D&D 3.x The new tumbling dwarf in 3.5.


log in or register to remove this ad

Hypersmurf said:


I wouldn't call him superdense to his face, though.

-Hyp.

I wouldn't, either. I usually don't kneel down when I talk to dwarves.

But I would call him superdense to his oversized, pointy hat, of course :D

(Of course, if a smurf wants to get face to face with a dwarf, he has to get a ladder :p)
 

Well, I guess it would now be more tactically advantagous to designate the dwarf as the party's new quartermaster and pack mule....
 
Last edited:

Andion Isurand said:
Well, I guess it would now be more tactically advantagous to designate the dwarf as the party's new quartermaster and pack mule....

Fitting considering dwarves, at least according to Tolkien, were able to go great distances with heavy loads without slowing or feeling the effects. This makes them seem more durable.

Its the small things like this that make me happy about 3.5.
 


Anubis the Doomseer said:
Dwarves should be ECL +1, they are the new Elves.

- Ma'at

I think dwarves are good now, no arguments there.

But why are they the new elves? I never played a straight (non sub-elven race) elf in 3... and I don't think I would have even if someone begged me to. They were ok... but not too good.
 

Well, IOC, all Elves are members of one sub-race or another. But I actually played a moon elf (the ones with the same stats as a D&D standard elf).

And dwarves are still ugly.
 


Dwarven PsiWarriors are going to RULE... speed bonus from Speed of Thought and Burst, Heavy Armor proficiency, and Tumble is a class skill!

-- Nifft
 

Anubis the Doomseer said:
Ugly or not they should be ECL +1.

You don't keep throwing benefits on a race just to make it popular.

- Ma'at
Nah, that's ovrreacting. Most powerful race in the PHB? Sure. +1 ECL? No.

New Elves comment was from 2e. In 2e, Elves were very, very powerful.

Rav
 

Remove ads

Top