Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Scribe" data-source="post: 8442966" data-attributes="member: 6807152">No, I don't think giving a creature beyond 'its mean' is the issue. The issue is couching everything said about a subject to in essence say nothing at all.Pick something for the yeti. 'They are generally docile, but a blizzard enrages them.'Maybe they are always helpful. Great.As to the Gold Dragon? Certainly, exceptions exist. That's been true forever and ever. Because the DM is always free to change things.The question of evil beings, has also had me confront the nature of Gods in my settings, because I feel a setting like FR does actually remove agency from certain races.Gruumsh is an evil God who factually created Orcs. If Gruumsh created Orcs to be bloodthisty reavers then that's what they are. The clerics enforce that, because God is real and can demonstrably be proven, spoken to, channelled, and even SEEN.That's an issue. That is something I believe Eberron and other settings have correctly changed, and a move D&D will embrace fully in 5.5.Now if you want to make a setting where the dominant goblin culture is friendly? Go nuts.You want a setting where Succubi are just hippies and all about free love? Go nuts.Devils are really just lawyers, undead are just afraid of leaving their loved ones, and Halflings are body builders?Great.But yes, please say something.Amethyst dragons are Neutral, and contemplative.Crystal are Chaotic (Positive)Topaz are Chaotic (Negative)Emerald are Lawful and reclusive.Sapphire are Lawful and regimented.Are there exceptions? Of course.Are their typical traits, behaviors, attitudes and preferences?Yes. That's why I like Fizbans.</blockquote>

Verification