Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
[UPDATED] Most D&D Players Prefer Humans - Without Feats!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 7735940" data-attributes="member: 1465"><p>Speaking from my own little perspective, I have always witnessed the same, but said perspective is of a player/DM who mostly played with friends who are fairly casual gamers, or at least very rarely hardcore gamers, and countless times I've have players at their very first experience.</p><p></p><p>To me it seems that whenever someone plays D&D for the first time, the choice of race is first of all a matter of "am I going to play a <em>human</em> or <em>something else</em>?", and only afterward it's a question of <em>what else</em>. No surprise that the first question already directs a lot of beginners towards not even looking at the non-human options. And the answer to the second question is of course more frequently a race that people are already familiar with through movies and computer games, LOTR and WOW have certainly gone a long way teaching what "elf" and "dwarf" can mean in a fantasy game. </p><p></p><p>So these general statistics don't surprise me at all, even if I don't know how much of them are based off beginners rather than long-time players.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is also very typical in my own experience. Casual gamers and beginners do not know or understand the rules yet to be able to compare character choices in terms of power, so they choose by rule of cool. It doesn't necessarily mean that they don't want to also learn to make more powerful choices, but simply that they realize there is no time to do that before they start playing.</p><p></p><p>But also, races aren't exactly the primary source of character power. Some editions encourage "combos" to leverage ability score bonuses, but beyond that, the choice of race has a diminishing importance as the character goes up in level.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is less clear to me. Quite certainly, each feat is a minor element of character design compared to the choice of class, even tho some feats have the potential to steer the character towards certain tactics and so they can really change the PC's behaviour during the adventures. But they still don't suggest to the average player the same level of characterization that the 3 "big" choices provide (even tho my personal belief is that the Background delivers a lot more narrative feel than functional abilities, we have to keep in mind that such 'feel' can be a lot more important to the player).</p><p></p><p>However, why players would choose ASI instead of feats is complicated for me to summarize, there are lots of possible reasons, and even contraddictive ones (there's always people arguing that ASI are 'obviously' more powerful, and other people arguing that feats are 'obviously' more powerful and even game-breaking, at least if you pick the best ones). The increased character complexity, the added narrative, the fiddly bits, the specialization effect etc. which a feat brings, could all be either <em>wanted</em> or <em>unwanted</em> consequences, depending on the player, so who can speak for everyone?</p><p></p><p>But we also have to keep in mind that many beginners and casual gamers never play long enough to ever have to make the choice, and this affects the statistics but again, we don't know how much.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Mmm... kind of a self-defining sentence here <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Their <strong>primary</strong> choices are of course those "big 3" each one carries plenty of details and abilities already. Choice of spells, equipment, feats and class-specific abilities are <strong>secondary</strong> by definition because they are individual, smaller choices.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Li Shenron, post: 7735940, member: 1465"] Speaking from my own little perspective, I have always witnessed the same, but said perspective is of a player/DM who mostly played with friends who are fairly casual gamers, or at least very rarely hardcore gamers, and countless times I've have players at their very first experience. To me it seems that whenever someone plays D&D for the first time, the choice of race is first of all a matter of "am I going to play a [I]human[/I] or [I]something else[/I]?", and only afterward it's a question of [I]what else[/I]. No surprise that the first question already directs a lot of beginners towards not even looking at the non-human options. And the answer to the second question is of course more frequently a race that people are already familiar with through movies and computer games, LOTR and WOW have certainly gone a long way teaching what "elf" and "dwarf" can mean in a fantasy game. So these general statistics don't surprise me at all, even if I don't know how much of them are based off beginners rather than long-time players. This is also very typical in my own experience. Casual gamers and beginners do not know or understand the rules yet to be able to compare character choices in terms of power, so they choose by rule of cool. It doesn't necessarily mean that they don't want to also learn to make more powerful choices, but simply that they realize there is no time to do that before they start playing. But also, races aren't exactly the primary source of character power. Some editions encourage "combos" to leverage ability score bonuses, but beyond that, the choice of race has a diminishing importance as the character goes up in level. This is less clear to me. Quite certainly, each feat is a minor element of character design compared to the choice of class, even tho some feats have the potential to steer the character towards certain tactics and so they can really change the PC's behaviour during the adventures. But they still don't suggest to the average player the same level of characterization that the 3 "big" choices provide (even tho my personal belief is that the Background delivers a lot more narrative feel than functional abilities, we have to keep in mind that such 'feel' can be a lot more important to the player). However, why players would choose ASI instead of feats is complicated for me to summarize, there are lots of possible reasons, and even contraddictive ones (there's always people arguing that ASI are 'obviously' more powerful, and other people arguing that feats are 'obviously' more powerful and even game-breaking, at least if you pick the best ones). The increased character complexity, the added narrative, the fiddly bits, the specialization effect etc. which a feat brings, could all be either [I]wanted[/I] or [I]unwanted[/I] consequences, depending on the player, so who can speak for everyone? But we also have to keep in mind that many beginners and casual gamers never play long enough to ever have to make the choice, and this affects the statistics but again, we don't know how much. Mmm... kind of a self-defining sentence here :) Their [B]primary[/B] choices are of course those "big 3" each one carries plenty of details and abilities already. Choice of spells, equipment, feats and class-specific abilities are [B]secondary[/B] by definition because they are individual, smaller choices. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
[UPDATED] Most D&D Players Prefer Humans - Without Feats!
Top