jmartkdr2
Hero
And that's how we get 47 different kinds of elves each with about a sentence worth of distinct lore.The answer to that issue is to make additional race as class options to cover these discrepancies. It can and has been done.
And that's how we get 47 different kinds of elves each with about a sentence worth of distinct lore.The answer to that issue is to make additional race as class options to cover these discrepancies. It can and has been done.
More like 47 different elven cultures if we went with the Level Up approach.And that's how we get 47 different kinds of elves each with about a sentence worth of distinct lore.
I said 5%. @Micah Sweet said they didn't like that number; the rest of their statement implied they wanted the 5% to be bigger and the remainder smaller. I suggested a method to "split the difference", granting more mechanical weight to the race overall (thus increasing the overall percentage to more than 5%) by adding on some post-character creation mechanics to allow for opt-in mechanical heft; their existence would also provide trope strengthening by their simple presence within the game rules. But since the bulk of the mechanical weight is post-character creation, that still allows for ample room for those who want to define their character against trope definitions to do so.5% is 5%, that doesn't leave much room to split the difference in, and adding it later doesn't increase how big 5% is.
You certainly can do it (and I know what you're thinking of, but no need to derailThe answer to that issue is to make additional race as class options to cover these discrepancies. It can and has been done.
Sure. You have the dwarf (fighter). And the dwarf crusader (cleric) and the dwarf locksmith (thief) and the dwarf artificer (wizard) and the dwarf caver (ranger) and the dwarf skald (bard) and the dwarf battlerager (barbarian), etc etc. Maybe we can put them in separate books so that if you don't have Bruenors Guide to Mithral Hall, you can't play a dwarf priest.The answer to that issue is to make additional race as class options to cover these discrepancies. It can and has been done.
Then add more lore. It's really not rocket science.And that's how we get 47 different kinds of elves each with about a sentence worth of distinct lore.
I like multiple approaches to an issue in game design. You put like three different option per race in the corebook, and save the rest for a supplement.Sure. You have the dwarf (fighter). And the dwarf crusader (cleric) and the dwarf locksmith (thief) and the dwarf artificer (wizard) and the dwarf caver (ranger) and the dwarf skald (bard) and the dwarf battlerager (barbarian), etc etc. Maybe we can put them in separate books so that if you don't have Bruenors Guide to Mithral Hall, you can't play a dwarf priest.
Or, you know, just open the 12 classes to all races and quit reinventing the wheel...
It was only a problem because so many of them were tied to FR & great wheel even when they should have slotted into other settings & because elf was pretty muc the gotoAnd that's how we get 47 different kinds of elves each with about a sentence worth of distinct lore.
That's true, but it's a matter of taste. I'm not a fan of cosmopolitan being assumed as the default that the rules all rally around, no matter popular it seems to be in modern fantasy gaming. How about we allow for both combined and separate cultures, and stop insisting that everything be the way the current feelings want it to be?You certainly can do it (and I know what you're thinking of, but no need to derail). A core issue, I think, is that race-as-class generally argues for races being relatively insular with distinct societies; I think a lot of more modern fantasy approaches lean towards various races living together in a fairly cosmopolitan manner.