Smart companies listen to the majority of their customers. Unfortunately, it seems that WOC is listening to a small but vocal group, most of whom have no long term interest in D&D, and are solely focused on imposing their social agenda.
Ok, stuff like this drives me nuts and even though it may seem like we are on the same side this is actually counterproductive. There is zero proof that those who support the change are either in the minority or have no long term interest in the game. I have no idea what percentage of the fan base is in support of it but it would appear to not be that small of an amount. And people line Yuri, Pantagruel666 and Third have definitely shown they have significant interest in the long term of the game and have for some time.
Right, this site is a bubble of enthusiastic players. The people I was referring to would never bother with a site like this.
What’s so wrong about rolling for stats? I’ve been rolling stats since the early ‘90s and it’s never been a problem.
Mainly, because it's random. I like the idea of it, and have used it in many games, but I don't use it anymore because my core principle for character generation in D&D is that you should be able to choose who you play. When you roll for stats, you don't choose, you roll.
Then it sounds to me that you might prefer a point-buy game. WotC shouldn’t have to change D&D to suit people who would prefer a different game, that’s why there are different games.
I didn't say D&D had to change, or that no one is allowed to roll for stats anymore. I understand people like playing different ways, and I like that the game has options for that/want more options for that (which has been my stance for this whole thread).
I personally use Point Buy or Standard Array for stats, and that's the rule at my table. I will in no way try to force anyone to use these 2 systems, and as a player, I make absolutely no fuss about it if the DM says to roll for stats, because I'm not a jerk.
Come on, Sposta. I thought you knew me better than that. Only a jerk would force a way of play on another person, I'm not that kind of guy.
Okay, so if one of your player came to you and said: “I don’t like standard array or point buy, I want to roll all of my PCs from now on.” Would you let them?
So you roll a low stat character. So what? The DM’s job is to help make everyone feel like a Star. Trust the DM to do their job. And if you cannot, switch groups.
The point of a game system is to make things easier for the game master and players. That means not dumping responsibility on the GM when the system can take care of it. Sure, as a DM I can even things out, but that's effort I'd rather spend on things like a good story.
Then you are unprepared for the responsibility of DMing and need a crutch.
The DM’s job is to curate an experience for their players. That means wearing many hats, including a Game Designer’s hat sometimes. Thems just the breaks.
That's... both arrogant and stupid. I didn't say I can't solve those problems, I just have better uses for my time. If you were really opposed to using tools (or crutches, as you call them) you wouldn't be playing D&D, you'd be playing a systemless theater of the mind. Given that you're going to use a tool, it makes no sense to use an inferior tool when a superior one is available.
Rolling for stats, under the standard rules, is just purely inferior, because it doesn't even create different characters, it just creates the same characters with variation in how good they are. If the purpose of random stats was "there's variation in real people", the way you'd do that is:
pick race.
roll stats, in order. You are not permitted to reorder them.
Choose class.
That version, while probably something I wouldn't play, I would at least respect. RAW stat rolling, however, is just "at the start of the game, roll some dice to see how good you'll be for the rest of the campaign, or until you suicide your character because you created a gump.
People are concerned about it because it's a slippery slope, and may eventually be part of the official rules. As others have mentioned, doing this is on the path to making species nothing more than a cosmetic skin.
Smart companies listen to the majority of their customers. Unfortunately, it seems that WOC is listening to a small but vocal group, most of whom have no long term interest in D&D, and are solely focused on imposing their social agenda.
Also, no one is saying that you can't play the game the way you want to play it. That's a straw-man argument.
Wow, everyone online loves throwing around the words "strawman" and "slippery slope".
Trust me, as a minority of the community on many topics, WotC never conforms to what we want. Also, shut the hell up about "no long term interest in D&D", just shut up. You have absolutely no evidence for that. Shut up if you don't have anything accurate to say, please. Also, this has nothing to do with a social agenda.
Also, the problem with slippery slope arguments (which is also a logical fallacy, btw) is that none of us can predict the future. If we could, we would know if this would lead to any revolution in the way race functions in the base game.
I will not "shut up". I have every right to express my views as you do.
What’s so wrong about rolling for stats? I’ve been rolling stats since the early ‘90s and it’s never been a problem.
Mainly, because it's random. I like the idea of it, and have used it in many games, but I don't use it anymore because my core principle for character generation in D&D is that you should be able to choose who you play. When you roll for stats, you don't choose, you roll.
Then it sounds to me that you might prefer a point-buy game. WotC shouldn’t have to change D&D to suit people who would prefer a different game, that’s why there are different games.
Hmm this seems to be rich coming from you. Especially considering your recent posts in other threads. I love how you want it changed in some aspects but when people say that to you, they are wrong but when you don’t the game changed in other aspects, “how dare they”
People are concerned about it because it's a slippery slope, and may eventually be part of the official rules. As others have mentioned, doing this is on the path to making species nothing more than a cosmetic skin.
Smart companies listen to the majority of their customers. Unfortunately, it seems that WOC is listening to a small but vocal group, most of whom have no long term interest in D&D, and are solely focused on imposing their social agenda.
Also, no one is saying that you can't play the game the way you want to play it. That's a straw-man argument.
Wow, everyone online loves throwing around the words "strawman" and "slippery slope".
Trust me, as a minority of the community on many topics, WotC never conforms to what we want. Also, shut the hell up about "no long term interest in D&D", just shut up. You have absolutely no evidence for that. Shut up if you don't have anything accurate to say, please. Also, this has nothing to do with a social agenda.
Also, the problem with slippery slope arguments (which is also a logical fallacy, btw) is that none of us can predict the future. If we could, we would know if this would lead to any revolution in the way race functions in the base game.
I will not "shut up". I have every right to express my views as you do.
everyone has the right to an opinion! can we keep it positive guys!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“I will take responsibility for what I have done. [...] If must fall, I will rise each time a better man.” ― Brandon Sanderson, Oathbringer.
Heh. If everyone has the right to an opinion, why does everyone not have the right to use optional rules from an official sourcebook in their own personal games with their DM's blessing?
Oh dear, this topic is rather toasty it seems.....
So, I will admit that I'm on the fence with these new variant rules, mainly because I don't actually know to what extent these variant rules will change as we have no information at this time. I like the idea of having more freedom with character creation but I have also enjoyed playing within the older and more rigid system and creating all manner of mix-matched character concepts from it.
Now as I said we don't yet know how it will work, but many races have features I feel can be swapped out for other equally valued features, like...
Skill proficiencies
Weapon training
Languages known
Tool proficiencies
However, some features feel a bit too tied to the races themselves such as...
Resistances/Immunities
Fey Ancestry
Powerful Build
Physical features such a Aarakocra's Flight, Loxodon's Trunks, Centaur's Equine Build or Tortle's Shell Defense
So at the end of the day, I wonder how swapping out racial features will work and if there will be any distinction these sorts of traits. Will be interesting for sure.
Somewhat connected to this though, something that has been brewing in my mind is that these Variant rules could potentially be a big tool for the DM as much as the players in different circumstances. Maybe its because I've been working on creating my own homebrew world with my own racial changes but I kinda wanted to share my thoughts a bit.
As far as I've seen (from my own limited perception of course), there are many DMs that don't allow Homebrew into their games. Sometimes because they are more of the mindset of wanting to keep D&D to its most official roots (i.e. official published books and supplements from Wizards themselves) or because they may not have the time, confidence or the patience to balance out various homebrew material such as races, class/subclasses and other such things within their game. These Variant rules could maybe be a valuable tool to such DMs who may have wanted to change up the ASI and features of the races but were uncertain about how to go about it in a way that would be easy to insert within their game worlds while hopefully being balanced to the standard rules (Of course things could be overpowered or under powered even if it comes from Wizards but you know).
Maybe a DM isn't comfortable with just letting the players customize their own character so extensively, however a DM could look at the system and decide "Neat, in my world elves a barbaric tribal people who fight with weapons instead of magic. I can use the variant rules to have the elves of my world have a +2 in Str and a +1 in Con and give them racial features that fit with a more martial, barbaric lifestyle" or "Ok, the Orcs of my world are more known for being peaceful, shamanistic people who is attuned to nature. With these rules I can make their ASI a +2 in Wis and a +1 to Cha to better match that and give them more nature and healing based racial features" This could give them more incentive to change up how the races work and give the player some new options to play around with while not going head first into the full variant rule set.
I don't know, this is just my two cents on the matter at the moment. Kinda jumbled but here you go.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
What’s so wrong about rolling for stats? I’ve been rolling stats since the early ‘90s and it’s never been a problem.
Mainly, because it's random. I like the idea of it, and have used it in many games, but I don't use it anymore because my core principle for character generation in D&D is that you should be able to choose who you play. When you roll for stats, you don't choose, you roll.
Then it sounds to me that you might prefer a point-buy game. WotC shouldn’t have to change D&D to suit people who would prefer a different game, that’s why there are different games.
Hmm this seems to be rich coming from you. Especially considering your recent posts in other threads. I love how you want it changed in some aspects but when people say that to you, they are wrong but when you don’t the game changed in other aspects, “how dare they”
To respond accurately to that I must first inquire as to what specifically you are referring. I think I know, but I don’t want to get into it in case you mean something else.
What’s so wrong about rolling for stats? I’ve been rolling stats since the early ‘90s and it’s never been a problem.
Mainly, because it's random.
You realize that rolling a d20 for an attack or a save is random too....
But an attack is for 1 turn. If you roll too well for stats, you character outshines everyone. If you roll badly, then you drag the party down. If you roll average, you are basically just using the standard array. The best result from rolling is probably some very high numbers and some very low numbers, to make things interesting.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
So you roll a low stat character. So what? The DM’s job is to help make everyone feel like a Star. Trust the DM to do their job. And if you cannot, switch groups.
The point of a game system is to make things easier for the game master and players. That means not dumping responsibility on the GM when the system can take care of it. Sure, as a DM I can even things out, but that's effort I'd rather spend on things like a good story.
Then you are unprepared for the responsibility of DMing and need a crutch.
The DM’s job is to curate an experience for their players. That means wearing many hats, including a Game Designer’s hat sometimes. Thems just the breaks.
That's... both arrogant and stupid. I didn't say I can't solve those problems, I just have better uses for my time. If you were really opposed to using tools (or crutches, as you call them) you wouldn't be playing D&D, you'd be playing a systemless theater of the mind. Given that you're going to use a tool, it makes no sense to use an inferior tool when a superior one is available.
Rolling for stats, under the standard rules, is just purely inferior, because it doesn't even create different characters, it just creates the same characters with variation in how good they are. If the purpose of random stats was "there's variation in real people", the way you'd do that is:
pick race.
roll stats, in order. You are not permitted to reorder them.
Choose class.
That version, while probably something I wouldn't play, I would at least respect. RAW stat rolling, however, is just "at the start of the game, roll some dice to see how good you'll be for the rest of the campaign, or until you suicide your character because you created a gump.
THAT’S MY FAVORITE WAY TO PLAY!! Just like back in 2e. Well, we rolled stats in order first and then picked Race and Class, but that’s only really because that was the order in the book.
IamSposta, rebalancing D&D for rolled stats since 1993ish.
What’s so wrong about rolling for stats? I’ve been rolling stats since the early ‘90s and it’s never been a problem.
Mainly, because it's random. I like the idea of it, and have used it in many games, but I don't use it anymore because my core principle for character generation in D&D is that you should be able to choose who you play. When you roll for stats, you don't choose, you roll.
Then it sounds to me that you might prefer a point-buy game. WotC shouldn’t have to change D&D to suit people who would prefer a different game, that’s why there are different games.
I didn't say D&D had to change, or that no one is allowed to roll for stats anymore. I understand people like playing different ways, and I like that the game has options for that/want more options for that (which has been my stance for this whole thread).
I personally use Point Buy or Standard Array for stats, and that's the rule at my table. I will in no way try to force anyone to use these 2 systems, and as a player, I make absolutely no fuss about it if the DM says to roll for stats, because I'm not a jerk.
Come on, Sposta. I thought you knew me better than that. Only a jerk would force a way of play on another person, I'm not that kind of guy.
Okay, so if one of your player came to you and said: “I don’t like standard array or point buy, I want to roll all of my PCs from now on.” Would you let them?
I would say no. It's the same reason that you wouldn't let psionics in your game unless it's how you want it. That's my right as a DM. If the player can absolutely not play in a game that doesn't roll for stats, I won't let them play in the campaign, because that's a sign that they're not going to be fun to play with.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Heh. If everyone has the right to an opinion, why does everyone not have the right to use optional rules from an official sourcebook in their own personal games with their DM's blessing?
Of course you do. This isn’t about telling you that you shouldn’t do that.
This is us saying that we think WotC should not have put those optional rules in an official book in the first place.
You of all people should appreciate our opinion that we don’t think WotC should change D&D to cater to “the masses.”
Heh. If everyone has the right to an opinion, why does everyone not have the right to use optional rules from an official sourcebook in their own personal games with their DM's blessing?
Of course you do. This isn’t about telling you that you shouldn’t do that.
This is us saying that we think WotC should not have put those optional rules in an official book in the first place.
Could you sum up exactly why you do not want the rules to be printed? Do you think it would encourage min-maxing, reduce character diversity, or for some other reason?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
What’s so wrong about rolling for stats? I’ve been rolling stats since the early ‘90s and it’s never been a problem.
Mainly, because it's random. I like the idea of it, and have used it in many games, but I don't use it anymore because my core principle for character generation in D&D is that you should be able to choose who you play. When you roll for stats, you don't choose, you roll.
Then it sounds to me that you might prefer a point-buy game. WotC shouldn’t have to change D&D to suit people who would prefer a different game, that’s why there are different games.
I didn't say D&D had to change, or that no one is allowed to roll for stats anymore. I understand people like playing different ways, and I like that the game has options for that/want more options for that (which has been my stance for this whole thread).
I personally use Point Buy or Standard Array for stats, and that's the rule at my table. I will in no way try to force anyone to use these 2 systems, and as a player, I make absolutely no fuss about it if the DM says to roll for stats, because I'm not a jerk.
Come on, Sposta. I thought you knew me better than that. Only a jerk would force a way of play on another person, I'm not that kind of guy.
Okay, so if one of your player came to you and said: “I don’t like standard array or point buy, I want to roll all of my PCs from now on.” Would you let them?
I would say no. It's the same reason that you wouldn't let psionics in your game unless it's how you want it. That's my right as a DM. If the player can absolutely not play in a game that doesn't roll for stats, I won't let them play in the campaign, because that's a sign that they're not going to be fun to play with.
Then we shall never play together my friend, because I don’t think that point buy or standard array should have ever been printed as options.
Heh. If everyone has the right to an opinion, why does everyone not have the right to use optional rules from an official sourcebook in their own personal games with their DM's blessing?
Of course you do. This isn’t about telling you that you shouldn’t do that.
This is us saying that we think WotC should not have put those optional rules in an official book in the first place.
WotC obviously wanted those rules in the game or they wouldn’t have put them there. I thought that WoTC shouldn’t have to change D&D to accommodate people who want to play a different game when there are those games out there.
What’s so wrong about rolling for stats? I’ve been rolling stats since the early ‘90s and it’s never been a problem.
Mainly, because it's random.
You realize that rolling a d20 for an attack or a save is random too....
Of course not, because I'm a complete idiot who can't read.
If you had read a few sentences beyond that point, you would realize that I meant that I don't like character generation to be random. You get to choose who you play in my games, randomness has no control over that. As soon as you stop making your character, everything else is left up to chance, from hit points when you level up (unless you choose average), to whether you live or die in combat.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Heh. If everyone has the right to an opinion, why does everyone not have the right to use optional rules from an official sourcebook in their own personal games with their DM's blessing?
Of course you do. This isn’t about telling you that you shouldn’t do that.
This is us saying that we think WotC should not have put those optional rules in an official book in the first place.
Could you sum up exactly why you do not want the rules to be printed? Do you think it would encourage min-maxing, reduce character diversity, or for some other reason?
Read the last 19 pages of this thread, “The truth is [in] there.”
People are concerned about it because it's a slippery slope, and may eventually be part of the official rules. As others have mentioned, doing this is on the path to making species nothing more than a cosmetic skin.
Smart companies listen to the majority of their customers. Unfortunately, it seems that WOC is listening to a small but vocal group, most of whom have no long term interest in D&D, and are solely focused on imposing their social agenda.
Also, no one is saying that you can't play the game the way you want to play it. That's a straw-man argument.
Wow, everyone online loves throwing around the words "strawman" and "slippery slope".
Trust me, as a minority of the community on many topics, WotC never conforms to what we want. Also, shut the hell up about "no long term interest in D&D", just shut up. You have absolutely no evidence for that. Shut up if you don't have anything accurate to say, please. Also, this has nothing to do with a social agenda.
Also, the problem with slippery slope arguments (which is also a logical fallacy, btw) is that none of us can predict the future. If we could, we would know if this would lead to any revolution in the way race functions in the base game.
I will not "shut up". I have every right to express my views as you do.
And I have an absolute right to point out the complete made up BS of your posts, then. You'll find that shutting up after spreading misinformation would have been the better option.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Right, this site is a bubble of enthusiastic players. The people I was referring to would never bother with a site like this.
Okay, so if one of your player came to you and said: “I don’t like standard array or point buy, I want to roll all of my PCs from now on.” Would you let them?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
That's... both arrogant and stupid. I didn't say I can't solve those problems, I just have better uses for my time. If you were really opposed to using tools (or crutches, as you call them) you wouldn't be playing D&D, you'd be playing a systemless theater of the mind. Given that you're going to use a tool, it makes no sense to use an inferior tool when a superior one is available.
Rolling for stats, under the standard rules, is just purely inferior, because it doesn't even create different characters, it just creates the same characters with variation in how good they are. If the purpose of random stats was "there's variation in real people", the way you'd do that is:
That version, while probably something I wouldn't play, I would at least respect. RAW stat rolling, however, is just "at the start of the game, roll some dice to see how good you'll be for the rest of the campaign, or until you suicide your character because you created a gump.
I will not "shut up". I have every right to express my views as you do.
Hmm this seems to be rich coming from you. Especially considering your recent posts in other threads. I love how you want it changed in some aspects but when people say that to you, they are wrong but when you don’t the game changed in other aspects, “how dare they”
everyone has the right to an opinion! can we keep it positive guys!
“I will take responsibility for what I have done. [...] If must fall, I will rise each time a better man.” ― Brandon Sanderson, Oathbringer.
Heh. If everyone has the right to an opinion, why does everyone not have the right to use optional rules from an official sourcebook in their own personal games with their DM's blessing?
Please do not contact or message me.
Oh dear, this topic is rather toasty it seems.....
So, I will admit that I'm on the fence with these new variant rules, mainly because I don't actually know to what extent these variant rules will change as we have no information at this time. I like the idea of having more freedom with character creation but I have also enjoyed playing within the older and more rigid system and creating all manner of mix-matched character concepts from it.
Now as I said we don't yet know how it will work, but many races have features I feel can be swapped out for other equally valued features, like...
However, some features feel a bit too tied to the races themselves such as...
So at the end of the day, I wonder how swapping out racial features will work and if there will be any distinction these sorts of traits. Will be interesting for sure.
Somewhat connected to this though, something that has been brewing in my mind is that these Variant rules could potentially be a big tool for the DM as much as the players in different circumstances. Maybe its because I've been working on creating my own homebrew world with my own racial changes but I kinda wanted to share my thoughts a bit.
As far as I've seen (from my own limited perception of course), there are many DMs that don't allow Homebrew into their games. Sometimes because they are more of the mindset of wanting to keep D&D to its most official roots (i.e. official published books and supplements from Wizards themselves) or because they may not have the time, confidence or the patience to balance out various homebrew material such as races, class/subclasses and other such things within their game. These Variant rules could maybe be a valuable tool to such DMs who may have wanted to change up the ASI and features of the races but were uncertain about how to go about it in a way that would be easy to insert within their game worlds while hopefully being balanced to the standard rules (Of course things could be overpowered or under powered even if it comes from Wizards but you know).
Maybe a DM isn't comfortable with just letting the players customize their own character so extensively, however a DM could look at the system and decide "Neat, in my world elves a barbaric tribal people who fight with weapons instead of magic. I can use the variant rules to have the elves of my world have a +2 in Str and a +1 in Con and give them racial features that fit with a more martial, barbaric lifestyle" or "Ok, the Orcs of my world are more known for being peaceful, shamanistic people who is attuned to nature. With these rules I can make their ASI a +2 in Wis and a +1 to Cha to better match that and give them more nature and healing based racial features" This could give them more incentive to change up how the races work and give the player some new options to play around with while not going head first into the full variant rule set.
I don't know, this is just my two cents on the matter at the moment. Kinda jumbled but here you go.
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
Characters for Tenebris Sine Fine
RoughCoronet's Greater Wills
You realize that rolling a d20 for an attack or a save is random too....
To respond accurately to that I must first inquire as to what specifically you are referring. I think I know, but I don’t want to get into it in case you mean something else.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
But an attack is for 1 turn. If you roll too well for stats, you character outshines everyone. If you roll badly, then you drag the party down. If you roll average, you are basically just using the standard array. The best result from rolling is probably some very high numbers and some very low numbers, to make things interesting.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
THAT’S MY FAVORITE WAY TO PLAY!! Just like back in 2e. Well, we rolled stats in order first and then picked Race and Class, but that’s only really because that was the order in the book.
IamSposta, rebalancing D&D for rolled stats since 1993ish.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I would say no. It's the same reason that you wouldn't let psionics in your game unless it's how you want it. That's my right as a DM. If the player can absolutely not play in a game that doesn't roll for stats, I won't let them play in the campaign, because that's a sign that they're not going to be fun to play with.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Of course you do. This isn’t about telling you that you shouldn’t do that.
This is us saying that we think WotC should not have put those optional rules in an official book in the first place.
You of all people should appreciate our opinion that we don’t think WotC should change D&D to cater to “the masses.”
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Could you sum up exactly why you do not want the rules to be printed? Do you think it would encourage min-maxing, reduce character diversity, or for some other reason?
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
Then we shall never play together my friend, because I don’t think that point buy or standard array should have ever been printed as options.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
WotC obviously wanted those rules in the game or they wouldn’t have put them there. I thought that WoTC shouldn’t have to change D&D to accommodate people who want to play a different game when there are those games out there.
Of course not, because I'm a complete idiot who can't read.
If you had read a few sentences beyond that point, you would realize that I meant that I don't like character generation to be random. You get to choose who you play in my games, randomness has no control over that. As soon as you stop making your character, everything else is left up to chance, from hit points when you level up (unless you choose average), to whether you live or die in combat.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Read the last 19 pages of this thread, “The truth is [in] there.”
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
And I have an absolute right to point out the complete made up BS of your posts, then. You'll find that shutting up after spreading misinformation would have been the better option.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms