If one objects so strenuously to playing a game that has “the Tolkienite baggage of fifty years of D&D,” then why does one play D&D and not another game that has not been steeped in 5 decades of Tolkienite baggage?” For many players, the opportunity to experience a “Tolkienite” world with a rich longstanding history is one of the main selling points of D&D. Why play a game inspired by and designed around a “Tolkienite” experience if one dislikes that experience so immensely? I’m curious since it seems such a strange thing to me.
I'm confused by this. Just the other day you were calling Vince out on gatekeeping because he was telling people that "Eberron isn't true D&D", and now you're doing a 180 and asking why Yurei and I and anyone else who doesn't like the tired, old Tolkein-tropes is playing D&D in the first place? Maybe you're not flip-flopping here, but it seems that way to me.
Besides, these are independent things. America started as a slave state with many slave-owner presidents and politicians and women not having the right to vote, but it has changed over the centuries. It was inspired by and designed around both the republic of Rome and democracy of Greece. Asking "why play a game inspired by and designed a 'Tolkienite' experience if one dislikes that experience so immensely?' is like asking an African-American Female American politician "why should you be in politics when our country didn't allow you to in the first place???"
The answer to both of those questions is this: Your origin doesn't have to dictate who you are and what you can do for eternity.
This game was based off of Tolkein's works. That is 100% true. Halflings were even called Hobbits. Orcs and Goblins were all evil because they were in Middle Earth. Rangers would straight up not exist if it were not for Aragorn. However, the game has changed in the past 46+ years. Did Tolkein's world have hippo-headed, gunslinging, british mercenaries that flew around in magic-powered spacecraft? Was the world a giant desert planet destroyed by arcane magic and full of psionic ant-people? Was Middle Earth full of lightning-trains and fiery air-ships created by Mega-Corporations of magical-tattooed tinkers? No, no, and no. If it did, I missed that in the Silmarillion. Does that make it not D&D. D&D can cover waaaaayyyy more tropes and stories than just Humans, Hobbits, Elves, and Dwarves journeying to slay the dragon that took over a fortress, or destroy a powerful artifact that could destroy the world by throwing it in a volcano.
D&D doesn't need any of that. My world barely focuses on Humans, Elves, Dwarves, or Halflings. They're all still there, and they're changed quite a bit, but they're very much some of the least important races in my world. My world has an huge expanse of undead-touched dwelling in thousands of settlements placed in the Underfell (the Shadowfell's Underdark) that serve and worship Vecna. My world has surface-dwelling nocturnal drow that worship the stars and believe that they will awaken into deities that will perfect the world. My world has a world-wide network of psionic races that band together to stop the oppression they have endured for hundreds of years because the magic-worshipping goblinoids irrationately hate psionics.
Is my world not D&D? Should I move to Pathfinder or some other TTRPG and transfer my world to there to preserve D&D as having "Tolkein Works Only"? Should Eberron or Dark Sun be sold off to another system in order to rid the hobby of the slippery slope of including a variety of character races and classes? Should we revert to back when Elf was a class and AC was backwards just because D&D started out like that?
I don't think so. D&D has room for my pseudo-modern, Eberron/Exandria/Dark Sun blend, trope-subverting world, and it also has room for space hippos that fight eel-spiders aboard flying warships.
My world isn't Tolkien-ish D&D, and I don't want it to be. That doesn't mean that I would be better off somewhere else and it doesn't mean that the game would be any better off with me gone.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Even if I could convince people to try a new ruleset - and there was actually some interest in Savage Worlds when I floated the idea even if Savage Worlds is basically just GURPS Lite with a better combat engine - there's simply no support for it. If you're not playing in person around a real-life table with a paper character sheet in hand, you more or less can't play.
Well there is support for it on Fantasy Grounds and now in Foundry. I have the official SWADE source mod they put out for Foundry for the low low price of $9.99 (that was promo -- it might be up to $14.99 now). I don't have the Fantasy Grounds one so I can't directly comment, but the Foundry one is great. It has 100% of SWADE in it as far as I can tell (I have not ever actually played SWADE in it but I made up a character and it was super easy).
So if the lack of support for playing it online is actually an issue and you really do want to try SWADE with your friends online... you can do it. There is a $65-ish price tag -- $50 for Foundry, and then $15 or so for the SWADE rules. But it's actually more and better integrated into Foundry than D&D is, since D&D is only the OSR stuff and not any of the book stuff, and the SWADE module is everything in SWADE.
Just saying... if you really want to play SWADE online, it is possible.... in case you didn't know that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Hopefully Cyberpunk Red learns from Shadowrun's mistakes.
Off-topic: your interest in Cyberpunk Red depends on whether you'll want magic systems in there. Cyberpunk has plenty of cyberware and skills, and roles that don't die you to particular characters, etc., but it doesn't have any magic in it and you'd need to homebrew it all yourself.
It certainly is more streamlined (particularly for Netrunning) compared to it's previous version and doesn't have the problems with rules that Shadowrun has, from having a read and starting to plan a campaign.
It also does have official VTT support in Astral, with some continuing and unofficial support in Foundry.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. Just because you personally dislike something doesn't mean it's stupid, or that other people won't like it. Similarly, just because you enjoy something doesn't mean that everyone will. And that's fine. You don't have to criticize people for their preferences. Just play whatever way is fun for you, and hopefully, everyone else will play the way that's fun for them.
Something being dumb doesn't mean whoever thought it up or whoever else likes it anyway is also dumb. I think those people are wrong, but that's not a problem. Those people thinking I'm wrong is not a problem either. We can all have an opinion and that really doesn't have to be the same one.
That said, floating ASIs being dumb being an opinion is not the same as me not liking yellow wallpaper being an opinion. It's not a matter of taste or preference or some personal dislike. The strongest gnome in the world being as strong as the strongest goliath in the world makes no sense. The hardiest elf in the world being as tough as the hardiest dragonborn makes no sense. I'm well aware this is already possible without floating ASIs, but those make that even easier. It's unnecessary and compounds something that makes no sense. Hence, dumb.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Hm. I thought Foundry was one of the umpteen bananamillion awkward, difficult-to-use VTT interfaces people sing too highly of. May have to look into it, if it has support for SWADE. Assuming one can do custom skills/edges and the like, or is it locked strictly to what's in the book?
Heh, and besides. I'm not trying to kick D&D out of the Fantasy genre. I'm trying to kick it into different takes on fantasy. Maybe I want some Brandon Sanderson in my world instead of Tolkien, all Tolkien, and nothing but Tolkien. No way to make a Mistwalker in D&D, but man - the worldbuilding that guy does is impressive, and there's some cool ideas to be mined there. Legit: were a DM to tell me "The game I'm planning takes its inspiration from the guns-and-sorcery magicpunk Western fantasy stories of Brandon Sanderson's Wax and Wayne series, in a world recovering from centuries of climatological catastrophe where the sciences are only beginning to emerge from the shadow of ancient magic and immortal tyranny", my excitement would be downright sexual and that game would get the absolute shit played out of it.
So play the Mistborn Adventure Game. I backed the Kickstarter and can wholeheartedly recommend it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Why is the ability to take +2 CHA on your elf always seen as min-maxing and never seen as "Hey, now my backstory of being a noble in the eladrin court can be backed up by my stats"?
As said elsewhere, people who want to purely optimize with no sense of roleplay could already do that. All these rules do for them is allow them to consider roleplay as well in their characters without taking a mechanical hit, which presumably makes the game better for them and their group.
People talk about min-maxers like they burst into the room, flip your D&D table, and then run out to find another game to ruin. I honestly don't get the narrative about how they're about to destroy the game every time a new feature comes out, it's exhausting and alarmist and above all simply not true.
By removing all the cultural abilities from races you are forcing every DM to come up with a list of cultures that each species of PC can come from.
The 5E rules used to provide this information directly, which as per Rule 0 (or is it 1) the DM could change if they wanted to have something different for their campaign.
Now all DMs, including novices, will have to come up with a set of cultural abilities for their PCs without having the benefit of a set of "stereotype" cultural abilities as a starting point.
It was mentioned early, in the opening post, I think, but having Backgrounds entirely overhauled, to include the old stat perks the races offered would be a really good idea. Each culture (Background) has it's priorities and such, and thus people from that Background would innately be a little stronger, or more nimble, or more knowledgeable in the forest or mountains. Making it so the AS perks tied to your background makes perfect sense and as stated, makes a Background something more than a couple shiny options that often have little impact.
That's aside though, because I also wanted to agree with some MUCH more experienced DM's I see posting that table rules (and settings and so forth) are what they are. I have seen a Dwarf who was a master woodsman and had no understanding of mining or rocks. Min/max freaks would be hollering that he MUST roll advantage on the checks, when in fact, the player would say "I don't know nothin' bout no rocks, lady." You want your stats assigned differently? I can edit ANY of the base stats as I create a character. This change is odd, for sure, but in truth, entirely pointless. EVERYTHING is customizable and people have been doing it forever. This is just saying it again and flattening the base numbers so it "looks" better upon initial presentation.
Ditching the culture will work great, too. Make sure you explain why your desert-born Drow can't see well in the sun.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Talk to your Players.Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
By removing all the cultural abilities from races you are forcing every DM to come up with a list of cultures that each species of PC can come from.
The 5E rules used to provide this information directly, which as per Rule 0 (or is it 1) the DM could change if they wanted to have something different for their campaign.
Now all DMs, including novices, will have to come up with a set of cultural abilities for their PCs without having the benefit of a set of "stereotype" cultural abilities as a starting point.
They're removing cultural abilities from races. They never said they weren't going to move them somewhere else. This is just one UA to introduce the change and give examples related to an upcoming book (Ravenloft). A later one will hopefully give an alternative system for culture.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Hm. I thought Foundry was one of the umpteen bananamillion awkward, difficult-to-use VTT interfaces people sing too highly of. May have to look into it, if it has support for SWADE. Assuming one can do custom skills/edges and the like, or is it locked strictly to what's in the book?
You can customize. Their compendia are "locked" but that is normal for a ruleset. You can't edit the ruleset. But you can make your own compendium or your own in-world item. I just tested it to be sure... I copied the Edge "Alertness" and renamed it "Dullness" and changed the text to say something about being stupid, and then gave it to a character by drag-and-drop. Easy peasy.
I don't have any way to address whether Foundry is awkward or not. You said that "online" options did not exist for SWADE like they do for D&D, but did not specify what you mean. If you mean a website that works exactly like D&D Beyond, then obviously, no... there is nothing like that. But I personally find Foundry dramatically easier to use than DDB for just about everything other than character creation, and that is only because D&D character creation is so complicated and has so many provisos and quid-pro-quos. SWADE characters are fairly easy to make by comparison. The Foundry mod will NOT automatically count up your skills or anything as you get them -- you have to track that you spent the right # of points on things. But again, it's not that hard to do in SWADE.
The Foundry mod has cards you can draw in a custom deck and things like this also... I think it's everything you need. Even some of the rulebook sections though obviously the ENTIRE book is not duplicated. You can, however, install a free Foundry mod called "PDFoundry" which will read PDFs, and could theoretically read the entire SWADE PDF in-app that way. I wouldn't advise it just because readers like Acrobat are more fully featured. PDFoundry lets you read but it's not a super great experience in comparison.
The big caveat is, I haven't actually played it because I don't have anyone to play it with. But I like SWADE and the thing was on sale, so I got it.
Anyway, if you truly like SWADE better and would rather play it but feel like you can't due to online limitations, I'd say you might want to try it, if you have some spare money lying around. You could try watching some videos to see how Foundry works first before spending but unfortunately they don't really have a "try before you buy" model.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
The one good thing I see here is that they are starting to use that PB scaling features where they belong, with Races. Too bad I now have to homebrew rules for what their ASBs are going to be because of these so-called “optional” (Crawford, you’re dirty mother******* liar) lineage rules so now I need to homebrew shit just to make it match established RAW in the PHB.
The big issue is that these are basic like “Half-races” which means they should be useable as templates to apply to any race and that would just **** everything up. So basically, on top of everything else they ****ed this up too. Now your Race is Damphir, which means you can’t be a “Damphir-Elf” or a “Damphir-Hobgoblin.” In other words, this is me saying “You ****ed this up too Crawford. You suck.”
This is a pretty late response, but making a Damphir-Elf or Damphir-Hobgoblin is pretty easy. Take Hobgob for example. Play the Damphir lineage, select +2 to CON and +1 to INT, and that is a pretty good approximation of the combination.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
Because Shadowrun is a mechanically terrible game, at least if the Sixth World sourcebook I have to go by is any indication. Seriously, those rules are an absolute trashfire. I bought the book at my Friendly Local Game Store (which is three hundred miles away from me since I got a job and moved, but it will never stop being my FLGS) out of sheer curiosity because I enjoy the world/idea of Shadowrun, but those rules are awful. Hopefully Cyberpunk Red learns from Shadowrun's mistakes.
Because for as much of a horrible anime weeb as I am, there's just not enough Twilight in me to run World of Darkness. Besides, I have the Grim Hollow Campaign Guide and their new Player Guide incoming as soon as it's done, if I want dark fantasy D&D I've got those needs thoroughly covered.
Because all the Rules-Lite Narrative Experience(TM) games out there are disgraces and should just stop.
Oh. And also because there's absolutely zero support for running any of those games online. Zip. Nada. Zilch. Nopesters.
It's an argument I've made before - DDB and its ilk are the only reason I get to play at all. I have zero friends in my local area, my whole group is online across all corners of the continental United States. I actually prefer GURPS 4e to D&D, but there's no way to support an online GURPS game. And also GURPS handles combat and other fast-paced sequences as poorly as 5e handles social encounters and site exploration. Even if I could convince people to try a new ruleset - and there was actually some interest in Savage Worlds when I floated the idea even if Savage Worlds is basically just GURPS Lite with a better combat engine - there's simply no support for it. If you're not playing in person around a real-life table with a paper character sheet in hand, you more or less can't play. It sucks rocks, I hate it, but it's true.
Heh, and besides. I'm not trying to kick D&D out of the Fantasy genre. I'm trying to kick it into different takes on fantasy. Maybe I want some Brandon Sanderson in my world instead of Tolkien, all Tolkien, and nothing but Tolkien. No way to make a Mistwalker in D&D, but man - the worldbuilding that guy does is impressive, and there's some cool ideas to be mined there. Legit: were a DM to tell me "The game I'm planning takes its inspiration from the guns-and-sorcery magicpunk Western fantasy stories of Brandon Sanderson's Wax and Wayne series, in a world recovering from centuries of climatological catastrophe where the sciences are only beginning to emerge from the shadow of ancient magic and immortal tyranny", my excitement would be downright sexual and that game would get the absolute shit played out of it. Still fantasy, still magical, but man. That just sounds so much freaking cooler than "the twist? This time, we're throwing a necklace into the volcano, Frodo!"
Okay, a couplefew things:
I didn’t say why don’t you play those other games. I said that those are the games I play when I want to play those styles of games. You don’t have to like Shadowrun or WoD, but there are plenty of other games out there that you may legitimately enjoy playing more than you enjoy playing D&D.
And my biggest complaint about Cyberpunk is that it isn’t Shadowrun. Shadowrun is such a way cooler IP. And judging by your review of the Shadowrun rules it seems like you think that games a little better than D&D so what’s the problem? 😜
I started playing both Shadowrun and WoD around the same time I started playing D&D, so the early-mid ‘90s. (You know, back before anybody bedazzled vampires.) And still play the old editions from back then so I cannot speak to the newer ones.
I don’t care about any of those games. Without rules and dice it’s just grownups playing make believe.
Okay, so your reasoning is that D&D is the only game with online support, so you’ll play D&D and fight with it tooth and claw it to better suit your tastes and pressure the publisher to change the game for you so you don’t have to. Why?!? Why not instead find a game you actually enjoy and change the online accessibility for that game?!? That way you get to play a game you like, you get to promote online support for that game you like, and you don’t have to keep fighting D&D and you don’t have to complain about it until they change it and I get to keep my simpler Race/Class system. Doesn’t that seem like more of a win all around?!? It legitimately seems like you just really dislike D&D.
The one good thing I see here is that they are starting to use that PB scaling features where they belong, with Races. Too bad I now have to homebrew rules for what their ASBs are going to be because of these so-called “optional” (Crawford, you’re dirty mother******* liar) lineage rules so now I need to homebrew shit just to make it match established RAW in the PHB.
The big issue is that these are basic like “Half-races” which means they should be useable as templates to apply to any race and that would just **** everything up. So basically, on top of everything else they ****ed this up too. Now your Race is Damphir, which means you can’t be a “Damphir-Elf” or a “Damphir-Hobgoblin.” In other words, this is me saying “You ****ed this up too Crawford. You suck.”
This is a pretty late response, but making a Damphir-Elf or Damphir-Hobgoblin is pretty easy. Take Hobgob for example. Play the Damphir lineage, select +2 to CON and +1 to INT, and that is a pretty good approximation of the combination.
Except for the Martial Training and Saving Face features.
The one good thing I see here is that they are starting to use that PB scaling features where they belong, with Races. Too bad I now have to homebrew rules for what their ASBs are going to be because of these so-called “optional” (Crawford, you’re dirty mother******* liar) lineage rules so now I need to homebrew shit just to make it match established RAW in the PHB.
The big issue is that these are basic like “Half-races” which means they should be useable as templates to apply to any race and that would just **** everything up. So basically, on top of everything else they ****ed this up too. Now your Race is Damphir, which means you can’t be a “Damphir-Elf” or a “Damphir-Hobgoblin.” In other words, this is me saying “You ****ed this up too Crawford. You suck.”
This is a pretty late response, but making a Damphir-Elf or Damphir-Hobgoblin is pretty easy. Take Hobgob for example. Play the Damphir lineage, select +2 to CON and +1 to INT, and that is a pretty good approximation of the combination.
Except for the Martial Training and Saving Face features.
Yeah, but you have to trade something for the sweet vampire features.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
Before this descends fully into thermonuclear flame war and padlock, I'm going to say this. These new lineages are exciting to try out, at least for me. Most of the time, the species of my character isn't really important to me; class and background define them more. But the mechanical and flavorful impact of these makes me want to build around them. It's a stark contrast to the previous most unique races, which were far less revolutionary than this. I hope that in the future, the focus of lineage design shifts more towards the features and abilities instead of flat numerical increases. Not only is this more interesting, they are also harder to min-max. At least the min-max's that come out of this will be pretty cool.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
FWIW, many people play D&D because it's the popular tabletop. I'm not sure of the numbers, but possibly something like 90% of the TTRPG market (and that's just 5e). And D&D has dndbeyond, with all the books and material coded right in. It handles most of the math, etc. That's better support than any other TTRPG has ever had. You want to take advantage of that, you play D&D 5e. A significant chunk of players play "D&D or bust" because anything else requires too much work, or they can't find players, or they can't find GMs, or no one is publishing adventures...
So it's not that surprising that people who have issues with the game want to change it --- or, more appropriately, celebrate when the game gets new officially supported options that fit their preferences.
Snetterton’s an ass who goes around as the self appointed arbiter of what is or is not D&D.
I am simply asking why one would continue to play a game they don’t like. That’s like someone saying that they hate spinach but they eat it every day. Why? If you hate spinach, why not try broccoli or Brussels sprouts or perhaps some nice kale. Why subject oneself to something one dislikes? Especially as a recreational activity.
---snip---
But if someone doesn’t want to play a game they don’t like, then why do it? Is that not a valid question? Why play a game one doesn’t like, and then insist that game change to suite one’s tastes? How is that fair to those of us who don’t want the changes?
Or has my friend decided they are the arbiter of what I am or am not allowed to be curious about?
I agree with you on that first point, which is what confused me. One person was being an ass by saying that Eberron isn't "true D&D" because it wasn't Tolkien-ish, and you immediately called them out for gatekeeping (multiple times, too). Then when Yurei and some others express their dislike of Tolkien's take on races messing with the game in worlds that shouldn't be altered in any way by Tolkien, you switch sides and begin saying that the game 46 years ago was inspired and based off of Tolkien and that anyone that doesn't like it can leave. Maybe misinterpreted your side here, but that's what it looked like.
My rebuttal to that analogy is that D&D may have started out as Tolkien-Spinach, but it eventually grew into much more. The vast majority of D&D 5e classes, subclasses and races don't fit Tolkien at all. D&D isn't spinach anymore, no matter how many gatekeeping grognards (like Vince) insist that "true D&D" has to be spinach and can never be anything other than spinach. Now D&D is basically every spinach/lettuce group vegetable, like Mustard, Cabbage (heh), Broccoli, Brussel Sprouts, Kale, Cauliflower, and so on. D&D started as spinach, but is much more now. There are just a lot of people who don't want to get rid of the rules that restrict the game to being Tolkien-Spinach and only Tolkien-Spinach.
The game doesn't have to change if its mechanics are more open. Base Orcs in my world have a +2 to their Wisdom score and +1 to their Strength or Constitution score, instead of the normal +2 STR and +1 CON. This "lineage" system would help me have that supported mechanically and officially. My orcs aren't standard Tolkien orcs, and to let the game as a base support any kind of orc will improve the game, not ruin it.
I didn't mean to do anything of the sort. This sort of question comes often enough that the learned reflex is to react harshly to people telling us to go to a different game. If it was a genuine query, I apologize if I was a bit too blunt.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I'm confused by this. Just the other day you were calling Vince out on gatekeeping because he was telling people that "Eberron isn't true D&D", and now you're doing a 180 and asking why Yurei and I and anyone else who doesn't like the tired, old Tolkein-tropes is playing D&D in the first place? Maybe you're not flip-flopping here, but it seems that way to me.
Besides, these are independent things. America started as a slave state with many slave-owner presidents and politicians and women not having the right to vote, but it has changed over the centuries. It was inspired by and designed around both the republic of Rome and democracy of Greece. Asking "why play a game inspired by and designed a 'Tolkienite' experience if one dislikes that experience so immensely?' is like asking an African-American Female American politician "why should you be in politics when our country didn't allow you to in the first place???"
The answer to both of those questions is this: Your origin doesn't have to dictate who you are and what you can do for eternity.
This game was based off of Tolkein's works. That is 100% true. Halflings were even called Hobbits. Orcs and Goblins were all evil because they were in Middle Earth. Rangers would straight up not exist if it were not for Aragorn. However, the game has changed in the past 46+ years. Did Tolkein's world have hippo-headed, gunslinging, british mercenaries that flew around in magic-powered spacecraft? Was the world a giant desert planet destroyed by arcane magic and full of psionic ant-people? Was Middle Earth full of lightning-trains and fiery air-ships created by Mega-Corporations of magical-tattooed tinkers? No, no, and no. If it did, I missed that in the Silmarillion. Does that make it not D&D. D&D can cover waaaaayyyy more tropes and stories than just Humans, Hobbits, Elves, and Dwarves journeying to slay the dragon that took over a fortress, or destroy a powerful artifact that could destroy the world by throwing it in a volcano.
D&D doesn't need any of that. My world barely focuses on Humans, Elves, Dwarves, or Halflings. They're all still there, and they're changed quite a bit, but they're very much some of the least important races in my world. My world has an huge expanse of undead-touched dwelling in thousands of settlements placed in the Underfell (the Shadowfell's Underdark) that serve and worship Vecna. My world has surface-dwelling nocturnal drow that worship the stars and believe that they will awaken into deities that will perfect the world. My world has a world-wide network of psionic races that band together to stop the oppression they have endured for hundreds of years because the magic-worshipping goblinoids irrationately hate psionics.
Is my world not D&D? Should I move to Pathfinder or some other TTRPG and transfer my world to there to preserve D&D as having "Tolkein Works Only"? Should Eberron or Dark Sun be sold off to another system in order to rid the hobby of the slippery slope of including a variety of character races and classes? Should we revert to back when Elf was a class and AC was backwards just because D&D started out like that?
I don't think so. D&D has room for my pseudo-modern, Eberron/Exandria/Dark Sun blend, trope-subverting world, and it also has room for space hippos that fight eel-spiders aboard flying warships.
My world isn't Tolkien-ish D&D, and I don't want it to be. That doesn't mean that I would be better off somewhere else and it doesn't mean that the game would be any better off with me gone.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Well there is support for it on Fantasy Grounds and now in Foundry. I have the official SWADE source mod they put out for Foundry for the low low price of $9.99 (that was promo -- it might be up to $14.99 now). I don't have the Fantasy Grounds one so I can't directly comment, but the Foundry one is great. It has 100% of SWADE in it as far as I can tell (I have not ever actually played SWADE in it but I made up a character and it was super easy).
So if the lack of support for playing it online is actually an issue and you really do want to try SWADE with your friends online... you can do it. There is a $65-ish price tag -- $50 for Foundry, and then $15 or so for the SWADE rules. But it's actually more and better integrated into Foundry than D&D is, since D&D is only the OSR stuff and not any of the book stuff, and the SWADE module is everything in SWADE.
Just saying... if you really want to play SWADE online, it is possible.... in case you didn't know that.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Off-topic: your interest in Cyberpunk Red depends on whether you'll want magic systems in there. Cyberpunk has plenty of cyberware and skills, and roles that don't die you to particular characters, etc., but it doesn't have any magic in it and you'd need to homebrew it all yourself.
It certainly is more streamlined (particularly for Netrunning) compared to it's previous version and doesn't have the problems with rules that Shadowrun has, from having a read and starting to plan a campaign.
It also does have official VTT support in Astral, with some continuing and unofficial support in Foundry.
Something being dumb doesn't mean whoever thought it up or whoever else likes it anyway is also dumb. I think those people are wrong, but that's not a problem. Those people thinking I'm wrong is not a problem either. We can all have an opinion and that really doesn't have to be the same one.
That said, floating ASIs being dumb being an opinion is not the same as me not liking yellow wallpaper being an opinion. It's not a matter of taste or preference or some personal dislike. The strongest gnome in the world being as strong as the strongest goliath in the world makes no sense. The hardiest elf in the world being as tough as the hardiest dragonborn makes no sense. I'm well aware this is already possible without floating ASIs, but those make that even easier. It's unnecessary and compounds something that makes no sense. Hence, dumb.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Hm. I thought Foundry was one of the umpteen bananamillion awkward, difficult-to-use VTT interfaces people sing too highly of. May have to look into it, if it has support for SWADE. Assuming one can do custom skills/edges and the like, or is it locked strictly to what's in the book?
Please do not contact or message me.
So play the Mistborn Adventure Game. I backed the Kickstarter and can wholeheartedly recommend it.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Why is the ability to take +2 CHA on your elf always seen as min-maxing and never seen as "Hey, now my backstory of being a noble in the eladrin court can be backed up by my stats"?
As said elsewhere, people who want to purely optimize with no sense of roleplay could already do that. All these rules do for them is allow them to consider roleplay as well in their characters without taking a mechanical hit, which presumably makes the game better for them and their group.
People talk about min-maxers like they burst into the room, flip your D&D table, and then run out to find another game to ruin. I honestly don't get the narrative about how they're about to destroy the game every time a new feature comes out, it's exhausting and alarmist and above all simply not true.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
By removing all the cultural abilities from races you are forcing every DM to come up with a list of cultures that each species of PC can come from.
The 5E rules used to provide this information directly, which as per Rule 0 (or is it 1) the DM could change if they wanted to have something different for their campaign.
Now all DMs, including novices, will have to come up with a set of cultural abilities for their PCs without having the benefit of a set of "stereotype" cultural abilities as a starting point.
It was mentioned early, in the opening post, I think, but having Backgrounds entirely overhauled, to include the old stat perks the races offered would be a really good idea. Each culture (Background) has it's priorities and such, and thus people from that Background would innately be a little stronger, or more nimble, or more knowledgeable in the forest or mountains. Making it so the AS perks tied to your background makes perfect sense and as stated, makes a Background something more than a couple shiny options that often have little impact.
That's aside though, because I also wanted to agree with some MUCH more experienced DM's I see posting that table rules (and settings and so forth) are what they are. I have seen a Dwarf who was a master woodsman and had no understanding of mining or rocks. Min/max freaks would be hollering that he MUST roll advantage on the checks, when in fact, the player would say "I don't know nothin' bout no rocks, lady." You want your stats assigned differently? I can edit ANY of the base stats as I create a character. This change is odd, for sure, but in truth, entirely pointless. EVERYTHING is customizable and people have been doing it forever. This is just saying it again and flattening the base numbers so it "looks" better upon initial presentation.
Ditching the culture will work great, too. Make sure you explain why your desert-born Drow can't see well in the sun.
Talk to your Players. Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
They're removing cultural abilities from races. They never said they weren't going to move them somewhere else. This is just one UA to introduce the change and give examples related to an upcoming book (Ravenloft). A later one will hopefully give an alternative system for culture.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
You can customize. Their compendia are "locked" but that is normal for a ruleset. You can't edit the ruleset. But you can make your own compendium or your own in-world item. I just tested it to be sure... I copied the Edge "Alertness" and renamed it "Dullness" and changed the text to say something about being stupid, and then gave it to a character by drag-and-drop. Easy peasy.
I don't have any way to address whether Foundry is awkward or not. You said that "online" options did not exist for SWADE like they do for D&D, but did not specify what you mean. If you mean a website that works exactly like D&D Beyond, then obviously, no... there is nothing like that. But I personally find Foundry dramatically easier to use than DDB for just about everything other than character creation, and that is only because D&D character creation is so complicated and has so many provisos and quid-pro-quos. SWADE characters are fairly easy to make by comparison. The Foundry mod will NOT automatically count up your skills or anything as you get them -- you have to track that you spent the right # of points on things. But again, it's not that hard to do in SWADE.
The Foundry mod has cards you can draw in a custom deck and things like this also... I think it's everything you need. Even some of the rulebook sections though obviously the ENTIRE book is not duplicated. You can, however, install a free Foundry mod called "PDFoundry" which will read PDFs, and could theoretically read the entire SWADE PDF in-app that way. I wouldn't advise it just because readers like Acrobat are more fully featured. PDFoundry lets you read but it's not a super great experience in comparison.
The big caveat is, I haven't actually played it because I don't have anyone to play it with. But I like SWADE and the thing was on sale, so I got it.
Anyway, if you truly like SWADE better and would rather play it but feel like you can't due to online limitations, I'd say you might want to try it, if you have some spare money lying around. You could try watching some videos to see how Foundry works first before spending but unfortunately they don't really have a "try before you buy" model.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Hm. Worth looking into, when I'm less furious at life, the universe, and everything. Bad workdays piling on top of bad forum days sucks.
Thanks for the tip, regardless.
Please do not contact or message me.
I don't get this discussion.
But it's hillarious.
#OpenDnD
This is a pretty late response, but making a Damphir-Elf or Damphir-Hobgoblin is pretty easy. Take Hobgob for example. Play the Damphir lineage, select +2 to CON and +1 to INT, and that is a pretty good approximation of the combination.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
Okay, a couplefew things:
I didn’t say why don’t you play those other games. I said that those are the games I play when I want to play those styles of games. You don’t have to like Shadowrun or WoD, but there are plenty of other games out there that you may legitimately enjoy playing more than you enjoy playing D&D.
And my biggest complaint about Cyberpunk is that it isn’t Shadowrun. Shadowrun is such a way cooler IP. And judging by your review of the Shadowrun rules it seems like you think that games a little better than D&D so what’s the problem? 😜
I started playing both Shadowrun and WoD around the same time I started playing D&D, so the early-mid ‘90s. (You know, back before anybody bedazzled vampires.) And still play the old editions from back then so I cannot speak to the newer ones.
I don’t care about any of those games. Without rules and dice it’s just grownups playing make believe.
Okay, so your reasoning is that D&D is the only game with online support, so you’ll play D&D and fight with it tooth and claw it to better suit your tastes and pressure the publisher to change the game for you so you don’t have to. Why?!? Why not instead find a game you actually enjoy and change the online accessibility for that game?!? That way you get to play a game you like, you get to promote online support for that game you like, and you don’t have to keep fighting D&D and you don’t have to complain about it until they change it and I get to keep my simpler Race/Class system. Doesn’t that seem like more of a win all around?!? It legitimately seems like you just really dislike D&D.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Except for the Martial Training and Saving Face features.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Yeah, but you have to trade something for the sweet vampire features.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
Before this descends fully into thermonuclear flame war and padlock, I'm going to say this. These new lineages are exciting to try out, at least for me. Most of the time, the species of my character isn't really important to me; class and background define them more. But the mechanical and flavorful impact of these makes me want to build around them. It's a stark contrast to the previous most unique races, which were far less revolutionary than this. I hope that in the future, the focus of lineage design shifts more towards the features and abilities instead of flat numerical increases. Not only is this more interesting, they are also harder to min-max. At least the min-max's that come out of this will be pretty cool.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
FWIW, many people play D&D because it's the popular tabletop. I'm not sure of the numbers, but possibly something like 90% of the TTRPG market (and that's just 5e). And D&D has dndbeyond, with all the books and material coded right in. It handles most of the math, etc. That's better support than any other TTRPG has ever had. You want to take advantage of that, you play D&D 5e. A significant chunk of players play "D&D or bust" because anything else requires too much work, or they can't find players, or they can't find GMs, or no one is publishing adventures...
So it's not that surprising that people who have issues with the game want to change it --- or, more appropriately, celebrate when the game gets new officially supported options that fit their preferences.
I agree with you on that first point, which is what confused me. One person was being an ass by saying that Eberron isn't "true D&D" because it wasn't Tolkien-ish, and you immediately called them out for gatekeeping (multiple times, too). Then when Yurei and some others express their dislike of Tolkien's take on races messing with the game in worlds that shouldn't be altered in any way by Tolkien, you switch sides and begin saying that the game 46 years ago was inspired and based off of Tolkien and that anyone that doesn't like it can leave. Maybe misinterpreted your side here, but that's what it looked like.
My rebuttal to that analogy is that D&D may have started out as Tolkien-Spinach, but it eventually grew into much more. The vast majority of D&D 5e classes, subclasses and races don't fit Tolkien at all. D&D isn't spinach anymore, no matter how many gatekeeping grognards (like Vince) insist that "true D&D" has to be spinach and can never be anything other than spinach. Now D&D is basically every spinach/lettuce group vegetable, like Mustard, Cabbage (heh), Broccoli, Brussel Sprouts, Kale, Cauliflower, and so on. D&D started as spinach, but is much more now. There are just a lot of people who don't want to get rid of the rules that restrict the game to being Tolkien-Spinach and only Tolkien-Spinach.
The game doesn't have to change if its mechanics are more open. Base Orcs in my world have a +2 to their Wisdom score and +1 to their Strength or Constitution score, instead of the normal +2 STR and +1 CON. This "lineage" system would help me have that supported mechanically and officially. My orcs aren't standard Tolkien orcs, and to let the game as a base support any kind of orc will improve the game, not ruin it.
I didn't mean to do anything of the sort. This sort of question comes often enough that the learned reflex is to react harshly to people telling us to go to a different game. If it was a genuine query, I apologize if I was a bit too blunt.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms