Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Faolyn" data-source="post: 8899460" data-attributes="member: 6915329">Meh. I think it would actually be a lot better for the DM, to give them the go-ahead to say &quot;no, I don't want these things in my game.&quot; How many DMs make a world that includes the standard races--elves, dwarfs, halflings, tieflings, orcs, gnomes--because they feel they have to, that every D&amp;D game has to have them? A while ago, my table co-created a world that was supposed to be the base of operations for a Spelljammer game that never happened. We picked the native races based entirely on the things we wanted to play, not what were in the PHB (aarakocra, dwarf, elf, goblin, goliath, loxodon, tabaxi, with humans as an invasive species). I think it makes for a much more interesting (to us, at least) world, and is far better than going for the same-old standard races.Plus, if the DM was going to take away a race, they're going to do it anyway, whether or not the book says so--which is &quot;meaner&quot; because the PHB implies that the species are supposed to be there. I'd rather play in a game where the DM says &quot;this world has X, Y, and Z species in it&quot; than one where they say &quot;I don't like X, so you can't play one.&quot;I've gotten into SWADE recently, and the books all provide templates for a ton of different, non-human races/ancestries, with zero expectation that you're required to have any of them. They're just there, so the GM doesn't have to make the stats themselves.And what's &quot;minimal&quot; for base options? Only Tolkien species? Only current species of Tolkien + dragonborn, gnome, and tiefling? Only the most popular races according to old polls on DDB? Only humans, with every non-human species off in another book somewhere? Those are all extremely valid options, after all.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Faolyn, post: 8899460, member: 6915329"] Meh. I think it would actually be a lot better for the DM, to give them the go-ahead to say "no, I don't want these things in my game." How many DMs make a world that includes the standard races--elves, dwarfs, halflings, tieflings, orcs, gnomes--because they feel they [I]have [/I]to, that every D&D game [I]has [/I]to have them? A while ago, my table co-created a world that was supposed to be the base of operations for a Spelljammer game that never happened. We picked the native races based entirely on the things we wanted to play, not what were in the PHB (aarakocra, dwarf, elf, goblin, goliath, loxodon, tabaxi, with humans as an invasive species). I think it makes for a much more interesting (to us, at least) world, and is far better than going for the same-old standard races. Plus, if the DM was going to take away a race, they're going to do it [I]anyway[/I], whether or not the book says so--which is "meaner" because the PHB implies that the species are supposed to be there. I'd rather play in a game where the DM says "this world has X, Y, and Z species in it" than one where they say "I don't like X, so you can't play one." I've gotten into SWADE recently, and the books all provide templates for a ton of different, non-human races/ancestries, with zero expectation that you're required to have [I]any [/I]of them. They're just there, so the GM doesn't have to make the stats themselves. And what's "minimal" for base options? Only Tolkien species? Only current species of Tolkien + dragonborn, gnome, and tiefling? Only the most popular races according to old polls on DDB? Only humans, with every non-human species off in another book somewhere? Those are all extremely valid options, after all. [/QUOTE]

Verification