Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Asmor" data-source="post: 5021178" data-attributes="member: 1154">I've a somewhat different opinion...The races in the back of the Monster Manual were specifically designed to be used by players, not DMs, regardless of what Mearls or anyone else says.The vast majority of those races are ones which are popular choices for PCs but not represented in the RAW. Gnomes, Warforged, Changelings, Goblins, Kobolds, Minotaur, Drow, etc.It's a bit shady/underhanded. It's like Mike Mearls is sitting at one side of the table, and the players of all those races are sitting on the other side. Mike says, &quot;Look, I'm sorry, but we just can't support all those races right out of the gates. You're just going to have to wait. Now I'm going to set this book down on the table, which has racial writeups, but they're not meant for you guys, and then I'm going to turn my back. And hey, if the book should mysteriously disappear, well, I guess we'll never know what happened.&quot; And then he winks.The idea that they're there for DMs to make NPCs is either misguided or a holdover from 3rd edition. If you are taking a PC race and adding PC levels to that PC race to make an NPC for 4th edition, you are doing it wrong. Even the DMG explicitly tells you the correct way to make &quot;classed&quot; monsters-- by using the class templates on non-classes monsters. And frankly, even that is stupid in my opinion, since if you want to make a monster with a &quot;class&quot; you just say it is that class.But I digress.Yes, the races in the back of the monster manual are meant for players, not DMs. The reason they've got all of those silly warnings is because they may not be balanced, they are not fully developed (e.g. they lack feats), and it's a lot easier for a DM with misgivings to say no to something from the MM which specifically says it's not for players than it is for him to say no to, say, a Goliath from PHB2. In other words, the MM races are basically &quot;betas,&quot; in the software sense of the word.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Asmor, post: 5021178, member: 1154"] I've a somewhat different opinion... The races in the back of the Monster Manual [i]were specifically designed to be used by players, not DMs, regardless of what Mearls or anyone else says[/i]. The vast majority of those races are ones which are popular choices for PCs but not represented in the RAW. Gnomes, Warforged, Changelings, Goblins, Kobolds, Minotaur, Drow, etc. It's a bit shady/underhanded. It's like Mike Mearls is sitting at one side of the table, and the players of all those races are sitting on the other side. Mike says, "Look, I'm sorry, but we just can't support all those races right out of the gates. You're just going to have to wait. Now I'm going to set this book down on the table, which has racial writeups, but they're not meant for you guys, and then I'm going to turn my back. And hey, if the book should mysteriously disappear, well, I guess we'll never know what happened." And then he winks. The idea that they're there for DMs to make NPCs is either misguided or a holdover from 3rd edition. If you are taking a PC race and adding PC levels to that PC race to make an NPC for 4th edition, [i]you are doing it wrong[/i]. Even the DMG explicitly tells you the correct way to make "classed" monsters-- by using the class templates on non-classes monsters. And frankly, even that is stupid in my opinion, since if you want to make a monster with a "class" you just say it is that class. But I digress. Yes, [b]the races in the back of the monster manual are meant for players, not DMs[/b]. The reason they've got all of those silly warnings is because they may not be balanced, they are not fully developed (e.g. they lack feats), and it's a lot easier for a DM with misgivings to say no to something from the MM which specifically says it's not for players than it is for him to say no to, say, a Goliath from PHB2. In other words, the MM races are basically "betas," in the software sense of the word. [/QUOTE]

Verification