifigant downside (shield pops you to 19, but is still a 2 point difference) </p><p></p><p>And, it should not be forgotten that strength is needed for grappling, athletics checks for breaking things in the environment, a few other uses. It is actually one of the more common roll types I see. Yes, Stealth and Perception are even more common, but Strength is up there.</p><p></p><p>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well let me see...</p><p></p><p>Greyhawk Dwarves: Hill Dwarfs are more relaxed and open to outsiders. They tend to start building above ground and then go underground. "They are more perceptive and empathic than their kin." Relying on that to guide relationships and pacts with other races. Mountain Dwarves hold a strong martial tradition, training in armor and weapons. They are also shut-ins, not interacting with other races if they can avoid it.</p><p></p><p>Big difference seems to be Mountain Dwarves fight more and Hill Dwarves make more trade agreements. So, this would be a it. But, let us keep going</p><p></p><p>Forgotten Realms Dwarves: It starts with a bit of their lore, and an interesting line "Gold Dwarves endure. Shield Dwarves Adapt." The Gold Dwarves stayed in their southern kingdom, were driven out and came back with armies to drive out the drow. They tend to stay underground, and are secretive and distrustful of outsiders and even Shield Dwarves. </p><p></p><p>Shield Dwarves are much more explorers and adventures, moving from one location to another quite often. Shield Dwarves are more likely to dwell on the surface and form trade relationships, and are far more open to outsiders. </p><p></p><p>Which, this is really funny. Wanna know why? </p><p></p><p>Because according to the PHB, Shield Dwarves with their open culture and trade agreements with the outside world are Mountain Dwarves. While the shut-ins constantly at war to hold on to their treasures are the Gold Dwarves, who use the Hill Dwarf statistics. </p><p></p><p>So, in Greyhawk, Hill Dwarves with their +1 Wisdom live with trade agreements with other nations. But in FR, Hill Dwarves are martial shut-ins who distrust the world. They literally have the opposite cultures, swapping them. So... which culture produces the +1 Wisdom? Both. They are literally swapped with each other between Greyhawk and FR. So, since either culture can produce the results of the mechanics, then is there really a difference? Or is the difference, fairly arbitrary?</p><p></p><p>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, according to the section of Mordenkainen's, that Tradition is that they are swapped between worlds. Hill Dwarves in Greyhawk are traders, while Hill Dwarves in FR are haughty and war-like. Meanwhile Mountain Dwarves in Greyhawk are Haughty and War-like, while in FR they are more likely to be traders. </p><p></p><p>I can see why you wanted to deflect though, since that shows that the statistics don't match up to the cultures. Well, <strong>traditionally </strong>they don't at least.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Wow, way to deflect. </p><p></p><p>Me: "Which is it, cultural or Genetic"</p><p>You: "If that is how you want ti, it has been this way for 50 years"</p><p></p><p></p><p>So, wonderful, for 50 years has it been Genetic or Cultural? Sinc eit has been five decades you should know which it is, right?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>And horses were the greatest form of transportation for thousands of years. Relying on "it has worked so far" is a poor excuse. Especially since I have been able to rather trivially show that "body type" is clearly not the major deciding factor for these stats.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>So, between magic, genetics, culture, and body types (which can vary from individual) we shoudl just keep doing the same thing you've done for 50 years, because you like it and you think it can't be improved. </p><p></p><p>I mean, it has established some great lore, as I showed with the Hill Dwarves and the Mountain Dwarves, I mean you almost can't tell the difference between them. </p><p></p><p>And, lets not forget all the wonderful lore of half-breeds being hated and despised that we got from the half-elves and the Half-Orcs... with only one of them "traditionally" having a negative charisma score to represent that. Or how the traditional elves like Legolas being shown with constitution penalties despite that having no basis on the "tradition" from Tolkien. </p><p></p><p></p><p>In other words, your appeal to Tradition does not move me.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, turns out I can read (shock!) and since you didn't bother to look it up, well, you can just scroll up and read my response to Maxperson. </p><p></p><p>Turns out it was a useful read for me, to help show that your arguments are not supported by the text of the game. They are only supported by the version of the lore in your mind. Not by RAW.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Chaosmancer, post: 8114203, member: 6801228"] While I agree with some of your thrust, there are reasons to make strength a consideration. Of the Simple weapons, only the dagger is a finesse melee weapon, making strength important in that respect. Strength is needed to get the best ACs. Platemail's requirement of 15 Str is actually high enough that you are better off just doing a strength build if you are planning on having heavy armor. Additionally, While Plate, Shield, and Defensive gets you 21 AC, studded leather and Dex gets you 17, which is a signifigant downside (shield pops you to 19, but is still a 2 point difference) And, it should not be forgotten that strength is needed for grappling, athletics checks for breaking things in the environment, a few other uses. It is actually one of the more common roll types I see. Yes, Stealth and Perception are even more common, but Strength is up there. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Well let me see... Greyhawk Dwarves: Hill Dwarfs are more relaxed and open to outsiders. They tend to start building above ground and then go underground. "They are more perceptive and empathic than their kin." Relying on that to guide relationships and pacts with other races. Mountain Dwarves hold a strong martial tradition, training in armor and weapons. They are also shut-ins, not interacting with other races if they can avoid it. Big difference seems to be Mountain Dwarves fight more and Hill Dwarves make more trade agreements. So, this would be a it. But, let us keep going Forgotten Realms Dwarves: It starts with a bit of their lore, and an interesting line "Gold Dwarves endure. Shield Dwarves Adapt." The Gold Dwarves stayed in their southern kingdom, were driven out and came back with armies to drive out the drow. They tend to stay underground, and are secretive and distrustful of outsiders and even Shield Dwarves. Shield Dwarves are much more explorers and adventures, moving from one location to another quite often. Shield Dwarves are more likely to dwell on the surface and form trade relationships, and are far more open to outsiders. Which, this is really funny. Wanna know why? Because according to the PHB, Shield Dwarves with their open culture and trade agreements with the outside world are Mountain Dwarves. While the shut-ins constantly at war to hold on to their treasures are the Gold Dwarves, who use the Hill Dwarf statistics. So, in Greyhawk, Hill Dwarves with their +1 Wisdom live with trade agreements with other nations. But in FR, Hill Dwarves are martial shut-ins who distrust the world. They literally have the opposite cultures, swapping them. So... which culture produces the +1 Wisdom? Both. They are literally swapped with each other between Greyhawk and FR. So, since either culture can produce the results of the mechanics, then is there really a difference? Or is the difference, fairly arbitrary? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Well, according to the section of Mordenkainen's, that Tradition is that they are swapped between worlds. Hill Dwarves in Greyhawk are traders, while Hill Dwarves in FR are haughty and war-like. Meanwhile Mountain Dwarves in Greyhawk are Haughty and War-like, while in FR they are more likely to be traders. I can see why you wanted to deflect though, since that shows that the statistics don't match up to the cultures. Well, [B]traditionally [/B]they don't at least. Wow, way to deflect. Me: "Which is it, cultural or Genetic" You: "If that is how you want ti, it has been this way for 50 years" So, wonderful, for 50 years has it been Genetic or Cultural? Sinc eit has been five decades you should know which it is, right? And horses were the greatest form of transportation for thousands of years. Relying on "it has worked so far" is a poor excuse. Especially since I have been able to rather trivially show that "body type" is clearly not the major deciding factor for these stats. So, between magic, genetics, culture, and body types (which can vary from individual) we shoudl just keep doing the same thing you've done for 50 years, because you like it and you think it can't be improved. I mean, it has established some great lore, as I showed with the Hill Dwarves and the Mountain Dwarves, I mean you almost can't tell the difference between them. And, lets not forget all the wonderful lore of half-breeds being hated and despised that we got from the half-elves and the Half-Orcs... with only one of them "traditionally" having a negative charisma score to represent that. Or how the traditional elves like Legolas being shown with constitution penalties despite that having no basis on the "tradition" from Tolkien. In other words, your appeal to Tradition does not move me. Well, turns out I can read (shock!) and since you didn't bother to look it up, well, you can just scroll up and read my response to Maxperson. Turns out it was a useful read for me, to help show that your arguments are not supported by the text of the game. They are only supported by the version of the lore in your mind. Not by RAW. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Jeremy Crawford Discusses Details on Custom Origins
Top