What changes to Humans would you like to see in D&D 3.5?
- Thread starter Green Knight
- Start date
Li Shenron
Legend
Gez said:
...but doesn't make sense, since +0 in a stats exactly means "as the average human" by definition, AFAIK!
I agree with everything...
Your suggestions are excellent, however I think they would be best implemented in a humans-only world. Why play a halfling if you can play a small human with a bonus feat? Why play an elf if you can have a dextrous but weak con human? Why play a half-orc if you can play a strong human, a dwarf if you can play a tough human, etc.
While we have all sorts of diversity, d&d's default setting is not earth. If it were, then hopefully there would be feats for tall humans and short ones, etc. Perhaps in house rules we could discuss how to manage such a thing for d20 modern (a good limitation on the stats thing would be max stat of 18 (a human limitation), and phys abilities cost 2 mental or 1 physical, ie- -2str can be countered with -2 con or -2 in and -2 cha). But I believe in d&d, humans get more than a fair shake.
For new players and seasoned players, humans are a clear strong race to play as. If there were more feats that could only be taken at 1st level, I think they would be perfect - balance wise. I think that presenting them as a race with options (4 extra skill points at 1st level, and a feat of your own choosing) was the best thing to do for them.
I personally hope they dont get changed at all for D&D 3.5
Technik
Your suggestions are excellent, however I think they would be best implemented in a humans-only world. Why play a halfling if you can play a small human with a bonus feat? Why play an elf if you can have a dextrous but weak con human? Why play a half-orc if you can play a strong human, a dwarf if you can play a tough human, etc.
While we have all sorts of diversity, d&d's default setting is not earth. If it were, then hopefully there would be feats for tall humans and short ones, etc. Perhaps in house rules we could discuss how to manage such a thing for d20 modern (a good limitation on the stats thing would be max stat of 18 (a human limitation), and phys abilities cost 2 mental or 1 physical, ie- -2str can be countered with -2 con or -2 in and -2 cha). But I believe in d&d, humans get more than a fair shake.
For new players and seasoned players, humans are a clear strong race to play as. If there were more feats that could only be taken at 1st level, I think they would be perfect - balance wise. I think that presenting them as a race with options (4 extra skill points at 1st level, and a feat of your own choosing) was the best thing to do for them.
I personally hope they dont get changed at all for D&D 3.5
Technik
Last edited:
Shard O'Glase
First Post
this is across the board and for all races including humans.
But if a race has a subrace, every race should have a subrace, if one has 5 every race should have 5.
If there are race sepcific feats/presitge classes/weapons every rae should have race specifc feats/prestige classes/weapons.
I think the racial diversity gets massively wrecked when they pull this lame(2e holdover or not) racial favortism, the I only spend time designing cool things for elves and dwarves the rest can jump in a lake problem.
But if a race has a subrace, every race should have a subrace, if one has 5 every race should have 5.
If there are race sepcific feats/presitge classes/weapons every rae should have race specifc feats/prestige classes/weapons.
I think the racial diversity gets massively wrecked when they pull this lame(2e holdover or not) racial favortism, the I only spend time designing cool things for elves and dwarves the rest can jump in a lake problem.
Similar Threads
