|
|
|
veteran
|
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
|
My main point is that I want to retain significant inherent differences between those races, as those differences are vital to distinguish the races and prevent Faerun from becoming "everyone is a slight variant on a human". These differences could be ASIs, or actually impactful & unique racial features, or something else. Can we agree on that at least? I mean I think I have been clear in most cases like the NPCs they should go with the usual racial differences but in places like character customization we should have the option to pick based on if we want to roleplay something different or even min/max. So long as that change is confined to Character Creation or any NPC Larian decides to specially change as atypical for narrative reasons then neither of us are harmed by the choice DnD may have rules but they are malleable with most tables having at least slight alterations and this arguement seems to come down to people feeling that everyone has to play things their way or it hurts their game somehow So no mutual agreement that PCs should have significant inherent racial differences, gotcha. One human with darkvision, gnomish cunning, dwarven resilience, and/or draconic breath weapon please. :P
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jul 2022
|
I don't really see how you proved me wrong? Oh thats easy ... You claim i can play however i want ... I want my Human to get +1 to Everything ... its good for Monk. I want my Half-Elf to get +2 to Charisma, +1 to Dexterity and +1 to Constitution ... its good for Bard. I want my Shield Dwarf to get +2 to Strength, +2 Constitution ... its good for Barbarian. Can i do any of those? Nope. Therefore i cant play however i want and that piss me off.  Are you ready to be locked in an endless cycle of debate with 'Yes but why won't you install a mod?' remark? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
|
You have the exact same attitude, you aren't even aware of it, which is sad. You've just recently suggested people to effing make their attributes low when there is an opportunity to make them high. Of course they won't feel good doing that. You are just protecting your idea of fun, you don't really care if other people with different ideas have fun as well, otherwise you won't give an advice like that. I think it'd be great if there was no default and the game asked you right away how you'd want to play. Well, THAT would be fair to all. Ok I don't get what you are talking about. I have no problems if people play exactly to the traditional racial bonus'. Also I didn't suggest people make their attributes low I was just using an example of an Orc I am workshopping with lower strength stats than most orcs. I am think he has some Sorcerer or Wizard blood which ups his Wisdom or Intel or maybe find a reason he is more dexterous than most orcs. The point I am making is having a standard bonus setting for each race is fine and perfectly fine if people want to adhere to that in their games they just shouldn't be able to force me to adhere to that in my games. Also long as each person can play how they want and aren't forced to play to another's idea of the right way I don't see any issues You'll soon notice I have the same "obsession" against people bringing OP homebrew to the table... or any number of features I believe are unbalanced... not thought through... or just harming the integrity of the system.
No, I will not support you. I will never support you. You can try to draw support from others to outvote me, in which case I won't throw a fit. However, I'll stand my ground in this thread, as it's meant for game feedback. I won't pretend my stance on this is something it isn't to soften the blow of disagreement. We are not talking about home brewing a whole system just saying one person may be slightly stronger or dextrose than most of their race. You seem to be a Lawful Dnd player and I am a Chaotic DnD player. You view rules as hard and fast while I and many other view them as a good starting point and malleable. Both are common and valid play types. At the end of the day it just seems you put way to much value on trying to force your playstyle on others
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
|
So no mutual agreement that PCs should have significant inherent racial differences, gotcha. One human with darkvision, gnomish cunning, dwarven resilience, and/or draconic breath weapon please. :P First off we have not been talking about any of that just the ability point scores. But hell if you want to talk about those too my 2 cents is I will usually go with the traditional but if I have a character idea that includes something out of the ordinary then heck why not pick it if I have the option. If others want to stay rigidly with whats canon then fine, if others want to go hog wild, fine neither hurts me. The main point is If I am given options but choose not to take them I don't care if others do in their own game. You seem to be very invested in others playing the game the same way you do I don't really see how you proved me wrong? Oh thats easy ... You claim i can play however i want ... I want my Human to get +1 to Everything ... its good for Monk. I want my Half-Elf to get +2 to Charisma, +1 to Dexterity and +1 to Constitution ... its good for Bard. I want my Shield Dwarf to get +2 to Strength, +2 Constitution ... its good for Barbarian. Can i do any of those? Nope. Therefore i cant play however i want and that piss me off. I mean there will be limits. It's a game we are talking about this one issue with ability points but frankly however far they go in letting us customize our characters I am happy. Your choices whether you go all out or restrained have no bearing on my game
Last edited by Scoonster49; 10/07/23 08:39 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jan 2023
|
I would always lose something I care deeply about: world integrity, to gain something I care nothing about: someone minmaxing a character.
It's therefore a fallacy to claim your proposal "costs me nothing". Or anyone else against it, nothing. One may as well propose removing all class restrictions preventing magic users to pick and swap spells, because you see... my character has that backstory. You just stick with standard cleric spells! (Result: killing much of multiclassing for convenience).
There is a point where a wild west of internal logic starts to feel grating. We disagree where that point is. Nonetheless, when rules become suggestions, depth is exchanged for convenience. Sometimes, that is necessary because of technological limitations. On the matter of becoming op quicker, that's... not a "feature" of any type added to the game in my book. It's just something that takes away and gives nothing back.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
|
So no mutual agreement that PCs should have significant inherent racial differences, gotcha. One human with darkvision, gnomish cunning, dwarven resilience, and/or draconic breath weapon please. :P First off we have not been talking about any of that just the ability point scores. But hell if you want to talk about those too my 2 cents is I will usually go with the traditional but if I have a character idea that includes something out of the ordinary then heck why not pick it if I have the option. If others want to stay rigidly with whats canon then fine, if others want to go hog wild, fine neither hurts me. The main point is If I am given options but choose not to take them I don't care if others do in their own game. You seem to be very invested in others playing the game the same way you do We weren't originally talking about that but I shifted the focus of the conversation to try to find a point where we could possibly agree. I understand, sometimes one misses something when reading and responding to a lot of people's posts. I've certainly done it myself. To me, it's good to have a world system that emphasizes the differences of entirely distinct creatures and incorporates those differences into character concepts instead of allowing players to ignore them. Ignoring racial features (again and importantly, without penalty) veers much too close to the "the backstory of my character is that they're smarter than everyone and thus should start at 20 Intelligence" phenomenon. Rules provide a framework for playing a game/telling a story, and imo racial ASIs add more to that than they restrict mechanically. In Pathfinder you can spend a feat to gain the abilities of different ancestry (race). This allows freedom but at the cost of dedicating a feat to this. I'm fine with this solution. In D&D 5e, I'm in favor of the "everybody gets a free starting feat" homebrew rule, which allows any character to start with 16+ in a stat by taking a half-feat. (but some races can start with an 18 or get a Full Feat instead)
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2021
|
My view would be if you are against removing racial ability scores they main point of concern should be more NPCs and less character creation. How other people choose to create their characters doesn't really affect anyone else but how Larian builds NPCs does. So as long as Larian uses the racial AS then there shouldn't be an issue.
My view is while I will usually pick the racial "canon" options I may occasionally decide to make an orc who is physically weaker than normal but more magically inclined or a halfling that is super strong and not as nimble. While atypical are still valid choices How you create your characters is entirely your call, but nothing in 5E stops you from putting more points into int and less into strength with your half-orc. The problem happens when you try to make your exceptional but not divinely blessed half-orc as nimble as an eceptional but not blessed person of a species that is exceptionally gifted at being nimble. That does not add to the universe. It takes from it. Because now all species have become very minor variants of the same species. Now bears and cheetas and humans and monkeys and birds and whales are all the same species, just with different proficiency bonuses. And frankly, why shouldn't a cheetah be able to swim like a while and dive to a depth of 3000 meters below and hold its breath for an hour? It's totally unfair that this is something reserved for whales, isn't it? Well, maybe it is unfair, but that is how different species work. They're different. My view is, I will roll whatever character I feel like, but I'd like if the race choice actually means something. If I decide to go dwarf, I want to feel dwarfy. If I go Elf, I want to feel Elfy. And if I go with a "suboptimal race choice" then that's my choice and it sets me back relative to some abstract idea of perfection, but it really isn't likely to mean a whole lot in the grand scheme of things, because the game doesn't require a party of min-maxed munchkin characters. But with this change, what does Dwarfy or Elfy even mean? How is that different from being human or orc or ogre or illithid? We're all physically the same anyway, after all. Granted, some physical differences still remain. Some species are a little faster, and some can see in the dark. And how long will it be before these things are also considered "unfair" or even racist stereotypes and wiped out? Why should a swift Elf be any faster at running than a 4 foot dude? Justice for the little people! My view would be if you are against removing racial ability scores they main point of concern should be more NPCs and less character creation. How other people choose to create their characters doesn't really affect anyone else but how Larian builds NPCs does. So as long as Larian uses the racial AS then there shouldn't be an issue.
My view is while I will usually pick the racial "canon" options I may occasionally decide to make an orc who is physically weaker than normal but more magically inclined or a halfling that is super strong and not as nimble. While atypical are still valid choices D&D is a co-operative, party-based game though, so you can't just ignore PCs. While the other party members' characters don't directly affect my character, they still do so indirectly via comparison. If my 17-strength orc obtained that maximum strength possible to level 1 characters by having dedicated years to enhance his inherent physical strength through a training regimen that only the strongest and hardiest of races could endure, and then you roll up with your 17 strength gnome, owlkin, or fairy...that directly affects immersion and world consistency. You can already do everything in that last paragraph with racial ASIs though. An Orc with 10 strength and 12 to 15 Int is "an orc who is physically weaker than normal but more magically inclined." A halfling with 12 to 15 strength and 10 Dex is a "halfling that is super strong and not as nimble." Again, I'd be okay with one of many different solutions as long as they preserve sufficient & unique physical and mental differences that characterize the various fantasy races. Orcs getting no strength ASI in exchange for (the laughably useless) Powerful Build and the easily-obtainable-by-anyone Athletics Proficiency is not anywhere near sufficient imo. DnD maybe cooperative but it is also local how my group plays doesn't affect yours in anyway. Same here with BG3, you can play it however you want and I can play it however I want and it doesn't affect either of our experiences. I do not understand the idea in a game like this that other people should have options denied to them that only affect their game because others do not like those options. While you are talking about how usually orcs have inherently higher strength it is entirely possible that for some reason an orc is born with significantly less strength and I can play one who is weaker than the norm trying to find their place in the world. Being able to change the ASI greatly helps roleplay that scenario. Or it is possible a human or halfing or what ever has orc in their heritage and their genes just come about to give them a boost. To me one of the wonders of DnD is the ability to craft worlds and narratives at will. Being able to take the set rules and adjust as needed is one of it's best features But I can't play however I want, can I? The change that wipes out racial differences for you also wipes them out for me. I can't pretend that orcs are generally stronger than haflings because my game is explicitly telling me that they're not. And please, find me that exceptional human that can outrun a cheetah or outwrestle a grizzly. Find me that exceptional human that can outsniff trained sniffer dogs. Find me that exceptional human that can outdive a whale. Or kindly stop suggesting that it makes total sense that an exceptional hafling can actually be just as strong as an exceptional half-orc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I would always lose something I care deeply about: world integrity, to gain something I care nothing about: someone minmaxing a character.
It's therefore a fallacy to claim your proposal "costs me nothing". Or anyone else against it, nothing. One may as well propose removing all class restrictions preventing magic users to pick and swap spells, because you see... my character has that backstory. You just stick with standard cleric spells! (Result: killing much of multiclassing for convenience).
There is a point where a wild west of internal logic starts to feel grating. We disagree where that point is. Nonetheless, when rules become suggestions, depth is exchanged for convenience. Sometimes, that is necessary because of technological limitations. On the matter of becoming op quicker, that's... not a "feature" of any type added to the game in my book. It's just something that takes away and gives nothing back. Again it's not always about minmaxing. There is also roleplaying benefit to having the choice. At the end of the day if other people making choices you don't like hurts your experience then I pity you. And I hope you can enjoy this game in the future even knowing others play it differently So no mutual agreement that PCs should have significant inherent racial differences, gotcha. One human with darkvision, gnomish cunning, dwarven resilience, and/or draconic breath weapon please. :P First off we have not been talking about any of that just the ability point scores. But hell if you want to talk about those too my 2 cents is I will usually go with the traditional but if I have a character idea that includes something out of the ordinary then heck why not pick it if I have the option. If others want to stay rigidly with whats canon then fine, if others want to go hog wild, fine neither hurts me. The main point is If I am given options but choose not to take them I don't care if others do in their own game. You seem to be very invested in others playing the game the same way you do We weren't originally talking about that but I shifted the focus of the conversation to try to find a point where we could possibly agree. I understand, sometimes one misses something when reading and responding to a lot of people's posts. I've certainly done it myself. To me, it's good to have a world system that emphasizes the differences of entirely distinct creatures and incorporates those differences into character concepts instead of allowing players to ignore them. Ignoring racial features (again and importantly, without penalty) veers much too close to the "the backstory of my character is that they're smarter than everyone and thus should start at 20 Intelligence" phenomenon. Rules provide a framework for playing a game/telling a story, and imo racial ASIs add more to that than they restrict mechanically. In Pathfinder you can spend a feat to gain the abilities of different ancestry (race). This allows freedom but at the cost of dedicating a feat to this. I'm fine with this solution. In D&D 5e, I'm in favor of the "everybody gets a free starting feat" homebrew rule, which allows any character to start with 16+ in a stat by taking a half-feat. (but some races can start with an 18 or get a Full Feat instead) I mean generally agree having uniqueness for each race is best and if it were a MMO or something I would agree with you but this isn't. I mean I would definitely make certain I had narrative reasons to veer from the standard attributes and pick penalties to make certain I am not giving myself an extra advantage overall but I still feel giving us more choices than less is best so we can tailor to ourselves how close to lore we want to anchor ourselves to
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Are you ready to be locked in an endless cycle of debate with 'Yes but why won't you install a mod?' remark? Allways ... Also irellevant.  I mean there will be limits. Presence of limits is obvious ... Presence of limits that go in direct contradictionw with what we tested in last 3 years, with what is the game advertised as (based on DnD), and what is desired by many players ... is anything but. Personaly i find it quite odd ... Would be nice if Larian would instead give us both (or even better stat rolling, wich was promised in the past) ... and let us choose ... I really want to like this company, i think there is lot of things other developers could and should learn from them ... sadly nothing is perfect, and this " change something essential, dont tell a living soul about it" is becoming clasic Lariain move lately, and its huge dark dot on their shield ...  I do want to trust in Larian, honestly i do ... Just as i wanted to trust in Paradox ... But only stupid child is burned twice for the same stove. Your choices whether you go all out or restrained have no bearing on my game Never said they do ... I said your claim that we all can play however we want is false ... and as you can see, it was.
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2017
|
A dwarf is not just a short human. An elf isn't just a human with pointed ears. An orc is not a green skinned real world dark skinned human (for the racists who think orcs = black people when they are not). Dargonborn are not simply scaley human with dangerous breath. These are differentt rsces/species entirely. Trying to treat them like different looking humans is not what fantasy should be about. Dwarves, elves, and the others are simply their own. It us the sane with fantasy religion. This push to lessen or outright get rid of it is anti fantasy and allows real world religious extremists get their way - I include the mythical old drool 80s anti dnd catholic trope or the hateful atheist who see fantasy religion as the equal to real life religion. Tyr, Bhaal, and the rest are not real world religions. Nothing to fear from them. All characters should be able to choose a religion or be agnostic/atheist with all the consequences that comes with in a world where multiple gods actually exist. Back to races and stats. Elves are more agile than humans. They just are. In the same way even the weakest grizzly is gonna be stronger than all but the 0.000001% of human muscle bound freaks. Lol Or the leopard is gonna be faster. Or the monkey a better climber..etc., etc. Different species are different because they are different species. It's that simple. Why does the real world need to taint fantasy. I get it, racism is bad. If you hate someone in the real world because they look differently than you you are scum. But , let's keep that sort of bias to the real world. And, humans are humans. Dwarves, elves, and half orcs are not humans. Let's not pretend that they are. Silly rant over.
Last edited by Volourn; 10/07/23 09:21 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jan 2023
|
Nah... As you can just reduce the strenght of your orc to 5, it's pretty much *proven* you only care about minmaxing. There is literally no other explanation. With a DM, you can negotiate reducing that strenght even more. In a video game, we can't consider an edge case of edge case of an edge case... that 5 will have to be enough.
As for you getting 2, and maybe an extra 2 points for that exceptionally low strenght... Yeah, I take offense to that. That makes not only no sense, but negative sense. If your character has a disability, I'm going to hold you accountable to actually roleplay the consequences of it. The full consequences of being disabled. Not "hidden superpower" special.
A friendly DM might give you a +1 to int. Your orc is not getting smarter than Gale just because he's got a disability affecting his muscles. There's suspension of disbelief and it dies just about here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Are you ready to be locked in an endless cycle of debate with 'Yes but why won't you install a mod?' remark? Allways ... Also irellevant. I mean there will be limits. Presence of limits is obvious ... Presence of limits that go in direct contradictionw with what we tested in last 3 years, with what is the game advertised as (based on DnD), and what is desired by many players ... is anything but. Personaly i find it quite odd ... Would be nice if Larian would instead give us both (or even better stat rolling, wich was promised in the past) ... and let us choose ... I really want to like this company, i think there is lot of things other developers could and should learn from them ... sadly nothing is perfect, and this " change something essential, dont tell a living soul about it" is becoming clasic Lariain move lately, and its huge dark dot on their shield ... I do want to trust in Larian, honestly i do ... Just as i wanted to trust in Paradox ... But only stupid child is burned twice for the same stove. Your choices whether you go all out or restrained have no bearing on my game Never said they do ... I said your claim that we all can play however we want is false ... and as you can see, it was. Yeah I was talking about the context of the ability scores and the choice to adhere to traditional ability scores or choose different ones which was obvious. So if you can't keep up with the convo I would suggest you read a bit more carefully Presence of limits that go in direct contradictionw with what we tested in last 3 years, with what is the game advertised as (based on DnD), and what is desired by many players ... is anything but. or how to say you don't understand what Early Access is without saying you don't know what early access is. Plus you still can play the same way as before. They are adding choice not taking anything from anyone 
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Nah... As you can just reduce the strenght of your orc to 5, it's pretty much *proven* you only care about minmaxing. There is literally no other explanation. With a DM, you can negotiate reducing that strenght even more. In a video game, we can't consider an edge case of edge case of an edge case... that 5 will have to be enough.
As for you getting 2, and maybe an extra 2 points for that exceptionally low strenght... Yeah, I take offense to that. That makes not only no sense, but negative sense. If your character has a disability, I'm going to hold you accountable to actually roleplay the consequences of it. The full consequences of being disabled. Not "hidden superpower" special.
A friendly DM might give you a +1 to int. Your orc is not getting smarter than Gale just because he's got a disability affecting his muscles. There's suspension of disbelief and it dies just about here. Again no I pointed out I may want my character to have a lower racial bonus or have it moved (Maybe it is from the bloodline or magic experiment or they are just an anomaly) Either way plenty of roleplay reasons I pointed out they could be related to socerers or wizards or hell it is possible for there to be an orc prodegy. It is for my game to decide and fortunately Larian has decided you don't get to tell me how to play.  You are just blinded by you narrow view of this game and refuse to accept the diversity this game encourages. Also a DM can give me what ever the hell they want. The ones I have had is so long as I can justify my choices and it doesn't conflict with their story they don't care Back to races and stats. Elves are more agile than humans. They just are. In the same way even the weakest grizzly is gonna be stronger than all but the 0.000001% of human muscle bound freaks. Lol Or the leopard is gonna be faster. Or the monkey a better climber..etc., etc. Different species are different because they are different species. It's that simple. Why does the real world need to taint fantasy. I get it, racism is bad. If you hate someone in the real world because they look differently than you you are scum. But , let's keep that sort of bias to the real world. And, humans are humans. Dwarves, elves, and half orcs are not humans. Let's not pretend that they are. There are always outliers
Last edited by Scoonster49; 10/07/23 09:31 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2021
|
Nah... As you can just reduce the strenght of your orc to 5, it's pretty much *proven* you only care about minmaxing. There is literally no other explanation. With a DM, you can negotiate reducing that strenght even more. In a video game, we can't consider an edge case of edge case of an edge case... that 5 will have to be enough.
As for you getting 2, and maybe an extra 2 points for that exceptionally low strenght... Yeah, I take offense to that. That makes not only no sense, but negative sense. If your character has a disability, I'm going to hold you accountable to actually roleplay the consequences of it. The full consequences of being disabled. Not "hidden superpower" special.
A friendly DM might give you a +1 to int. Your orc is not getting smarter than Gale just because he's got a disability affecting his muscles. There's suspension of disbelief and it dies just about here. Again no I pointed out I may want my character to have a lower racial bonus or have it moved (Maybe it is from the bloodline or magic experiment or they are just an anomaly) Either way plenty of roleplay reasons I pointed out they could be related to socerers or wizards or hell it is possible for there to be an orc prodegy. It is for my game to decide and fortunately Larian has decided you don't get to tell me how to play. You are just blinded by you narrow view of this game and refuse to accept the diversity this game encourages. Also a DM can give me what ever the hell they want. The ones I have had is so long as I can justify my choices and it doesn't conflict with their story they don't care Back to races and stats. Elves are more agile than humans. They just are. In the same way even the weakest grizzly is gonna be stronger than all but the 0.000001% of human muscle bound freaks. Lol Or the leopard is gonna be faster. Or the monkey a better climber..etc., etc. Different species are different because they are different species. It's that simple. Why does the real world need to taint fantasy. I get it, racism is bad. If you hate someone in the real world because they look differently than you you are scum. But , let's keep that sort of bias to the real world. And, humans are humans. Dwarves, elves, and half orcs are not humans. Let's not pretend that they are. There are always outliers What you're saying is that you should get to tell others how they should play, though. And while you're doing that, you're also calling people who dislike that narrowminded. And no, there are in fact not always outliers. No human has ever been as strong as a grizzly. No human has ever been able to dive as deep as a whale. No human has ever had the speed of a cheetah. It doesn't happen because evolution is not magic. And arguing that the most exceptionally strong halfing ever is in fact just as strong as the most exceptionally strong half-orc is essentially equivalent with arguing that not only could an exceptionally fast human be just as fast a generic cheetah, but they could even be as fast as the most exceptionally fast cheetah. I don't know how that makes sense to you. And I don't know how a world where that is true can remain coherent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jan 2023
|
Ah yes, "everyone who doesn't accept my new and improved ruleset is narrowminded". Honestly, if your new and improved ruleset leaves much to be desired, I might just pride myself in that. If you want extra, *earn* it in game.
These chosen one add ons, because what you got back from point buy wasn't enough... being one of the smartest of orcs wasn't enough... the magic items giving you more int weren't enough... eh, I'm not sure if that orc being the smartest being alive would be enough? That's a lot of "Not enough!" going on here. I'm guessing that orc ends up power hungry and thoroughly corrupted in his search for MORE, to make up for his lack of strenght.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I was talking about the context of the ability scores and the choice to adhere to traditional ability scores or choose different ones Where "choice to adhere to traditional ability scores" is not possible, since you are missing some. Your point? I hope you are not trying to make "im not wrong bcs i was only talking about situations when im not wrong" argument. or how to say you don't understand what Early Access is without saying you don't know what early access is. Englighten me then. Plus you still can play the same way as before. No i cant ... thats the point. Who isnt reading carefuly? :-/ They are adding choice not taking anything from anyone Your source? As far as i know, both Red Queen and WolfheartFPS said that they didnt notice any way to change their ability score bonuses.
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Volunteer Moderator
|
|
Volunteer Moderator
Joined: Feb 2022
|
To be clear, we didn’t see stat rolling, but as per this post and some further chat later in the thread it does look as though we can swap around attribute bonuses. Oh, and I’m going to thank everyone here for an interesting thread that I’m still mulling over a number of details of, but as it’s my bedtime I’m just going to ask everyone to try to keep it light and constructive and remember it’s okay to agree to disagree. (While secretly knowing that your own position is the correct one  ) Apologies if I’m doing anyone an injustice, it just feels as though we’re occasionally getting a bit fraught here.
"You may call it 'nonsense' if you like, but I've heard nonsense, compared with which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
|
ArvGuy
How am I telling others how they should play? They can play how they want. If they can play with traditional attributes then they can just as I can change it up if I want. They are complaining that I am able to change it up. Also yes there are outliers and you demanding that all fantasy creatures have the same stats is just weird. We are talking about a fictional magical world.
Silver
It's not that i disagree with you that you are narrowminded. I respect your decision to play closely to the rules. I just don't respect your instance that everyone else play the way you do
RagnarokCzD
"Where "choice to adhere to traditional ability scores" is not possible, since you are missing some.
Your point?
I hope you are not trying to make "im not wrong bcs i was only talking about situations when im not wrong" argument. "
We were talking about a specific thing then you brought in random shit trying to change my arguement
"or how to say you don't understand what Early Access is without saying you don't know what early access is."
Early access is were they test things then add and change them. You may not have played it early on but intial release was very different from how the game is now.
"No i cant ... thats the point.
Who isnt reading carefuly? :-/"
You can still add the attribute scores to your characters as before other people just have the ability to change them if they want
"Your source?"
You can still give your characters the same ability scores (Edit) My first post in this thread was talking about a youtube video from WolfheartFPS talking about how we get to choose which attributes get bonus's
Last edited by Scoonster49; 10/07/23 10:39 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
as per this post and some further chat later in the thread it does look as though we can swap around attribute bonuses. Just to be clear ... When you say "swap around" ... you mean swaping between fluid +2 and +1 ... and +1 to everything ... for humans, for example? Not about that you can asing that +2 and +1 to any ability score you want ... corect? If so ... then this is very welcomed news! If not ... then it still sucks. RagnarokCzD
There is just so much disingenuousness in your statements I should know something about that ... Since i dont ... its not true. Early access is were they test things then add and change them. You may not have played it early on but intial release was very different from how the game is now. And what exactly is purpose of "testing" system that isnt going to be used, while using system that was never tested? O_o You can still add the attrivute scores to your characters as before other people just have the ability to change them if they want
"Your source?"
The game. You can still give your characters the same ability scores Eh ... Seriously? The game that have outdated patch, wich dont reflect at all any changes of wich we are talking here is your source? This is wrong on so many levels. I dont really know what to say.
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Ok looks like you were writing your post around the time I edited mine.
I took out the one line about disingenuousness to tone it down and take the mod's request to heart.
I then pointed out about where I got my info from and pointed out my first post in this thread was me listing my source.
" When you say "swap around" ... you mean swaping between fluid +2 and +1 ... and +1 to everything ... for humans, for example?
Not about that you can asing that +2 and +1 to any ability score you want ... corect?"
No idea what you are trying to say here
"And what exactly is purpose of "testing" system that isnt going to be used, while using system that was never tested? O_o"
Same here. everything is being tested in EA
|
|
|
|
|
