So there you go. Subraces of Tiefling in 3E Faerun.
(Thanks, Jeraa!)
Can we let this die already?
I was having an interesting discussion. You don't have to click on the link, my friend.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I was having an interesting discussion. You don't have to click on the link, my friend.
I didn't click on the link. What I did do was get a hostile PM from someone in this thread ("intelligence is obviously your dump stat").
OVER A FREAKING GAME.
So while I'm glad you find it interesting, I'm tired of the edition war bickering. I'll leave you guys to it.
This free basic edition didn't have a few things in it though like feats did it? I didnt see any. Some guy was trying to argue you didnt have to spend more money to get into 5th. Not true at all. The basic edition is just that, basic. It wont have everything the PHB has. In other words its incomplete. I also dont see a DMG or a MM for free either. So saying 5th ed core rules are free is incorrect.
WotC has stated those will be added to the Basic PDF once the books themselves come out. It is also possible we will get more information from the Players Handbook (such as feats) when it actually comes out next month.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What I did do was get a hostile PM from someone in this thread ("intelligence is obviously your dump stat").
Wow. Poor form.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wow. Poor form.
Indeed. Especially since I'm pretty sure *wisdom* is my dump stat (as I keep participating in these threads). >:(
So there you go. Subraces of Tiefling in 3E Faerun.
(Thanks, Jeraa!)
Hmm. Even without that, earlier editions had...
Subraces
Tieflings
Putting two things you have already done together doesn't sound like swiping from someone else, especially if they follow the cambion/alu-fiend route of making the subrace more dependent on the specific type of fiend rather than the plane of origin.
Yep. It's a point that I had made earlier in the thread.
Wow. Poor form.Indeed. Especially since I'm pretty sure *wisdom* is my dump stat (as I keep participating in these threads). >:(
In high school it was made quite clear to me that charisma was mine. :(
I was having an interesting discussion. You don't have to click on the link, my friend.I didn't click on the link. What I did do was get a hostile PM from someone in this thread ("intelligence is obviously your dump stat").
OVER A FREAKING GAME.
So while I'm glad you find it interesting, I'm tired of the edition war bickering. I'll leave you guys to it.
I don't know what you guys are doing, but I was simply pointing out a factual error. I could care less about edition warring.
I'm also fairly sure that PM would have happened with or without the discussion of Tiefling subraces.
Still, as Steve Geddes wrote: Poor from. Sorry that you're being harassed.
I don't know what you guys are doing, but I was simply pointing out a factual error. I could care less about edition warring.
I'm also fairly sure that PM would have happened with or without the discussion of Tiefling subraces.
Still, as Steve Geddes wrote: Poor from. Sorry that you're being harassed.
Actually, the message in question specifically referenced the Tiefling subrace thing (which is part of what made it so bizarre)...but no worries. I just need to grow a thicker skin. :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What about races? I sitll want to play a Tiefling for example. I heard they are getting subraces now? So that's sort of stolen from Pathfinder.
In the same way that 75% of Pathfinder was "stolen" from D&D, sure. But it's totally cool as long as WotC isn't doing the "stealing", right?
This free basic edition didn't have a few things in it though like feats did it? I didnt see any. Some guy was trying to argue you didnt have to spend more money to get into 5th. Not true at all. The basic edition is just that, basic. It wont have everything the PHB has. In other words its incomplete. I also dont see a DMG or a MM for free either. So saying 5th ed core rules are free is incorrect.
I don't think there's a single person left in this thread taking your criticisms seriously.
If you're going to PM nasty comments to someone just because they disagreed with you about a game, it might as well be me. I'm pretty sure I disagree with you way harder than bugleyman does.
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think that WotC releasing the Basic D&D has allowed me to make an informed choice about buying into 5th, meaning PHB, DMG, and MM. After reading I am happy and will leave my Amazon pre-order in place.
Seems a very nice thing WotC has done. There were lots who complained, including some of my players, that they brought 4th (PHB/DMG/MM set) and thought WTF?! This sux, its WoW on paper, etc,etc...
Read the Basic rules and for ZERO dollars you can decide if the rules suit you and your group.
+1 to WotC from me.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
After reading I am happy and will leave my Amazon pre-order in place.You're not going to convert over from 2nd edition AD&D are you? :-(
Simply put... No. 5th still suffers from every race can be every class (shudder) and no level limits for demi-humans. Not to mention that demi-human is seen now as a racist term ;)
Can't make a world to play in with any d20 game!
Paladins are Human, full stop. Anything else is pure fantasy, er...
|
|
OK, so I've had a chance to read through it now. It definitely looks like D&D again, to the point where taking something classic like White Plume Mountain should be fairly easy to play in it, while also allowing for playing The Sunless Citadel or Keep on the Shadowfell under these new rules. Nothing in it truly offended me, but then again, I played 4E for over a year in LFR and GMed a third of the Scales of War AP before I truly tired of the way the rules worked.
I'm currently in a "wait-and-see" mode. Nothing that they printed in the rules really excited me, but similarly, nothing really offended me. I'm very interested in playing the game and seeing how the engine actually performs - that's really the test of the game. Advantage/disadvantage looks to be a neat solution to having 8,000 different situational modifiers, cutting down on the easily forgettable bonuses to just one uniform mechanic - roll twice, and pick one. I hope it succeeds - a market without competition is a stagnant market, and while I see no signs that Paizo is resting on its laurels, it's good for our hobby in the long run to have two robust gaming pillars, rather than just one. I want 5E to be successful. I want to see it thriving. I don't want this to be D&D's swan song before Hasbro gives up on it entirely and swallows it up, utilizing it only as a product for licensing.
I want to keep breaking into dungeons and killing dragons. I sincerely hope that Wizards has created a game that will last the test of time again.
I am actually running White Plume Mountain tonight using a mix of Basic D&D and the D&D Next playtest final packet. I already ran Lost Caverns and that was great.
Charlie, I wouldn't mind reading a play review tomorrow. I'm particularly interested in how some of the new features contribute to that "old school" D&D experience (you know, the one all the old guys remember...probably a little inaccurately).
I didn't keep up with the playtest docs; could you fill me in on what (not too specific, the NDA still applies) is in the final test packet that isn't in Basic (for example: druids, more Martial Archetypes, a few magic items, etc.).
I still disagree. Those races aren't playable for one, they are monsters and they still happen like a half-fiend does. The book I had showed them as half fiends, not tieflings. So which book specifically shows them as being tieflings? And aren't half-fiends plane-touched or are they outsiders?
What I did do was get a hostile PM from someone in this thread ("intelligence is obviously your dump stat").Wow. Poor form.
Almost as much as constantly harrassing me on the forums every time I post, no? Or is public harrasment allowed here? If so my bad.
This free basic edition didn't have a few things in it though like feats did it? I didnt see any. Some guy was trying to argue you didnt have to spend more money to get into 5th. Not true at all. The basic edition is just that, basic. It wont have everything the PHB has. In other words its incomplete. I also dont see a DMG or a MM for free either. So saying 5th ed core rules are free is incorrect.WotC has stated those will be added to the Basic PDF once the books themselves come out. It is also possible we will get more information from the Players Handbook (such as feats) when it actually comes out next month.
And it's still not going to be the complete rules. You're only getting the most basic rules for free. Do you honestly believe you wont have to buy the PHB, DMG or Monster Manual? You will. I already talked to my local gaming store clerk and he said the PHB does have more stuff in in than these basic rules had.
For the record, one of the later Planescape books included customizable tieflings. I don't remember there being any equivalent for aasimar. The customization wasn't intended to betray which flavor of fiend your tiefling came from, though; it was a lot more like the Counsel of Thieves random bunch of powers and traits.
*********************
I really hope that PHB/DMG/MM rules are published as free PDFs. I don't think it's going to happen and it isn't my expectation, but I would really like to see a PRD-type offering to allow everybody to play without any monetary commitment. We'll see, I guess.
I don't know what you guys are doing, but I was simply pointing out a factual error. I could care less about edition warring.
I'm also fairly sure that PM would have happened with or without the discussion of Tiefling subraces.
Still, as Steve Geddes wrote: Poor from. Sorry that you're being harassed.
Actually, the message in question specifically referenced the Tiefling subrace thing (which is part of what made it so bizarre)...but no worries. I just need to grow a thicker skin. :)
Growing a thicker skin is never the solution to people being jerks. Ensuring they're made extremely unwelcome wherever they show up tends to work far better.
Almost as much as constantly harrassing me on the forums every time I post, no? Or is public harrasment allowed here? If so my bad.What I did do was get a hostile PM from someone in this thread ("intelligence is obviously your dump stat").Wow. Poor form.
If you're unhappy with a poster's behaviour you bring it to the moderators' attention.
Sending insulting pms is poor form.
Growing a thicker skin is never the solution to people being jerks. Ensuring they're made extremely unwelcome wherever they show up tends to work far better.I don't know what you guys are doing, but I was simply pointing out a factual error. I could care less about edition warring.
I'm also fairly sure that PM would have happened with or without the discussion of Tiefling subraces.
Still, as Steve Geddes wrote: Poor from. Sorry that you're being harassed.
Actually, the message in question specifically referenced the Tiefling subrace thing (which is part of what made it so bizarre)...but no worries. I just need to grow a thicker skin. :)
Not really. That only makes them feel more like they are right and proves their opinions about you to themselves. So go for it. That strategy will not work and will just get you in trouble as well.
Almost as much as constantly harrassing me on the forums every time I post, no? Or is public harrasment allowed here? If so my bad.What I did do was get a hostile PM from someone in this thread ("intelligence is obviously your dump stat").Wow. Poor form.If you're unhappy with a poster's behaviour you bring it to the moderators' attention.
Sending insulting pms is poor form.
So is following someone around attacking their posts.
So is following someone around attacking their posts.
I will try this only once: I was not "following you around." We were both posting in the same thread, and I found your statement that WotC was stealing the idea of plane-touched subraces from Paizo ludicrous. And it is ludicrous.
I'm sorry if that upsets you. However, I don't believe that being upset entitles you to send nasty PMs. The PM system isn't in place so that you can send messages that you know would be moderated if you had posted them for everyone to see.
I still disagree. Those races aren't playable for one, they are monsters and they still happen like a half-fiend does. The book I had showed them as half fiends, not tieflings. So which book specifically shows them as being tieflings? And aren't half-fiends plane-touched or are they outsiders?
Yes they are playable. Races of Faerun even lists their racial modifiers and level adjustments. It even says:
In this book, you will find sifficient information in the racial descriptions of these races to play them as player characters, but you should refer to Monsters of Faerun if you need their monster entries for your game.
The entire point of Races of Faerun is to give you more options for player character races. And as I said before, Monsters of Faerun very specifically calls them tieflings.
Races of Faerun also very specifically stats that orcs with one tanarukk grandparent are still tanarukks themselves. They can't be half-fiends.
Half-fiends are not planetouched. Planetouched have some outsider-blood somewhere in their ancestry, but not as much as a half-fiend/half-celestial has. Half-fiends are the children of fiends and mortals. Planetouched such as tieflings are the grandchildren (or later) of fiends and mortals.
And it's still not going to be the complete rules. You're only getting the most basic rules for free. Do you honestly believe you wont have to buy the PHB, DMG or Monster Manual? You will. I already talked to my local gaming store clerk and he said the PHB does have more stuff in in than these basic rules had.This free basic edition didn't have a few things in it though like feats did it? I didnt see any. Some guy was trying to argue you didnt have to spend more money to get into 5th. Not true at all. The basic edition is just that, basic. It wont have everything the PHB has. In other words its incomplete. I also dont see a DMG or a MM for free either. So saying 5th ed core rules are free is incorrect.WotC has stated those will be added to the Basic PDF once the books themselves come out. It is also possible we will get more information from the Players Handbook (such as feats) when it actually comes out next month.
I never said anything about it being the complete rules for free.
Do you need to buy all 3 books? It all depends on just what WotC decides to give out for free. If they go as far as they did with the 3.X SRD (which is doubtful), then you won't need to buy the books. Sure, you will need the Players Handbook (its possible that when the book does finally come out, more of it will be added to the Basic PDF). That contains all the needed rules for character creation.
The Dungeon Masters Guide, however, may be potentially optional. Magic items are really the only "needed" thing from it, and those can be homebrewed very easily. The same with monsters. 5e is close enough to 3.X and previous editions to even use material from them with minor changes.
|
Also true. Treating both groups as monolithic entities is probably not the best way to go about it. Still, I feel like the former is by far the most common rationale for people switching to Pathfinder, and the latter is the most common criticism of 5e I've seen from Pathfinder players. So while they're probably not the same group, there's probably a lot of overlap.In fairness, Scott, you could be talking about an entirely different group of people.3.5 player circa 2008: "Pathfinder is the D&D I love but now with sensible changes for smoother play? Take my money!"
Pathfinder player circa 2014: "5th edition is the D&D I love but now with sensible changes for smoother play? Doesn't sound revolutionary enough to satisfy me!"
Go figure.
I'd assume the most common reason was, "I want to keep playing 3.5 and I can do that with PF".
And the most common current reason here is "I want to keep playing PF and I can still do that with PF".
Something drastically different in a way that they liked might be reason to change or at least add it to the roster. 4E may have been drastically different, but not in the way they wanted.
This is a good summation of how I feel about DDN. Transitioning from a dead game to a live game is different from transitioning from one live game to another live game.
-Skeld
Ignoring any previous posts potentially attacking, or defending a definitely-non-attack, and posting my thoughts about Basic D&D:
Things I liked:
-I really like a save for all the ability scores. I think it makes a certain amount of sense, and opens up for some really good social interaction. "Lord Soand'So is attempting to expose how little you know about the subject, make an Intelligence save to roll with it or a Charisma save to maintain composure."
-I liked the simplicity of finesse weapons, and also the viability of Dex-based warrior types with Dex to damage.
-It was really simple to make up characters, and they were rather evocative. I definitely didn't feel like my rogue was going to be the same as everyone else's rogue.
-I enjoy that magic is special, and incredibly helpful but not necessary. I really dislike +x magic items.
-I really like advantage/disadvantage as a mechanic. Elegant, dynamic and well-done.
Things I'm neutral about:
-Ability scores capped out at 20. While I get that it sometimes gets excessive in 3.x or Pathfinder (I once played a half-dragon fighter with a strength in the 80s!) I think it does limit those people who do want to play super-heroic characters.
-In addition to the ability scores, the math overall is really flat by design. It makes monsters like goblins viable for a longer time which is cool, but making up a higher level character, they don't feel necessarily more powerful than the first level nobody, except for hit points.
-Multiclassing. I like that they're doing it, but there really weren't any rules for it in the basic rules (understandable), other than proficiency bonuses remain constant for character level, and you only get a few of the proficiencies.
Things I didn't like:
-I really wanted to like backgrounds, but they felt so limiting. I imagine that this will be an area that is really expanded upon with splat books and Race Highlight books (Dwarves of...). There would need to be a lot of backgrounds for it to feel like I can actually have it reflect my character. I prefer Pathfinder traits.
-I didn't like the Skill system. while I started gaming with 2nd Edition, I really cut my teeth on 3.0, and I use skills quite a bit to help me define my characters. Choosing a finite number that won't change, and being trained in skills don't really make you all that much better than someone who isn't, for instance, just isn't evocative to me.
-While the majority of the game is set up to be intuitive, there are a couple of instances where that breaks down. I think because the system is designed to be pretty simple otherwise, these stick out a bit more. An example is the Arcane Recovery for a Wizard who can study her spellbook for a short time and then recover a number of spell levels-ish equal to half her level (rounded up), where a third level wizard can recover one second level spell, or two first level spells. It just feels a bit awkward.
In all:
-I think it's a solid game. Not enough to make it my primary game, but I think it was a solid effort. I would definitely try this out at a Con or if a friend wanted to run it as a one off. I think that one of the things this highlights is that WotC, with both 4th edition, and with this edition is attempting to 'get the math right', so that the 'sweet spot' for the game runs longer, and so that there is less that has to be modified/nerfed/banned for different games. I think Pathfinder expects that the GM will do that on his/her own. I still feel that Pathfinder has much more space to craft a character using the mechanics of the game, and not just the story. That brings in a level of unpredictability with the mechanics, but also more freedom. Those are my 2 cents (or more, if we're paying by word count. Sorry!)
|
|
Charlie, I wouldn't mind reading a play review tomorrow. I'm particularly interested in how some of the new features contribute to that "old school" D&D experience (you know, the one all the old guys remember...probably a little inaccurately).
I didn't keep up with the playtest docs; could you fill me in on what (not too specific, the NDA still applies) is in the final test packet that isn't in Basic (for example: druids, more Martial Archetypes, a few magic items, etc.).
NDA no longer applies so we're good. You can actually still get D&D Next playtest rules if you buy a D&D Next adventure PDF on Drive Thru.
D&D Next final playtest packet is very similar to D&D Basic in the rules. Converting an 11th level mage to an 11th level wizard took about 2 minutes.
D&D Next has extra classes (bard, barbarian, druid, monk, paladin, and ranger), extra races (gnome, half-elf, half-orc, tiefling, dragonborn, kender, and warforged). Lots more spells. Some magic items. A huge number of monsters (not balanced, too weak, but can be upped with a nice table created by someone on Wizard's website) especially from the old playtest packet with D&D module conversions.
Our D&D Next group is a barbarian, cleric, ranger/rogue, paladin, and wizard. We are slowly converting to D&D 5E as stuff rolls out.
My favorite part of D&D next was the module conversions. I've already run Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth and like I said will be running White Plume tonight with beefed up monsters.
I can't really do much testing of D&D 5E right now since I don't have high level monsters that aren't converted from D&D Next. However, we will use the new combat rules and spells tonight.
Spells got a boost in power. Fireball was 6d6 damage in D&D Next for example. However, concentration is more difficult now so there is a give in take in rule changes from D&D Next to D&D 5E that I like.
D&D Next also has special powers for big monsters in lairs that I really like. I upgraded the vampire in White Plume to the lich from the D&D Next module Dead in Thay. It gets extra lair abilities which I really like.
