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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tovec" data-source="post: 6172071" data-attributes="member: 95493">As far as the article goes:I don't like the write up for Cambion. It seems to lose a lot in translation. Like if I were to say all elves were "tree hugging hippies, who sat around in large grassy huts in the forest and did dances on the solstices."  That would seem to ignore all the other (better) interpretations of elf. It would also ignore the whole magical/warrior side that seems very core to DnD elves.Alu-fiends as the opposite gender of Cambion I don't mind as a sorting effect but they aren't the same creatures in real myth or in DnD lore so that is a misstep. But as long as they get separate write-ups I don't really care.I don't know the second creature and I skipped over that question on the survey.Tieflings. The description did absolutely nothing for me. It wasn't even a description. By in large most descriptions of the creatures we've had could be more or less dropped into a MM and be done with. The Tiefling "description" didn't describe them EXCEPT in the controversial terms of what 4e did differently. It is like talking about the Realms by ONLY talking of the spellplague (and similar events), as opposed to what attracts people to the Realms in the first place. Voted that "description" down, but when I checked after it still had 51% "I love this description of them, never change," like anything else ever written in these articles, so whatever.Genuinely confused... They don't reproduce the same because the first group breeds true and the second group doesn't? Is that it? If it is then that seems fairly simple to justify, and can be easily included in each race's description. It is no more different than elves live a long time and humans don't. The only issue I can see if there are outright contradictions and so far I'm not seeing that here.Antlers and different (minor) visual changes can be easily incorporated into a sidebar or campaign book. I don't know anything about the imperials but that looks like it could work here. Just like in the 3.5 Monster Manual it mentions that they have fiendish traits, gives a list, but never explicitly says what ones a player would have - something that is a bit annoying but also something that would work well here.A. I don't know what Celadrin or god blooded aasimars are either.B. Would this be any different than the stuff from above concerning Tieflings?C. Why are you lumping Devas in with Aasimar?D. Don't lump Devas in with Aasimars?E. If you absolutely must lump Devas in with Aasimars, then include a sidebar that says that they reborn when they die, are truly immortal - and the implications of that. Why are Devas lumped in with Aasimars again?F. Where is the conflict, except that they're different? Do we have pre-4e devas and post-4e devas? (I mean I guess we did but not in context of aasimars from what I recall.)Perhaps this is all just my confusion, as with the Tieflings.</blockquote>

Verification