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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dragonhelm" data-source="post: 6188778" data-attributes="member: 3867">You might be surprised. In every Dragonlance game I have played in or DM'd, there has been a kender (or a half-kender!). I have also played a gully dwarf (tragic character, really). Tinker gnomes are more rare, but I think that's because there have not always been good rules for tinker gnomes in D&D. The 3.5 rules have been the best thus far, though I thought the 4e artificer worked well for them.These three races get a bad reputation for being "silly". Because, you know, someone somewhere decided that silly was bad. I can attest, though, that each of these races are far more. I've seen tragic versions of each, for example. It's all in the way you play them.As I mentioned above, kender were quite common. Thing is, we knew not to be jerks. Kender are far more than kleptomaniacs. They are the children of the world, approaching life with a child-like wonder. They have no fear, and life is an adventure. They were highly influential with the 3e halfling, who no longer resembled the hobbits of Middle-Earth.What I have discovered is that the race isn't broken so much as it is the players. How many of you have played in a game where someone is playing a human rogue, and they rob everybody blind? Those same people are drawn to kender, focusing on handling and not making a well-rounded exemplar of the race.One thing I would advise with kender is to let the DM roll for their handling. And make certain you have a variety of items. A kender may very well throw away an expensive item if a pretty purple stone catches their attention instead. A kender would rather have pink fuzzy bunny slippers than coin.Kender are perfectly viable races to play. It is a shame that some bad players have given kender an undeserved bad reputation.</blockquote>

Verification