Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8118475" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Hmmm. I see options. Options are optional. For example, it says "you can create an NPC". By saying can they are acknowleding it is a choice. It nessecarily means that you "can" also not create them with the player's handbook. You may also want to look at the Monster Manual, which states that you "can" customize NPCs by adding racial traits. However, since it is an option, that means that you also do not need to add them, and they can still represent that race. If you see options as iron-clad rules, that might be part of your problem in this point.Wow... just wow. A third of all dwarves are as graceful as elves, and that doesn't ruin anything, in fact it is... well nothing according to you. But, we absolutely need to have races with mods so that 2/3 of all elves are graceful, or no one can be unique and it is all rubber masks. Again, that is a 25% difference in likelihood. That is all. And, Variant Human is an option, and that option could also go into Dex, or it could not. Dropping the population to below the dwarven percentage (your 30%) based solely on that option being possible is just straight up deceitful math. Heck, I can't even say it is math, because you offer no support for that decision. 37.5 is the +0 Dex option. Even if I decide that half of all humans do not put a +1 is dex, and they do not take a dex feat (which by the way, makes them act like elves with their 62.5) then all I need to do is average those two numbers (and I want to point out this is half of all humans being variant, and every single variant choosing to ignore dex with both of their +1's. This is the most extreme example, and essentially would not happen)(37.5+50)/2 = 43.75And, since we assumed that variable, lets go the other direction.(50+62.5)/2 = 56.25So, Humans are between 43.75% and 56.25%. So, it is potentially possible for the majority of all humans to be as graceful as elves. Either way, I think 1/3 of the population being of a particular type is what we call a "super minority" That many dwarves being graceful is very significant. Just to throw a number out there. In 2017 India had a female population that was 48.18%. The lowest globally was Oman which was 34.16, less than the population of Dwarves that are as graceful as elves. Would you say that with that percentage, there are effectively no women with Oman citizenship? You did say "Just over 1/3 to close to half isn't enough for the race to be anything." in terms of Dwarves being graceful. So, if 37.5 percent isn't signifigant to be considered, then logically 34.16% smaller and therefore worth even less consideration, correct? Or, is it more reasonable to assume that you do not need over 50% of the population to be something, for it to be a significant matter?----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Well... yeah. Not all DnD players are Trekkies. And, you can like the show without having to like their depiction of races.You are moving far outside of the context of this discussion to even bring in the global trek fandom though.  Right. That is an extreme position that no one else has taken. But, if you want to advocate for them to abandon 5e and write an entirely new edition, go ahead. I don't find this change nearly that large.  I addressed Max's points above. And, if you want to say I am playing Devil's Advocate, well, I am also arguing that the designers of the game are not liars. I don't think that I know that the truth is that they are liars. In fact, I find it quite believable, that when you take in the DMG and MM that they did not intend the bonuses to be applied to NPCs across the board as a default. Which is what Max and now you are saying is "known to be true" Instead, I find it very easy to think that since they were thinking in terms of PC archetypes, that they were thinking that all Dwarf PCs would get +2 Con, but that not every single dwarf ever created by the DM would automatically get a +2 Con applied to their final scores. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Which cases don't you agree with, because over the last week I have legit tried to break this, and I have found nothing that could not have already been done within the game. Maybe you already banned something at your table that would allow for this, but DnD Beyond hasn't banned any official content, and it is from official content that we should determine the state of the game, not people's preferred houserules for content.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------And yet, they are still officially sanctioned content....</blockquote>

Verification