Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8705373" data-attributes="member: 6801228">IF the only thing that made you special was that other people weren't allowed to play rogues and you weren't allowed to be a wizard, then you aren't really special. Also, yes, clearly the lore and design that doesn't make them feel special doesn't make them feel special, and discussing ways to change that with people is a way to address what we do want. I'm not particularly interested in giving them dwarven toughness, that seems to be a bit unfair to dwarves. I'm not really sure what we could want from "nimbleness" because that is a such a broad and oversaturated area it could be anything. And bonuses to throwing things is just... weird. So your 2e or 1e version of the race also doesn't seem to fit into a modern design. But it is difficult to discuss with you how we could even change things, because you often don't even know what rules have changed. I'm not trying to be dismissive, but I've noticed this a lot where you will say "it works fine for me, becuase I'm not using the rules you are" which... isn't helpful.I fundamentally disagree. Nothing about your race determines whether you can worship the gods or worship nature (cleric or druid). Nothing about your race determines if you can devote yourself zealously to a cause, hone your body and mind, or break with the norms of society for the left handed path or for the wilds of the world (Paladin, Monk, Rogue, or Ranger). Nothing about your race determines if you can learn how to fight, or if you throw yourself into fights with a supernatural fury (Fighter or Barbarian). Nothing about your race determines if you can study magic, study engineering, study music, make deals with otherworldly entities or be born with magical powers (Wizard, Artificer, Bard, Warlock or Sorcerer) Allowing the combinations doesn't make the game lesser, because it tells people that any combination of things is possible and supported.I actually had experience with the opposite some time ago. Some friends desperately wanted to play pathfinder to do a specific genre of game. I agreed and tried building a character. I had an idea of what I wanted, and picked the race that fit and noticed they mentioned an ability that worked with a specific class, so I started building the character. Only, one of my friends pointed out that despite having an ability directly linked with the class, the race had a restriction that completely ruined any attempt to use that class, and it was completely nonviable. I could have gone forward with it anyways, played that nerfed character, but I didn't I made something that worked. And you know what? I'm still being constantly overshadowed by people who knew the system better and built something better. If I'd gone with my original idea? It'd have been a joke and if I didn't quit, I'd have rerolled a new character. Needlessly limiting race/class combos or setting restrictions where only certain things are viable, is bad game design for a Tabletop RPG in my opinion. All it does is funnel people into making the same decisions, and punish those who don't.Where in my view I see that as nothing but a positive.</blockquote>

Verification