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="ivocaliban" data-source="post: 2029357" data-attributes="member: 17596">I think that the only way these things are broken is if you allow new material for only one race, while banning it for the rest. For instance, if you allowed Humans to take Able Learner, Heroic Destiny, Fearless Destiny and Protected Destiny from Races of Destiny, but then you ruled that Elves couldn't have the new feats granted them in Races of Wild...that would be broken.It seems to me the real problem here is a dislike of Elves and a fear that Humans might no longer be the best choice for a Wizard. Heaven forbid that Elves, whose favored class is Wizard, could actually be better at it than Humans! Besides, to say that the extra feat Humans get doesn't matter is rather silly, because (within reason) no matter what a Human Wizard takes it's something he won't need to waste another feat on further down the road. Not only does a Human Wizard get a headstart, but he/she will pretty much always be in the lead when it comes to feats and skill points. I also don't buy into the Elves have more PrCs than any other race argument and here's why: Sure, Elves can choose almost any PrC a human can take and still have access to Elven PrCs, but it's pretty clear that many open-to-all PrCs weren't designed with Elves in mind. While it's certainly not impossible, I wouldn't expect to see too many Elven Reaping Maulers, for example. All said and done, it's been shown several times that Dwarves based on race alone are "broken" when compared with the other races, but I suspect no one is too concerned with that one. I'm willing to allow Elves what they need to be a superior Wizard, since they're going to be inferior or maybe break even in most other positions.</blockquote>

Verification