Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 6340969" data-attributes="member: 1465">You have to consider that there are 2 different ideas about humans being versatile and "good at anything" (compared to other races of course):a- they can do everything at least decently (jack-of-all-trades)b- they can do more things excellently (more specialties)Bonus feats and skills tend to represent b, while a flat increase to all 6 scores tends to represent a. Another thing that could represent b would be granting humans the Rogue's expertise, while another representing a would be the Bard's jack of all trades.They are different concepts, and personally I largely prefer b.Honestly "we can do anything" tells me nothing, because Elves PC can be anything, and so can Halflings and Dwarves. They have no restriction whatsoever. They might at worse have a relative -1 in the most important stat compared to default humans, but wait a few levels and they will reach the same 20 cap. You can say it's their identity in terms of fluff, but for players characters I don't think it matters at all.I complained in feedback since day 1 of playtest, and for almost 2 years, but eventually we were a minority and we lost.I think we're just trying to put the right importance. Most of the time I pick a race just because I feel up to play that for narrative reasons. But since they decided to continue with the design choice of having races mechanically different, we naturally want them to be on par. So if they haven't changed the Half-Elf and Half-Orc since the playtest I'll be disappointed because even at first look those two felt clearly inferior to the standard races, and they deliver a feeling like "want to play this race? you deserve less than the other players". Sometimes that can even be appropriate (if want to play a crippled awaken slug, it doesn't sound like it has to be on par with elves and humans), but is it appropriate for a race that's been a fairly common PC race for 3 or more editions? I don't think so.Anyway, notice that here I am not really concerned about Humans vs Elves vs Dwarves vs Halfling, because those are different enough to make the comparison difficult for me. Instead I am concerned about the different options for human characters. Specifically I want to make sure that if I allow both human options and if I add even more options, no player will feel they're getting the shaft for choosing one over the other.Absolutely agree, alone the fact that humans can get feats immediately is a significant benefit IMO.My concern is that feats are optional. The human variant gives a reminder about that saying "use the variant if you allow feats". After bragging for 2 years that feats will be optional, I think WotC should have thought about including a human variant that doesn't get 6 +1 but also doesn't require anything optional. With a little bit more design effort, they could have offered other bonus proficiencies (weapons, armors, tools, languages or even ST) on stuff that's mandatory, instead of a feat.Yeah that's what I am trying to figure out...</blockquote>

Verification