Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sacrosanct" data-source="post: 8183545" data-attributes="member: 15700">I may regret wading into this conversation...Not this just reason, but other reasons as well.  Reasons that limit you to play archetypes you want.  Whenever we talk about getting rid of racial modifiers, there are always comments about "but halflings shouldn't be that strong!  All dwarves are extra healthy!"  But no one talks about the other side of the argument.  Not just as you say (we end up with the same race/class combinations all the freaking time), but this as well:If the lowest score I can possibly get in ability is a 10 (because the racial bonus gives a +2), that means as a PC, I can never have that as a weak area.  Strengths aren't the only thing that helps flesh our our archetypes.  Weaknesses also do that, and are just as important.  Maybe I want to play a PC who is crude, rude, and bears horrific scars, and overall is not charismatic at all.  Well, if I play a half elf, or tiefling, or other CHA bonuses race, I guess I can't really do that and have the mechanics support it.Or maybe I want to play a minotaur/goliath/etc who was a runt, but because of that, relied on their intelligence and cunning to survive growing up.  With racial modifiers, can't really do that.  Worst STR I could have is a 10 (assuming array or point buy)PCs are supposed to be the exception.  Therefore, they should be able to be created with any combination of racial adjustments.  Not only to avoid the stereotypical frequent race/class combos, but to allow archetypes to be achieved and supported mechanically.</blockquote>

Verification