Posted: Sat Jun 20, 2020 8:30 pm
They all play as differently dressed humans anyways.Thaluikhain wrote: So...there's no point having different races and you may as well just be differently dressed humans?
Welcome to the Gaming Den.
http://www.tgdmb.com/phpBB3/
They all play as differently dressed humans anyways.Thaluikhain wrote: So...there's no point having different races and you may as well just be differently dressed humans?
If +2 to one stat over another is the only point of having races to you, then yes, Elves that live 750 years and can't be charmed and don't sleep and are more perceptive are exactly the same as the Half-Orcs who live 75 years and crit harder and pop up from 0 HP once for free and are more intimidating, and those two are exactly like the fucking Aarakocra who live 30 years and have 50' flight speed from level 1, which sounds just like Humans in different outfits to me. I sure wish the Aarakocra got +2 to something so that I would know it's supposed to be a bird man.Thaluikhain wrote:So...there's no point having different races and you may as well just be differently dressed humans?TheGreatEvilKing wrote:Recently WotC announced they were going to try to deal with some of the racial determinism by introducing an upcoming product that would let people swap out stat arrays.
the fuck are you on about? 4e had teleporting rangers, and 3e had rangers who can tree stride in core, and the horizon walker ranger prestige class who straight teleports. I don't know enough 2e, but I'd bet there is some there too. You're example of why 5e is bad came from, at latest, 2003.buddy bradley wrote:I'll stick to the stuff where Orcs are evil, fuck this edition. And remember, this is the edition where there are rangers that can teleport. I expect the 6th edition to have gnomes that harvest laser beams in their eyes and use it to destroy no one because that would be offensive to, well, certainly not the rapists and other pieces of shit they hire to work on their product.
What irks me about 5e and "evil races" is that all them have the same reason for being evil: "Their evil gods demands it". Such a lack of creativity on a fantasy game is disgusting.Krusk wrote:Not to get into the obvious racism of mandating that all orcs are bad guys, but are also free willed and intelligent.
They got Plant and Animal spheres (similar to domains), but only up to 3rd level spells. Transport Via Plants was 6th level.Krusk wrote:I don't know enough 2e, but I'd bet there is some there too.
Isn't picking up a dropped item a free action that doesn't provoke AoOs?Unity wrote:Also, disarming. Disarming is actually really useful now, especially since casters can be disarmed of their spellcasting focus.
It's not actually possible for good and evil to be real forces that exist, any more than it's possible for gravity to be a value judgement. People fool themselves by having real forces that exist and which react to human decisionmaking in a way that matches their personal value judgements, but inventing a force of nature that backs up your personal morals with brute force in a fictional setting doesn't mean those morals are now more correct, not even within the context of the setting. If there were a setting that had only one cosmic force reacting to human decisions that way, and it was a cosmic force that rewarded puppy drowning and punished kindness, you wouldn't say that this was a setting where good was an objectively real force that hates puppies, and that gives the game away: Whether or not a cosmic force trying to enforce morals counts as "good" or "evil" depends entirely on whether or not you agree with the morals being enforced, same as regular real world people and organizations.Rawbeard wrote:morality is really not complicated in D&D. good and evil are real forces that exist, not just value judgements based on societal standards.
I mean, technically, it totally is, if the metaphysics support it. Evil can be a tangible thing that exists, has a mass measured in millNazis and an atomic weight of 666, naturally takes on hooked and spiky forms at a molecular level, and condenses out of the air in places where great sins were committed, and gravity can be the active regard of a rather opinionated spirit of attraction who normally pulls everything to the Earth proportionally to its mass but will make an exception for you (and make you immune to gravity for the rest of your very brief life) if you commit the unforgiveable sin of wearing green on Thursday.Chamomile wrote:It's not actually possible for good and evil to be real forces that exist, any more than it's possible for gravity to be a value judgement.
Something to remember about good and evil in D&D is that actual capital-G Good is distinct from the teachings of various Good-aligned gods and outsiders and such, and likewise for Evil. You can have objective Good as a nebulous Platonic-ideal cosmic force left undefined and untainted by particular DMs' or players' opinions on Goodness, and also have Good gods and exemplar lords promoting their own take on Goodness that matches a DM's or player's views as closely as they're comfortable with (and which might be flawed or less than Good in other players' or characters' views), and the two can coexist without much difficulty.People fool themselves by having real forces that exist and which react to human decisionmaking in a way that matches their personal value judgements, but inventing a force of nature that backs up your personal morals with brute force in a fictional setting doesn't mean those morals are now more correct, not even within the context of the setting. If there were a setting that had only one cosmic force reacting to human decisions that way, and it was a cosmic force that rewarded puppy drowning and punished kindness, you wouldn't say that this was a setting where good was an objectively real force that hates puppies, and that gives the game away: Whether or not a cosmic force trying to enforce morals counts as "good" or "evil" depends entirely on whether or not you agree with the morals being enforced, same as regular real world people and organizations.
are you argueing that magic, gods, elves, halflings cannot exist in fantasy games? because you seem to. or you are missing the point so hard, it makes me want to poke you with a stick to see what happens next.Chamomile wrote:It's not actually possible for good and evil to be real forces that exist, any more than it's possible for gravity to be a value judgement.
Rawbeard wrote:are you argueing that magic, gods, elves, halflings cannot exist in fantasy games? because you seem to. or you are missing the point so hard, it makes me want to poke you with a stick to see what happens next.Chamomile wrote:It's not actually possible for good and evil to be real forces that exist, any more than it's possible for gravity to be a value judgement.
alignment can literally be detected AND measured in D&D. this is not about "in the real world", dummy.
Chamomile wrote:People fool themselves by having real forces that exist and which react to human decisionmaking in a way that matches their personal value judgements, but inventing a force of nature that backs up your personal morals with brute force in a fictional setting doesn't mean those morals are now more correct, not even within the context of the setting.
God saying it's Good to kill goblins doesn't make it good to kill goblins. It only means that God will look kindly on you if you kill goblins.merxa wrote:I know 'alignment' is a sore subject for various roleplayers, but attempts to rewrite history or apply some sophmorphic logic doesn't recreate reality.
Good, Evil, Law, Chaos, are objective metaphysical and physical truths in d&d of editions past and present. They have physical manifestations and are absolutely moral and ethical truths.
Of course these concepts aren't especially logical, and even become contradictory if examined too closely, but they were presented as truths that absolutely mapped to moral concerns. Kavitching doesn't change that.
No? In the setting those four things are labels given to in universe forces. If you were to say it is 'just by the in universe laws every goblin born reads purple on this aura radar' that would be fine and true. To then go 'beyond' that and claim that 'then' this speaks to a moral and ethical truth is where you go waaaaaaay off into talking nonsense. The fact that alignment was 'meant' to map to moral concerns is one of the major reasons WHY people can very easily find that the alignment wheel doesn't work.merxa wrote:I know 'alignment' is a sore subject for various roleplayers, but attempts to rewrite history or apply some sophmorphic logic doesn't recreate reality.
Good, Evil, Law, Chaos, are objective metaphysical and physical truths in d&d of editions past and present. They have physical manifestations and are absolutely moral and ethical truths.
Of course these concepts aren't especially logical, and even become contradictory if examined too closely, but they were presented as truths that absolutely mapped to moral concerns. Kavitching doesn't change that.
Hmmm...does that mean that "objective Good" can mean something different for different Paladins, depending on who they worship? Some of them kill goblins babies, some don't?Omegonthesane wrote:It is literally impossible for "objective Good" to mean anything more deep and profound than "objectively the set of behaviours most likely to let you keep and grow your Paladin powers".