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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sylrae" data-source="post: 4375425" data-attributes="member: 48520">I agree about the illusionist being a bad call as it's a subclass of wizard.Flavor wise, Bards rock. they're alot of fun. unfortunately they have the big drawback of the fact that as a class, statistically, they still suck. 3.5 made them suck less with the ability to wear armor and whatnot, but they aren't particularly good at anything really except diplomacy. - and making money in a non-adventuring way.Elves having Wizard as the favored class kindof works. They weren't supposed to be forest elves, they are the universal elves. Like Moonelves in FR. They're more magically oriented, not melee oriented (hence the -2 con). If you want rangers, you're looking at wood or wild elves. Wood elves are probably the strongest 0 LA race I can think of, cause theyre the only ones who dont get royally shafted for having +2 Str.If you want a woodsy elf then the wood/wild eves should be the core elf race you use, in my opinion. Should they have been the core elf race in the PHBs instead of in the monster manual/FRCS? maybe.I think the PHB should have had the high elf and wood elf as races, and put the standard elf in the MM. but then you'd have people bitching about 2 elves in the PHB. This is basically what 4e did, cept they called the high elves eladrin,(thus removing the eladrin monsters) and gave them a goofy teleport ability.HumanOrcHalflingWood ElfHigh/Grey ElfDwarfGnomewould have been my ideal 'standard' setup.Tieflings shouldnt be a core race, cause theyre anti-aasimar, and well, I think if you put in tieflings you have about 7 other planetouched you should add in - FR did this, and if youre gonna have all the different types of planetouched fine, but don't make one of them core and the others not, that just doesn't make much sense. Plus the teifling is poosly defined. With the big rift between Demons and Devils in D&D you really need 2 types of hellish races. And planetouched would make much more sense as a series of templates than races, because why is it so hard to imagine an outsider reproducing with a different type of humanoid? Planetouched races were poorly thought out in 3e in my opinion, and this holds in 4e as well.Dragonborn, well, dragon people are not something i see as a player race. Halfogres seem more reasonable, even though dragonborn are powered down to player power levels.I dont 'love' gnomes, I just wanted to know why there were gnome hate posts. they're a race that sees occasional use in my games, whereas halflings see less use. I see more goblin players than halflings. (though I made the goblins slightly more attractive by dropping their extra -2 they get).I don't have a problem with steampunk. The game I'm running right now has 2 core races (Humans and Dwarves - the dwarves have been changed though)the rest are all non-standard, being either from a different source, modified, or wholly original. They live in flying mechanical cities powered by levitation spells in some cases and machines in others, and the general tech level is up to flintlock weapons. This is obviously not the 'standard' campaign, and this is the first time I've run a game with this much tech, but it's not bad. Actually, gnomes got cut from my steampunk setting, but so did most of the standard classes: cleric, paladin, monk, sorcerer, bard. I decided to run somethign really different this time. (classes come from other sources than the phb, obviously)It's not hard to have gnomes without tech though as pointed out above.but if they had to cut them, that's fine, I just think they picked bad things to replace them with. A rakshasa would have been much better than a tiefling. Hell, there are a bunch of really cool monsters that would make awesome player races:If you want exotic- Dryad, Rakshasa, Centaur, Satyr, Githyanki/GithzeraiIf you want something less exotic: Goblins, Hobgoblins, Bugbears, Kobolds, Troglodytes, Lizardfolk, Lizardfolk (Blackscale), Gnoll, Minotaur.I think any of those would have been better player race additions than the Dragonborn or the teifling.Favored classes never really made much of a difference in any ofthe games I played, we didn't use multiclassing penalties, cause the dms never gave just combat experience. experience is often just per session, and if thye think you did something extra above the other players then you get a little more. combat experience almost never happened, cause we foudn that made players have WAY unevern levels. like by the time one player got to level 9 the others would be at 6, and the rift would keep getting bigger. Cause the way the standard system works is you difide encounter xp by the party. what if the party splits up into pairs, or if one player runs off ahead and does stuff on their own? it was much easier to drop that method of experience distribution. So for a while "nobody had a favored class" until we found the variant on here where favored class gives you extra feats, which made the favored classes relevent again, but that was just recently...</blockquote>

Verification