Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Verision" data-source="post: 4365035" data-attributes="member: 72236">Maybe it's all in the presentation?First, I'm glade you're not getting snipey. I like civil arguements, even when I completely disagree with the person I'm arguring with. (In other words, no offense taken and no offense meant). Alright, let's get down to it:  By "illegal" I mean that the concept you are working with has been intentionally removed from this edition (there are only two times when the words "Natural Attack" appear in the Player's Handbook; they are both under "Unarmed Attacks"), not that what you're writing is not in the MM. I am contending that Natural Armour and Natural Attacks have been intentionally removed from the game.   Again, I think you mistook my meaning when I said illegal. If Darkvision had been completely removed from 4e and you homebrewed a Drow race with Darkvision, then I would say it's not 4e legal. But, since Darkvision is still part of 4e, homebrewing a race with Darkvision is not illegal.   A natual weapon is being used, but in the same way that the Dragonborn's breath weapon is a "natual weapon". You will notice that the Dragonborn cannot make a claw attack or a bite attack, even though every "humanoid dragon" race in 3.X had an actual Natural Weapon.  In other words, I see these as being two completely seperate ideas. An encounter power that uses something natual to the race (Goring Charge and Dragon Breath) vs an at-will Natural Weapon that cannot be removed from the race.   Again, I point you to the fact that a PC Dragonborn cannot get wings and the Dragonborn in the MM can. Please don't make "Suspension of Disbelief" arguements about D&D mechanics. They just don't make sense. Dragonborn have large, powerful jaws and long, sharp teeth, and yet their "bite" (I.E. unarmed attack) only does 1d4 with no proficiency bonus (exactly the same as a halfling punching you in the mouth). If that does not "warp your suspension of disbelief", then why does the Minotaur goring you for the same damage "warp your suspension of disbelief"? If your Minotaur hits someone with his horns, then it's just an unarmed attack in the same way that a Dragonborn biting someone is just a normal unarmed attack. The only reason you think it warps the "Suspension of Disbelief" is that you have read the rules in the MM and you know the mechanic behind the attack and you know that if the PC does it it's not the exact same mechanic. Suspension of Disbelief should not include the mechanic (which is something that cannot be accessed from within the game) but should only include the Fluff (I.E. the way the characters in the game would view it. To a person in the game, a minotaur hitting someone with his horns doesn't change between a PC and a Monster; they can't see what die you're rolling or what modifiers you're adding)  I've already stated that as far as the question "Does the Gore attack REALLY make that much difference, over the course of 30 levels, as far as power balancing" is concerned, my answer is NO. That doesn't mean you aren't using a concept that was intentionally left out of 4e.   Again, you are arguing balance, I'm arguing leaglity. I've already stated my position on balance, can we please talk about legality? (I.E. whether or not the concepts you are using are part of 4e)  There is no such thing as a combat menuver called Disarm (I.E. like Bullrush or Charge). That doesn't mean someone can't knock you out and take your weapons (I.E. Disarming you).   Now, this sounds (emphasis on 'sounds') more 4e legal. If you just made racial feats for this, then I wouldn't have an arguement (I.E. Feat 1: Must be minotaur; Gain +2 to unarmed attack rolls. Feat 2: Must be minotaur; Your unarmed attacks deal 1d6 dmg. Heck, you could make it just one feat that does both, if you really wanted to), but I still think having a Natrual Attack/Weapon as a base ability for a PC race is "illegal".  I'm starting to think that we might have to "agree to disagree" on this one.</blockquote>

Verification