Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Worlds of Design: More Human Than Human
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Lylandra" data-source="post: 7931692" data-attributes="member: 6816692"><p>/sigh</p><p></p><p>While this is an interesting topic, I'd really love to see one of LP's articles that doesn't scream "old man yells at cloud" to me by stabbing at what he percieves to be the "spoiled youth of today" while reveling in his old-school-systems are superior mood. </p><p></p><p>Well, here's my 2c:</p><p></p><p>1) I like the idea of ancestries as they combine biology with cultural traditions and allow for more variable concepts. For example, we got an air genasi teen who was found by halflings and was raised like a halfling child. Which makes one hilarious character concept. With ancestries she would have had the opportunity to implement her halfling culture into her "build".</p><p></p><p>2) Depth - I agree that playing a different species should or could add gameplay quirks, but you'd have to be very careful to not make them mandatory in certain situations. Unless you plan your campaign around your party. This can be problematic with the overabundance of darkvision in 5e where you'd be in a huge disadvantage as a human player. </p><p></p><p>3) However, could you please decide whether or not you're in favour of variety and whether or not it increases depth in your opinion? In my opinion, it <em>does</em> increase depth if the player wants to. Having a lot of tools to choose from in character creation (ancestry, background, class, stats...) opens up the possibility to weave immensely variable, creative and deep concepts. Which also tend to evoke ideas of background story as well. For example, I really got hooked by the Divine Sorcerer in 5e and then decided to play as Aasimar as being both a mechanical and a thematic fit. I then made up my character's story background in no time.</p><p></p><p>But that's the "good case". If players are overwhelmed with choice or if they just want to be "best at all", you might end up with a purely mechanical, specialized powerhouse that doesn't fit thematically, or a complete patchwork that's "can do everything" but only a little bit. </p><p></p><p>4) Power creep - this is only a problem when game designers don't do their job. In my opinion, 1e/2e racial restrictions were stupid, and balance should never be achieved through such restrictions. Using LA as a balance tool is problematic as well. Just make every species interesting in their own, unique way. And I get that this is really hard for the human species which is a) almost always bland or generic and b) therefore either intrinsically better for every build or intrinsically worse for every build than other species. </p><p></p><p>Ideally, and that's just my POV, species would not be primarily about the stats, but more about the quirks. Because stats limit builds. Detecting secret doors doesn't limit. A +2 Str or -2 Str does. </p><p></p><p>5) Too many species - Yes! But that's what session 0 is for. I've limited species based on setting and I would do it again. I'm also in for my player's wishes, so if they want to play in a world without Yuan-Ti or Drow, so be it. Having a themed campaign where your group consists of only dwarves or elves can be fun, too! But then you'd need to think about how to include the more odd combinations (like a dwarven bard or so).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Lylandra, post: 7931692, member: 6816692"] /sigh While this is an interesting topic, I'd really love to see one of LP's articles that doesn't scream "old man yells at cloud" to me by stabbing at what he percieves to be the "spoiled youth of today" while reveling in his old-school-systems are superior mood. Well, here's my 2c: 1) I like the idea of ancestries as they combine biology with cultural traditions and allow for more variable concepts. For example, we got an air genasi teen who was found by halflings and was raised like a halfling child. Which makes one hilarious character concept. With ancestries she would have had the opportunity to implement her halfling culture into her "build". 2) Depth - I agree that playing a different species should or could add gameplay quirks, but you'd have to be very careful to not make them mandatory in certain situations. Unless you plan your campaign around your party. This can be problematic with the overabundance of darkvision in 5e where you'd be in a huge disadvantage as a human player. 3) However, could you please decide whether or not you're in favour of variety and whether or not it increases depth in your opinion? In my opinion, it [I]does[/I] increase depth if the player wants to. Having a lot of tools to choose from in character creation (ancestry, background, class, stats...) opens up the possibility to weave immensely variable, creative and deep concepts. Which also tend to evoke ideas of background story as well. For example, I really got hooked by the Divine Sorcerer in 5e and then decided to play as Aasimar as being both a mechanical and a thematic fit. I then made up my character's story background in no time. But that's the "good case". If players are overwhelmed with choice or if they just want to be "best at all", you might end up with a purely mechanical, specialized powerhouse that doesn't fit thematically, or a complete patchwork that's "can do everything" but only a little bit. 4) Power creep - this is only a problem when game designers don't do their job. In my opinion, 1e/2e racial restrictions were stupid, and balance should never be achieved through such restrictions. Using LA as a balance tool is problematic as well. Just make every species interesting in their own, unique way. And I get that this is really hard for the human species which is a) almost always bland or generic and b) therefore either intrinsically better for every build or intrinsically worse for every build than other species. Ideally, and that's just my POV, species would not be primarily about the stats, but more about the quirks. Because stats limit builds. Detecting secret doors doesn't limit. A +2 Str or -2 Str does. 5) Too many species - Yes! But that's what session 0 is for. I've limited species based on setting and I would do it again. I'm also in for my player's wishes, so if they want to play in a world without Yuan-Ti or Drow, so be it. Having a themed campaign where your group consists of only dwarves or elves can be fun, too! But then you'd need to think about how to include the more odd combinations (like a dwarven bard or so). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Worlds of Design: More Human Than Human
Top