Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dausuul" data-source="post: 5410087" data-attributes="member: 58197">Three thoughts on the subject.First, that's not nearly a long enough post to require a warning. You should see the text walls some folks put up.Second, in my view, the DM does have a say on what classes and races are in the party. Specifically, the DM decides up front which classes and races are available in the campaign world. The players are free to choose from the menu of options the DM offers, and the DM shouldn't try to dictate who picks what; but the DM chooses what goes on the menu in the first place.Third, I felt 3E handled this issue very well by making humans mechanically one of the strongest race picks. So nobody was forced to play a human, and nonhumans didn't face any of the old level cap stuff, but you tended to see mostly-human parties anyway, because it was hard to beat the bonus feat, extra skill points, and flexible multiclassing.4E stepped back from this, which I find sad. Essentials has given humans a significant power-up with Heroic Effort, but I would have preferred to see them get a second floating stat bonus instead. The fact that you can't get +2 to both your primary and your secondary stat is a significant drawback for humans; if they had two floating stat bonuses, humans would once more become the "do-anything" race suitable for almost any build.</blockquote>