D&D General The Monsters Know What They're Doing ... Are Unsure on 5e24

[Thomas Shey]

So a strength score off 10 is OK?!

Have racial bonus ever been greater than +2?

I seem to remember something with a +4 back in the 3e days, but I couldn't tell you what after all this time.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I seem to remember something with a +4 back in the 3e days, but I couldn't tell you what after all this time.

Half giants from Dark Sun.

 

[Maxperson]

I trust other players at the table whether GM or player until proven otherwise.

Same, because if I can't trust them, I can't enjoy the game.

 

[AlViking]

If someone thinks not doing that is generically a bad policy, is there a way for them to say that you won't be annoyed by? I'm suspecting not.

We've been told repeatedly that if we don't allow any possible species, it's a bad thing. No ifs, ands or buts. There is never a good enough reason to do so. We've also been told that if you don't do collaborative world building the players are stuck with a museum where they cannot touch or disturb anything.

Have we not been reading the same thread?

 

[Maxperson]

I seem to remember something with a +4 back in the 3e days, but I couldn't tell you what after all this time.

Well if we're going back to 3e, there were some with +6 and I think even +8.

 

[dave2008]

That's why I said at the beginning of this tangent that wookies would not be able to be a PC race.

You could play them in my D&D game.* Heck I had a player be a giant once. Not a half giant, but a full on giant!

*Not all of my games are anything goes, but some are

 

[Maxperson]

You could play them in my D&D game.* Heck I had a player be a giant once. Not a half giant, but a full on giant!

*Not all of my games are anything goes, but some are

Yeah. I haven't done that with 5e yet, but with 3e I had people playing all kinds of powerful races over the years. Not ever campaign allowed it, but some did.

 

[Remathilis]

We've been told repeatedly that if we don't allow any possible species, it's a bad thing. No ifs, ands or buts. There is never a good enough reason to do so. We've also been told that if you don't do collaborative world building the players are stuck with a museum where they cannot touch or disturb anything.

Have we not been reading the same thread?

And we've been told that players are bratty and entitled jerks if we dare ask for anything other than whatever we're offered and the only compromise is submission or rejection.

 

[Maxperson]

And we've been told that players are bratty and entitled jerks if we dare ask for anything other than whatever we're offered and the only compromise is submission or rejection.

By who? Not by virtually all of the posters in this thread.

 

[AlViking]

And we've been told that players are bratty and entitled jerks if we dare ask for anything other than whatever we're offered and the only compromise is submission or rejection.

If someone accepts the invitation to my game they knew I had a curated list of species. If they want to discuss options we will. But if they use the definition of "compromise" which means they get to play whatever they want and they don't care what I want then they do have a sense of entitlement.

If they didn't want to follow my house rules they shouldn't have accepted the invitation.