Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="rounser" data-source="post: 5793956" data-attributes="member: 1106">Druids and rangers have both a fantasy and a D&amp;D tradition and pedigree.&nbsp; They'd be fine; I don't think they belong in the same sentence as &quot;warlords&quot; (in the 4E redefinition of the term) and &quot;dragonborn&quot;, both of which are pretty contrived and IMO don't deserve core status.&nbsp; A starter box isn't what I'm referring to - gnomes, sorcerers, dark elves, warlocks, assassins (without spells, please), necromancers, knights etc. would all suit.&nbsp; Strong archetypes, suit most worlds as a common kind of adventurer, neither of which goes for a &quot;dragonborn warlord&quot; or a &quot;warforged artificer&quot;...thus the not belonging in the core rules.Note that no-one is preventing you from running such characters, just that they need to be optional because they're not part of the mythology that D&amp;D leans on, and worldbuilders use as the archetypal foundation of their worlds.&nbsp; There simply aren't dragonmen hanging around in taverns in most of the kind of fantasy world that gets built with D&amp;D, nor does a D&amp;D party say &quot;gee, we need to hire a warlord&quot; (unless maybe they're talking about staging mass combat rather than adventuring, such a bad choice of name there) and the core game shouldn't clash with that.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="rounser, post: 5793956, member: 1106"] Druids and rangers have both a fantasy and a D&D tradition and pedigree. They'd be fine; I don't think they belong in the same sentence as "warlords" (in the 4E redefinition of the term) and "dragonborn", both of which are pretty contrived and IMO don't deserve core status. A starter box isn't what I'm referring to - gnomes, sorcerers, dark elves, warlocks, assassins (without spells, please), necromancers, knights etc. would all suit. Strong archetypes, suit most worlds as a common kind of adventurer, neither of which goes for a "dragonborn warlord" or a "warforged artificer"...thus the not belonging in the core rules. Note that no-one is preventing you from running such characters, just that they need to be optional because they're not part of the mythology that D&D leans on, and worldbuilders use as the archetypal foundation of their worlds. There simply [I]aren't[/I] dragonmen hanging around in taverns in most of the kind of fantasy world that gets built with D&D, nor does a D&D party say "gee, we need to hire a warlord" (unless maybe they're talking about staging mass combat rather than adventuring, such a bad choice of name there) and the core game shouldn't clash with that. [/QUOTE]

Verification