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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MechaPilot" data-source="post: 7165864" data-attributes="member: 82779">Dragonborn (note the lack of an "e" on the end there) and Tiefling are certainly non-standard races, but you have a pretty hard sell ahead of you if you want to convince us they're more prone to abuse than other races are.  Variant human is widely considered one of the best races in the game (especially out of the options given in the PHB).  I have two players at my table who enjoy min/maxing and the mechanical aspects of character building, and they always pick an elf or a variant human.Also, if you are an old-school D&D player, you might recall Tieflings being introduced as a playable race in AD&D 2e's Planescape.  I certainly prefer the variable appearance of the 2e Tiefling (which is easily enough to re-instate, and I have done so at my table), but the tiefling adventuring with planar races is far from new.  Also, there really shouldn't be an assumption that a game will be confined to the prime material plane.  If a DM wants to run a planar campaign, or just a campaign where an individual can have a fiendish ancestry, the teifling is there as a resource.Regarding the Warlock being "shades of WoW," you must not have played a World of Warcraft Warlock, because the 5e Warlock plays almost nothing like the WoW Warlock.  Heck, the 5e 'lock doesn't even get an impish familiar, much less several demon pets at her beck and call.  The ranger is more of a WoW warlock than is the 5e warlock.That's pretty much my opinion on all material, regardless of whether it's homebrew, from the DM's Guild, from the UA, or from a WotC published product.I'm glad you're enjoying it.  I like it as well.  It has it's flaws and faults, all things do, and it's not my favorite version of D&D (4e is my favorite edition of D&D), but I enjoy running and playing it much more than I did 3e, and a little more than I did AD&D 2e.Edition warring, accusations of munchkinism, and a sweeping statement that races which appear monstrous to human sensibilities must be monsters and not heroes is probably not a great way to start out a post if you don't want adversarial responses.  I get that we all have our own preferences with regard to the game, but it's pretty clear that there are a wealth of preferences and playstyles, with none of them being inherently more right than the others, or for that matter more "D&D" than the others (The very creator of the game encouraged the people who play it to alter it an make it their own, after all).I don't begrudge you your grognard sensibilities, nor do I use the term grognard as an insult or pejorative; I use it because that's how you've chosen to refer to yourself.  I had a great deal of fun in the years when I played BECMI and AD&D 2e (and 3e, 4e, and now 5e, for that matter), so I certainly see the older editions having their appeal (likewise, I don't view the newer editions with rose-tinted goggles that filter out all their flaws).  If anything, I suppose I'm just weary of fans judging each other for enjoying what they enjoy, instead of simply respecting that we all have different preferences that are equally valid.</blockquote>

Verification