Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Najo" data-source="post: 3885557" data-attributes="member: 9959">I am a little bit concerned for different reasons:1) I really like the concept of the Teifling, but I feel they are not appropiate for all campaigns and including them in the main player's handbook might be going to far. 2) I think not including the druid is a mistake. I think the whole nature connected priest is important to the core ideals of fantasy roleplaying. I think the options in the core rulebook should focus on heroic characters fighting against evil. I also think that is what D&D should look like, whether edgy or dark fantasy, it still should be good guys fighting against the darkness. Now, I think the multi alignment Paladin is a good thing. I think losing the monk is a good thing. I think the bard should be a prestige class or put into the game later. I think including the warlock is good. The idea of a dark sorcerer/ wizard type character who makes pacts with supernatural forces is a good archetype for the core book. I think instead of tieflings I would put in planar touched or planar blooded creatures and have both good and evil blooded creatures in one race with different traits.I think it is important for any one to pick up D&D and see adventure, intense fantasy with the forces of darkness being fought against by a band of heroes. Outsiders to the hobby shouldn't see a game that promotes "evil" and they should be able to see the connection to Lord of the Rings through the artwork and flavor text. I think D&D should be more than that, but it needs at least that in it to help it sell to the mainstream.</blockquote>

Verification