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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8115096" data-attributes="member: 6801228">sighI know we are discussing the subraces, that is all I'm discussing.So, if it doesn't matter why, then it doesn't matter if we change it? I mean, we have the game designers telling  us that it won't break the math of the game. The reason why the races have their bonuses doesn't matter. So... why defend it? There is no reason, so there is no reason to keep it.Max, you keep missing the point. To a degree that is astounding. The PHB Tells us that these two races are mechanically identical. People claimed that they had their bonuses do to culture. The sources we have tell us that those races are culturally incompatible. I don't care that you think setting lore is irrelevant, that is not the point. What we are finding in this discussion is that it was not in fact decided that Hill Dwarves would get a +1 Wisdom due to their culture. It was decided that they would get a +1 Wisdom, and then we would have to jam in any explanation that sort of fit for why. So, at this stage, we seem to have two options for going forward1) Admit that culture has nothing to do with why a race has the bonuses it has. Because we can demonstrate with official material that cultures that are very dissimiliar were given the same treatment. 2) Admit that since culture is supposed to matter, and the current system is doing a poor job of emulating that, that Tasha's rules will allow us to get closer to the designers intended design of the subraces. oh wait, false dichotomy. We can also just keep endlessly telling each other they are wrong until we spiral this thread completely to death. That doesn't actually move us forward, but it is an option.Then why are the same stats given to different cultures? THAT is the point I keep trying to hammer in, and you keep saying that setting lore can change between settings. That is true, and also irrelevant.Okay, I think I've got it. You don't believe that Gold Dwarves use the "Hill Dwarf" mechanics. You think that the PHB is lying to us, and that Gold Dwarves actually use a different set of mechanics. Because that is literally the only thing the PHB is telling us in this scenario. The mechanical +1 Wisdom dwarf is both the Hill Dwarf of Greyhawk and the Gold Dwarf of FR. Since specific beats general, and the PHB is subservient to the lore, and that somehow frickin matters in this, the only thing that could mean is that the +1 Wisdom Dwarf is not the Gold dwarf. So, is it the mechanical Mountain Dwarf? That is what I've been saying. So then I would be right. Or, is there a specific FR product that gives us a third and fourth dwarven statblock that replaces the Mountain and Hill dwarf mechanics? Because somehow specific beats general applies, so where are the new mechanics that I can use to play the FR specific dwarves? Because if they are the PHB dwarves, mechanically, then I'm right, and specific beats general does not apply. Like I've said.I am not going to argue definitions with you Max. I have found greater success breaking steel walls with my bare hands. So, this will be my last word on this part of the issue. Optimism (noun): "hopefulness and confidence about the future or the successful outcome of something."Hope and Confidence. If you are still suspicious and untrusting, then you lack confidence in your hopes. The reason Optimism is not "Hopefulism" is because it requires that component of confidence, by definition. "Realistic Optimism" is just hope, no confidence, therefore it is not Optimism. And, just to cover on down the line. "Hopeful" means having qualities that inspire hope. and "Hope" has the following definitions:1) to cherish a desire with anticipation : to want something to happen or be true2) (archaic ) trust3) to desire with expectation of obtainment or fulfillment                                                               None of which are Optimism. Because, again, Optimism requires Hope and Confidence that that hope will be met--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I've seen a few different fixes for Dragonborn over the years. One of the big ones was increasing the breath weapon and making it a bonus action (which makes it much more powerful) I've also seen the Ravenite version from Wildemount being used well. Darkvision and a counter-attack move. But yeah, Dragonborn needed another design pass to be certain. But the moving of the stats I think just highlights that, since it makes us focus more on those abilities that turn out to be a little weak.</blockquote>

Verification