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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="mamba" data-source="post: 9797363" data-attributes="member: 7034611">they both were misses, the preserver did not actually preserve anything, they basically cast an illusion that lasted for a short while and then everything reset to normal. If I wanted to actually preserve nature, this is the last thing I would do. Literally anything I would try to help the environment would have more impact.And they obviously both fail by making this subclasses when really any use of magic should defile or preserve. If I can just avoid the whole thing by picking any subclass from the PHB, the approach has failed completely. This appears to be so fundamental that WotC should be aware of it too, guess we will see.I'll focus on the ones you think WotC cannot achieve2, They still have slavery in other books, I do not believe they have to remove it from DS, they probably will downplay it though. That and and many of the other items reinforce a savage world.4, yes, the UA got that wrong on a fundamental level, I withhold judgement until the finished product is out however6. a refluff gets you most of the way there, good enough to leave it at that instead of coming up with new cleric subclasses8. no idea about muls, let's just assume you are correct. It does not take cannibal halflings for the races to be different from what you expect, they can be different from what you expect and not be identical to the DS of 2e. That would make them truly different from what you expect <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />My main concern is your number 4, the rest will be a matter of what they actually do with the fluff, but getting defiling and preserving wrong would be a fundamental problem to me</blockquote>

Verification