Races & Classes spotted?

[Nahat Anoj]

EDIT - Really not worth it, I'm sorry I posted.

 

[withak]

You could argue, also, that what you've said right there is one humdinger of a straw man, too.

I think WOTC has got some really good ideas for 4E, and I'm looking forward to the majority of them. I can't fault them from anything they've said re: mechanics, or cleaning up the game generally. I just wish they'd get the flavour of some of the specifics under control, though, because it has issues (IMO). Or at least put them in a supplement where they can be ignored. But no.

I'm pretty much "meh" about Dragonborn as well, but we have so little info about what they're going to be like in 4e. (Or at least I hope we don't -- if they're not too dissimilar from their 3.5e counterparts, I don't think I'll be using them at all.) I'm going to wait and see what comes out of the first preview book. Who knows, it could be really cool stuff.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

But even more interesting to me....even more compelling....is what I see in the classes list....

Didja see that?

DRUID

Woah.

Right next to Swordmage, which is NOT in the PH.

 

[Kintara]

You could argue, also, that what you've said right there is one humdinger of a straw man, too.

I think WOTC has got some really good ideas for 4E, and I'm looking forward to the majority of them. I can't fault them from anything they've said re: mechanics, or cleaning up the game generally. I just wish they'd get the flavour of some of the specifics under control, though, because it has issues (IMO). Or at least put them in a supplement where they can be ignored. But no.

No, my point is that you are implying that they are getting D&D wrong, when, really, it's just that it's changing in a way you don't like. That's fine. You deserve to have the version of D&D you want as much as I do. It's just that the version we're getting is the one we're getting. I think it makes more sense to argue with that established.

Edit: In other words, I would respect what you were saying if you said, "I don't like the idea of Dragonborn, and I don't like that 4e will have Dragonborn in it. It's a waste of space for me because they won't be in my campaign." Fine. I get that. I'll use them, though. Or at least someone at my table will, and I won't begrudge them for it.

 

[Mad Mac]

And WOTC is prescribing every D&D game eladrin, and dragondudes. Oh and "warlords". By default.

I thought you liked generic fantasy? Seriously, reptile-men are one of the oldest fantasy races around, especially in sword and sorcery type stuff. Didn't show up in Tolkein, granted, but all over the place. And Eladrin sound like they're going to be closer to Tolkein-esque high elves than D&D elves have ever been. The Warlord is a very recognizable archtype that's never been doable in D&D.

I just don't see the tragedy here. Should every edition of D&D have the exact same races and classes? Even the ones nobody really plays anymore except out of habit? They're introducing new races and classes, but it all strikes me as very archtypical stuff that is very common in fantasy outside of D&D. I like that, personally.

 

[Tquirky]

No, my point is that you are implying that they are getting D&D wrong

I'm arguing that they've got D&D's core wrong. Not necessarily D&D, but the core, yes. And I'm making my case. You don't have to agree, but there it is.

I think it makes more sense to argue with that established.

And in other news, the sky is usually blue during the day.

but all over the place

As monsters, rather than "our heroes". Yeah.

 

[Kintara]

I'm arguing that they've got D&D's core wrong. Not necessarily D&D, but the core, yes. And I'm making my case. You don't have to agree, but there it is.

Okay, fine. I misunderstood.

Are the 3.5 races what you consider core D&D? Edit: Oh, this was the problem last time. It's because they are "generic." I don't think they are. I don't even really think there is such a thing. I think maybe we just don't think about this stuff the same way....

 

[Tquirky]

Are the 3.5 races what you consider core D&D?

Nope. Half-elf and half-orc could be gone without being missed by me (and maybe gnome - they seem redundant...apparently the designers agree). I'd welcome aasimar and tiefling sooner than them, but maybe with better names (aasimar sounds a lot made up). Wouldn't miss halflings either, they're truly Tolkien.

I'd welcome lizardfolk sooner than dragondudes, and the reasons aren't logical. But that's aesthetics for you.

But anyway, this is academic - the core should serve the most people, and it's getting specific. Elves and dwarves, with mythological basis, can't really be considered anything but generic. Dragondudes also bring the whole "monsters as PCs" can of worms into things, but a lot of people see no problem with the heroes and monsters being cut from exactly the same cloth.

 

[Kintara]

But anyway, this is academic - the core should serve the most people....

See, this is where we agree. Unfortunately, there's not much more we can say, though, because my opinion doesn't match yours after that.

Edit: You think historically, and think the races should be safer representations from sources like Tolkien and earlier. I personally think that tastes have changed, are changing, and will change more later. If that means Dragonborn, I wouldn't be surprised.

 

[JoeGKushner]

I look at it this way:

Let's take 5 of the most popular fantasy worlds of the last few centuries- Arthurian Britain, Middle Earth, Hyboria, Nehwon (the world where Lankhmar is) and Thieves World.

Dragonborn fit in three (Hyboria, Nehwon and Lankhmar), Tieflings in 4 (everything but Middle Earth).

Halflings and Elves on the other hand, fit in only one, Middle Earth.

So maybe some of these racial changes are an attempt to make D&D more of a toolkit for emulating fantasy fiction and less of an attempt to make a LOTR game with the serial numbers filed off?

It's been a while since I've read some of the materal you're talking about, but in both cases, wouldn't dragonborn and tieflings be the types of things players are killing? No dragonborn is going to walk into a Lankhimar. Maybe Santuary if you're GM is feeling generous that day. In Hyboria, if the GM doesn't describe every human meeting one of those races as having an instant and total distruct of the "inhuman" nature of these outsiders, then you're not really using Hyboria.

I'm not saying you're wrong in other aspects, that say, halflings and gnomes, as written, are a D&D thing, but ironically enough, you've left out one of the biggest fantasy series of all. The Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance. Both have dozens, if not hundreds of books.