I love this word that the OP keeps using.....'tend'. What a great, scientifically correct, perfectly composed word. Yes men 'tend' to be stronger, and women tend to be more social. Yes men 'tend' to be more interested in things and women 'tend' to be more interested in people. But not my guy. He is a computer wizard (literally), a social devil, a carousing genius who is able to read between the lines and notice things that others can't. He also can't deadlift a sack of potatoes, and if you flick his nose it will bleed profusely. I feel like I am describing myself (jk lol, I am this but dumber)
No adventurer will symbolize every single person, so you cannot assign an ASI on a generalization. Even if men 'tend' to be stronger that does not mean that your PCs should be. There are ALWAYS men that are smart and ALWAYS women that are strong (Just ask my cousin Ren....she is seven, and can no joke beat me and the rest of my family in an arm wrestle. No special training, she is just built like a brick s***house), so why can't your PCs be one of those people?
Party on dude, I rest my case.
100% I stand with you, there are always exceptions to the rule. talk to the DM, but as for *general rules* remember *general* men are typically stronger than women and women tend to be better socially. nothing wrong with that, but if you dont want to play that... don't.
just a question... are you sure she's not MC Ren? XD
No. She is a girl. And the players shouldn't have to ask for exceptions, it should just be an option. If it is an exception, does it mean that you wont say yes 100% of the time? If not, then you are generalizing
The other thing I am confused about is the fact that you are 'playtesting' this. What is there to playtest? Mechanically, the stats are no different to any other race, so there is nothing that needs 'playtesting'....Just a badly designed rule that replaces different races with the same race. But now sex is a part of it, for absolutely no reason.
first off it was a joke, your cousin seems cool.
2nd, people should ask for exceptions if they want one, otherwise they don't need one. they know it's an option. it's just not typically necessary,
3rdly im just testing it out... in one campaign and if it sucks i'll drop it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cult of Sedge
Rangers are the best, and have always been the best
I love this word that the OP keeps using.....'tend'. What a great, scientifically correct, perfectly composed word. Yes men 'tend' to be stronger, and women tend to be more social. Yes men 'tend' to be more interested in things and women 'tend' to be more interested in people. But not my guy. He is a computer wizard (literally), a social devil, a carousing genius who is able to read between the lines and notice things that others can't. He also can't deadlift a sack of potatoes, and if you flick his nose it will bleed profusely. I feel like I am describing myself (jk lol, I am this but dumber)
No adventurer will symbolize every single person, so you cannot assign an ASI on a generalization. Even if men 'tend' to be stronger that does not mean that your PCs should be. There are ALWAYS men that are smart and ALWAYS women that are strong (Just ask my cousin Ren....she is seven, and can no joke beat me and the rest of my family in an arm wrestle. No special training, she is just built like a brick s***house), so why can't your PCs be one of those people?
Party on dude, I rest my case.
100% I stand with you, there are always exceptions to the rule. talk to the DM, but as for *general rules* remember *general* men are typically stronger than women and women tend to be better socially. nothing wrong with that, but if you dont want to play that... don't.
just a question... are you sure she's not MC Ren? XD
No. She is a girl. And the players shouldn't have to ask for exceptions, it should just be an option. If it is an exception, does it mean that you wont say yes 100% of the time? If not, then you are generalizing
The other thing I am confused about is the fact that you are 'playtesting' this. What is there to playtest? Mechanically, the stats are no different to any other race, so there is nothing that needs 'playtesting'....Just a badly designed rule that replaces different races with the same race. But now sex is a part of it, for absolutely no reason.
first off it was a joke, your cousin seems cool.
2nd, people should ask for exceptions if they want one, otherwise they don't need one. they know it's an option. it's just not typically necessary,
3rdly im just testing it out... in one campaign and if it sucks i'll drop it.
But do you always allow the exeptions when they ask for them? if so, then it is an optional rule, if not, then you should, because otherwise that is definitely sexist.
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.
Just as a heads up, if you respond to any of the inevitable further responses to this thread, I'm totally gonna all you out, because that would be 100% confirmation that you honestly do care.
I love this word that the OP keeps using.....'tend'. What a great, scientifically correct, perfectly composed word. Yes men 'tend' to be stronger, and women tend to be more social. Yes men 'tend' to be more interested in things and women 'tend' to be more interested in people. But not my guy. He is a computer wizard (literally), a social devil, a carousing genius who is able to read between the lines and notice things that others can't. He also can't deadlift a sack of potatoes, and if you flick his nose it will bleed profusely. I feel like I am describing myself (jk lol, I am this but dumber)
No adventurer will symbolize every single person, so you cannot assign an ASI on a generalization. Even if men 'tend' to be stronger that does not mean that your PCs should be. There are ALWAYS men that are smart and ALWAYS women that are strong (Just ask my cousin Ren....she is seven, and can no joke beat me and the rest of my family in an arm wrestle. No special training, she is just built like a brick s***house), so why can't your PCs be one of those people?
Party on dude, I rest my case.
100% I stand with you, there are always exceptions to the rule. talk to the DM, but as for *general rules* remember *general* men are typically stronger than women and women tend to be better socially. nothing wrong with that, but if you dont want to play that... don't.
just a question... are you sure she's not MC Ren? XD
No. She is a girl. And the players shouldn't have to ask for exceptions, it should just be an option. If it is an exception, does it mean that you wont say yes 100% of the time? If not, then you are generalizing
The other thing I am confused about is the fact that you are 'playtesting' this. What is there to playtest? Mechanically, the stats are no different to any other race, so there is nothing that needs 'playtesting'....Just a badly designed rule that replaces different races with the same race. But now sex is a part of it, for absolutely no reason.
first off it was a joke, your cousin seems cool.
2nd, people should ask for exceptions if they want one, otherwise they don't need one. they know it's an option. it's just not typically necessary,
3rdly im just testing it out... in one campaign and if it sucks i'll drop it.
But do you always allow the exeptions when they ask for them? if so, then it is an optional rule, if not, then you should, because otherwise that is definitely sexist.
depends on the campaign, whether it's story driven or a murderhobo game... with murderhobos literally anything goes, if it's story driven i have specific slots, and tailor who i pick to that, i allow exceptions always, but i don't always pick exception laden characters. and sexist is prioritizing certain genders over others, such as showing a preference to men over women, roughly 51% of my slots go to women to reflect *realism* i'm not a bigot i'm a realist.
I love this word that the OP keeps using.....'tend'. What a great, scientifically correct, perfectly composed word. Yes men 'tend' to be stronger, and women tend to be more social. Yes men 'tend' to be more interested in things and women 'tend' to be more interested in people. But not my guy. He is a computer wizard (literally), a social devil, a carousing genius who is able to read between the lines and notice things that others can't. He also can't deadlift a sack of potatoes, and if you flick his nose it will bleed profusely. I feel like I am describing myself (jk lol, I am this but dumber)
No adventurer will symbolize every single person, so you cannot assign an ASI on a generalization. Even if men 'tend' to be stronger that does not mean that your PCs should be. There are ALWAYS men that are smart and ALWAYS women that are strong (Just ask my cousin Ren....she is seven, and can no joke beat me and the rest of my family in an arm wrestle. No special training, she is just built like a brick s***house), so why can't your PCs be one of those people?
Party on dude, I rest my case.
100% I stand with you, there are always exceptions to the rule. talk to the DM, but as for *general rules* remember *general* men are typically stronger than women and women tend to be better socially. nothing wrong with that, but if you dont want to play that... don't.
just a question... are you sure she's not MC Ren? XD
No. She is a girl. And the players shouldn't have to ask for exceptions, it should just be an option. If it is an exception, does it mean that you wont say yes 100% of the time? If not, then you are generalizing
The other thing I am confused about is the fact that you are 'playtesting' this. What is there to playtest? Mechanically, the stats are no different to any other race, so there is nothing that needs 'playtesting'....Just a badly designed rule that replaces different races with the same race. But now sex is a part of it, for absolutely no reason.
first off it was a joke, your cousin seems cool.
2nd, people should ask for exceptions if they want one, otherwise they don't need one. they know it's an option. it's just not typically necessary,
3rdly im just testing it out... in one campaign and if it sucks i'll drop it.
But do you always allow the exeptions when they ask for them? if so, then it is an optional rule, if not, then you should, because otherwise that is definitely sexist.
depends on the campaign, whether it's story driven or a murderhobo game... with murderhobos literally anything goes, if it's story driven i have specific slots, and tailor who i pick to that, i allow exceptions always, but i don't always pick exception laden characters.
So no. I am glad you answered, but that is not a good answer. People only pick stereotypical characters, you have a serious problem with not understanding DnD
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.
That is not what sexism is. Sexism by a googles definition is "prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex"
You are doing 2 of if not all of those things.
And that's just a Google definition, sexism is a much more complicated discussion then just favoritism.
I love this word that the OP keeps using.....'tend'. What a great, scientifically correct, perfectly composed word. Yes men 'tend' to be stronger, and women tend to be more social. Yes men 'tend' to be more interested in things and women 'tend' to be more interested in people. But not my guy. He is a computer wizard (literally), a social devil, a carousing genius who is able to read between the lines and notice things that others can't. He also can't deadlift a sack of potatoes, and if you flick his nose it will bleed profusely. I feel like I am describing myself (jk lol, I am this but dumber)
No adventurer will symbolize every single person, so you cannot assign an ASI on a generalization. Even if men 'tend' to be stronger that does not mean that your PCs should be. There are ALWAYS men that are smart and ALWAYS women that are strong (Just ask my cousin Ren....she is seven, and can no joke beat me and the rest of my family in an arm wrestle. No special training, she is just built like a brick s***house), so why can't your PCs be one of those people?
Party on dude, I rest my case.
100% I stand with you, there are always exceptions to the rule. talk to the DM, but as for *general rules* remember *general* men are typically stronger than women and women tend to be better socially. nothing wrong with that, but if you dont want to play that... don't.
just a question... are you sure she's not MC Ren? XD
No. She is a girl. And the players shouldn't have to ask for exceptions, it should just be an option. If it is an exception, does it mean that you wont say yes 100% of the time? If not, then you are generalizing
The other thing I am confused about is the fact that you are 'playtesting' this. What is there to playtest? Mechanically, the stats are no different to any other race, so there is nothing that needs 'playtesting'....Just a badly designed rule that replaces different races with the same race. But now sex is a part of it, for absolutely no reason.
first off it was a joke, your cousin seems cool.
2nd, people should ask for exceptions if they want one, otherwise they don't need one. they know it's an option. it's just not typically necessary,
3rdly im just testing it out... in one campaign and if it sucks i'll drop it.
But do you always allow the exeptions when they ask for them? if so, then it is an optional rule, if not, then you should, because otherwise that is definitely sexist.
depends on the campaign, whether it's story driven or a murderhobo game... with murderhobos literally anything goes, if it's story driven i have specific slots, and tailor who i pick to that, i allow exceptions always, but i don't always pick exception laden characters.
So no. I am glad you answered, but that is not a good answer. People only pick stereotypical characters, you have a serious problem with not understanding DnD
not necessarily: they can do whatever they want to do, but if it's overboard i'm not gonna pick them, and not everybody picks stereotypical characters.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cult of Sedge
Rangers are the best, and have always been the best
I love this word that the OP keeps using.....'tend'. What a great, scientifically correct, perfectly composed word. Yes men 'tend' to be stronger, and women tend to be more social. Yes men 'tend' to be more interested in things and women 'tend' to be more interested in people. But not my guy. He is a computer wizard (literally), a social devil, a carousing genius who is able to read between the lines and notice things that others can't. He also can't deadlift a sack of potatoes, and if you flick his nose it will bleed profusely. I feel like I am describing myself (jk lol, I am this but dumber)
No adventurer will symbolize every single person, so you cannot assign an ASI on a generalization. Even if men 'tend' to be stronger that does not mean that your PCs should be. There are ALWAYS men that are smart and ALWAYS women that are strong (Just ask my cousin Ren....she is seven, and can no joke beat me and the rest of my family in an arm wrestle. No special training, she is just built like a brick s***house), so why can't your PCs be one of those people?
Party on dude, I rest my case.
100% I stand with you, there are always exceptions to the rule. talk to the DM, but as for *general rules* remember *general* men are typically stronger than women and women tend to be better socially. nothing wrong with that, but if you dont want to play that... don't.
just a question... are you sure she's not MC Ren? XD
No. She is a girl. And the players shouldn't have to ask for exceptions, it should just be an option. If it is an exception, does it mean that you wont say yes 100% of the time? If not, then you are generalizing
The other thing I am confused about is the fact that you are 'playtesting' this. What is there to playtest? Mechanically, the stats are no different to any other race, so there is nothing that needs 'playtesting'....Just a badly designed rule that replaces different races with the same race. But now sex is a part of it, for absolutely no reason.
first off it was a joke, your cousin seems cool.
2nd, people should ask for exceptions if they want one, otherwise they don't need one. they know it's an option. it's just not typically necessary,
3rdly im just testing it out... in one campaign and if it sucks i'll drop it.
But do you always allow the exeptions when they ask for them? if so, then it is an optional rule, if not, then you should, because otherwise that is definitely sexist.
depends on the campaign, whether it's story driven or a murderhobo game... with murderhobos literally anything goes, if it's story driven i have specific slots, and tailor who i pick to that, i allow exceptions always, but i don't always pick exception laden characters.
So no. I am glad you answered, but that is not a good answer. People only pick stereotypical characters, you have a serious problem with not understanding DnD
not necessarily: they can do whatever they want to do, but if it's overboard i'm not gonna pick them, and not everybody picks stereotypical characters.
What if it was your IRL group? Would you always allow them to use an exception? If so, I restate, it is an optional rule.
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.
I love this word that the OP keeps using.....'tend'. What a great, scientifically correct, perfectly composed word. Yes men 'tend' to be stronger, and women tend to be more social. Yes men 'tend' to be more interested in things and women 'tend' to be more interested in people. But not my guy. He is a computer wizard (literally), a social devil, a carousing genius who is able to read between the lines and notice things that others can't. He also can't deadlift a sack of potatoes, and if you flick his nose it will bleed profusely. I feel like I am describing myself (jk lol, I am this but dumber)
No adventurer will symbolize every single person, so you cannot assign an ASI on a generalization. Even if men 'tend' to be stronger that does not mean that your PCs should be. There are ALWAYS men that are smart and ALWAYS women that are strong (Just ask my cousin Ren....she is seven, and can no joke beat me and the rest of my family in an arm wrestle. No special training, she is just built like a brick s***house), so why can't your PCs be one of those people?
Party on dude, I rest my case.
100% I stand with you, there are always exceptions to the rule. talk to the DM, but as for *general rules* remember *general* men are typically stronger than women and women tend to be better socially. nothing wrong with that, but if you dont want to play that... don't.
just a question... are you sure she's not MC Ren? XD
No. She is a girl. And the players shouldn't have to ask for exceptions, it should just be an option. If it is an exception, does it mean that you wont say yes 100% of the time? If not, then you are generalizing
The other thing I am confused about is the fact that you are 'playtesting' this. What is there to playtest? Mechanically, the stats are no different to any other race, so there is nothing that needs 'playtesting'....Just a badly designed rule that replaces different races with the same race. But now sex is a part of it, for absolutely no reason.
first off it was a joke, your cousin seems cool.
2nd, people should ask for exceptions if they want one, otherwise they don't need one. they know it's an option. it's just not typically necessary,
3rdly im just testing it out... in one campaign and if it sucks i'll drop it.
But do you always allow the exeptions when they ask for them? if so, then it is an optional rule, if not, then you should, because otherwise that is definitely sexist.
depends on the campaign, whether it's story driven or a murderhobo game... with murderhobos literally anything goes, if it's story driven i have specific slots, and tailor who i pick to that, i allow exceptions always, but i don't always pick exception laden characters.
So no. I am glad you answered, but that is not a good answer. People only pick stereotypical characters, you have a serious problem with not understanding DnD
not necessarily: they can do whatever they want to do, but if it's overboard i'm not gonna pick them, and not everybody picks stereotypical characters.
What if it was your IRL group? Would you always allow them to use an exception? If so, I restate, it is an optional rule.
Sadly enough, i'm in the process of finding a new one, but i absolutely would, if they asked for it, and had a backstory that could work out the kinks absolutely, but in the sake of balance, i'd ask them to take a nerf along with any buff.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cult of Sedge
Rangers are the best, and have always been the best
But now sex is a part of it, for absolutely no reason.
Gonna slightly correct you on that last part. Sex is part of it, for absolutely no good/beneficial reason.
maybe, but let me try out my idea, give you a report on how it went before you pass judgement please.
Some ideas are obviously not good ideas without having to try them out. I've never eaten a Tide pod, but I'm able to pass judgement on whether or not it's a good idea.
But now sex is a part of it, for absolutely no reason.
Gonna slightly correct you on that last part. Sex is part of it, for absolutely no good/beneficial reason.
maybe, but let me try out my idea, give you a report on how it went before you pass judgement please.
Some ideas are obviously not good ideas without having to try them out. I've never eaten a Tide pod, but I'm able to pass judgement on whether or not it's a good idea.
yes, but only because others have...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cult of Sedge
Rangers are the best, and have always been the best
While the exercise physiologist in me appreciates the realism, I do NOT want this unnecessary intra-species, sexual dimorphism thingy in my games.
Yes, human males are larger and stronger, and yes, human females tend to have slightly better reaction times and are better at forming and maintaining complex social networks, but I just want my distinctions to occur at the Human-Elf-Dwarf level.
Not to mention, you're going to REALLY piss off a certain...recreationally outraged segment of the population. Proceed at your own risk.
This is an excellent post. People are not quantifiable by six numbers. Also, strength is not just brute force and lifting. It also covers athletics, which is jumping, climbing and various other things. Sure men might be able to lift more on average, but are they also more proficient in the other areas of athletics? Even arguable the most simple stat is not cut and dried.
Actually, yes. There's this thing called neuromuscular efficiency, which is primarily set in untero via the amount of testostrone a fetus is bathed in.
Even for transgender folks who transition from female to male, you can't bridge this gap. Testosterone introduced after the fact simply won't reverse engineer the difference in the ability to produce explosive forces. As best we can tell, it accounts for somewhere between 15-25% of the force generated, all other attributes being completely equal.
Yeah, this one is a one off experiment, not some kind of rule change i'm trying to push, i think it would be unnecessary and hard to keep track of as a player, but just for the sake of a really odd campaign imma try it once.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cult of Sedge
Rangers are the best, and have always been the best
But now sex is a part of it, for absolutely no reason.
Gonna slightly correct you on that last part. Sex is part of it, for absolutely no good/beneficial reason.
maybe, but let me try out my idea, give you a report on how it went before you pass judgement please.
Some ideas are obviously not good ideas without having to try them out. I've never eaten a Tide pod, but I'm able to pass judgement on whether or not it's a good idea.
yes, but only because others have...
*facepalm
You can know something is bad without experiencing it and without others experiencing it. Science would say that Tide pods are bad for you without us having to give them to people.
Also, this same recommendation you're recommending has been tried before, and it didn't work because it was too problematic and un-inclusive. If you think that you can learn from other people's experiences, you would not play with this rule as it has been shown that people in general don't like it, and it isn't good for the game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
But now sex is a part of it, for absolutely no reason.
Gonna slightly correct you on that last part. Sex is part of it, for absolutely no good/beneficial reason.
maybe, but let me try out my idea, give you a report on how it went before you pass judgement please.
Some ideas are obviously not good ideas without having to try them out. I've never eaten a Tide pod, but I'm able to pass judgement on whether or not it's a good idea.
yes, but only because others have...
*facepalm
You can know something is bad without experiencing it and without others experiencing it. Science would say that Tide pods are bad for you without us having to give them to people.
Also, this same recommendation you're recommending has been tried before, and it didn't work because it was too problematic and un-inclusive. If you think that you can learn from other people's experiences, you would not play with this rule as it has been shown that people in general don't like it, and it isn't good for the game.
well then don't play it. imma try it myself, you don't have to. imma try to impose realism on a few campaigns, maybe it will be fun, maybe not, peace.
well then don't play it. imma try it myself, you don't have to. Peace.
I won't play it, and am only here to convince others that this isn't a good idea. I was under the impression that you wanted to convince other people to playtest it. I will be here trying to convince those same people to not use it. Peace as well.
(Also, you know what they say Einstein said about the definition of insanity. He didn't say it, but it's still a true statement.)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I stand corrected.
“I will take responsibility for what I have done. [...] If must fall, I will rise each time a better man.” ― Brandon Sanderson, Oathbringer.
first off it was a joke, your cousin seems cool.
2nd, people should ask for exceptions if they want one, otherwise they don't need one. they know it's an option. it's just not typically necessary,
3rdly im just testing it out... in one campaign and if it sucks i'll drop it.
Cult of Sedge
Rangers are the best, and have always been the best
I love Homebrew
I hate paladins
Warrior Bovine
If you don't like it, allow this thread to die. I honestly do not care.
Cult of Sedge
Rangers are the best, and have always been the best
I love Homebrew
I hate paladins
Warrior Bovine
But do you always allow the exeptions when they ask for them? if so, then it is an optional rule, if not, then you should, because otherwise that is definitely sexist.
“I will take responsibility for what I have done. [...] If must fall, I will rise each time a better man.” ― Brandon Sanderson, Oathbringer.
Just as a heads up, if you respond to any of the inevitable further responses to this thread, I'm totally gonna all you out, because that would be 100% confirmation that you honestly do care.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
maybe, but let me try out my idea, give you a report on how it went before you pass judgement please.
Cult of Sedge
Rangers are the best, and have always been the best
I love Homebrew
I hate paladins
Warrior Bovine
depends on the campaign, whether it's story driven or a murderhobo game... with murderhobos literally anything goes, if it's story driven i have specific slots, and tailor who i pick to that, i allow exceptions always, but i don't always pick exception laden characters. and sexist is prioritizing certain genders over others, such as showing a preference to men over women, roughly 51% of my slots go to women to reflect *realism* i'm not a bigot i'm a realist.
Cult of Sedge
Rangers are the best, and have always been the best
I love Homebrew
I hate paladins
Warrior Bovine
So no. I am glad you answered, but that is not a good answer. People only pick stereotypical characters, you have a serious problem with not understanding DnD
“I will take responsibility for what I have done. [...] If must fall, I will rise each time a better man.” ― Brandon Sanderson, Oathbringer.
Wow. Took you a whole 4 minutes to prove yourself wrong.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
That is not what sexism is. Sexism by a googles definition is "prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex"
You are doing 2 of if not all of those things.
And that's just a Google definition, sexism is a much more complicated discussion then just favoritism.
Buyers Guide for D&D Beyond - Hardcover Books, D&D Beyond and You - How/What is Toggled Content?
Everything you need to know about Homebrew - Homebrew FAQ - Digital Book on D&D Beyond Vs Physical Books
Can't find the content you are supposed to have access to? Read this FAQ.
"Play the game however you want to play the game. After all, your fun doesn't threaten my fun."
not necessarily: they can do whatever they want to do, but if it's overboard i'm not gonna pick them, and not everybody picks stereotypical characters.
Cult of Sedge
Rangers are the best, and have always been the best
I love Homebrew
I hate paladins
Warrior Bovine
What if it was your IRL group? Would you always allow them to use an exception? If so, I restate, it is an optional rule.
“I will take responsibility for what I have done. [...] If must fall, I will rise each time a better man.” ― Brandon Sanderson, Oathbringer.
Cult of Sedge
Rangers are the best, and have always been the best
I love Homebrew
I hate paladins
Warrior Bovine
Sadly enough, i'm in the process of finding a new one, but i absolutely would, if they asked for it, and had a backstory that could work out the kinks absolutely, but in the sake of balance, i'd ask them to take a nerf along with any buff.
Cult of Sedge
Rangers are the best, and have always been the best
I love Homebrew
I hate paladins
Warrior Bovine
Some ideas are obviously not good ideas without having to try them out. I've never eaten a Tide pod, but I'm able to pass judgement on whether or not it's a good idea.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
yes, but only because others have...
Cult of Sedge
Rangers are the best, and have always been the best
I love Homebrew
I hate paladins
Warrior Bovine
Yeah, this one is a one off experiment, not some kind of rule change i'm trying to push, i think it would be unnecessary and hard to keep track of as a player, but just for the sake of a really odd campaign imma try it once.
Cult of Sedge
Rangers are the best, and have always been the best
I love Homebrew
I hate paladins
Warrior Bovine
*facepalm
You can know something is bad without experiencing it and without others experiencing it. Science would say that Tide pods are bad for you without us having to give them to people.
Also, this same recommendation you're recommending has been tried before, and it didn't work because it was too problematic and un-inclusive. If you think that you can learn from other people's experiences, you would not play with this rule as it has been shown that people in general don't like it, and it isn't good for the game.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
well then don't play it. imma try it myself, you don't have to. imma try to impose realism on a few campaigns, maybe it will be fun, maybe not, peace.
Cult of Sedge
Rangers are the best, and have always been the best
I love Homebrew
I hate paladins
Warrior Bovine
I won't play it, and am only here to convince others that this isn't a good idea. I was under the impression that you wanted to convince other people to playtest it. I will be here trying to convince those same people to not use it. Peace as well.
(Also, you know what they say Einstein said about the definition of insanity. He didn't say it, but it's still a true statement.)
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms