Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 37

Thread: New 4E Races

  1. #21
    Senior Member ShadowMoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Pula, Croatia (HR)
    Posts
    278
    Downloads
    8
    Uploads
    0
    you would have to approach this out of the box, to understand...

    nvm, just my personal point...


    so to track back to subject, this time more "considerate"...

    I don't think Birthright would be the same with having Dragonkin and/or Tieflings as core player races...
    "If the wizards and students who lived here centuries ago had practiced control - in their spellcasting and in their dealings with the politics of the empire - you would be studying in a tall tower made by the best dwarf stone masons, not in an old military barracks."
    Applied Thaumaturgy Lector of the Royal College of Sorcery to new generation of students.

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    128
    Downloads
    6
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Thelandrin View Post
    I particularly think that Drow in Cerilia is a very bad idea
    I am agree.Regular elves in Cerilia are already wild and racist,with an evil leader such Rhuobhe they are just evil like the drow.

    These new races are good for NPC in D&D,not for the player.A dragonborn should be a monster.Playing as a dragonborn sounds....sad....who is a dragonborn?The poor son of a human mother raped by a dragon?

    If we need new playable races on Birthright we have already goblins (and even hobgoblins and bugbear),orogs,gnolls and cobolds.The problem is with bugbear,gnolls and orogs:they are too strong.

  3. #23
    Site Moderator geeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,188
    Downloads
    4
    Uploads
    7
    At 12:05 PM 6/23/2008, vota dc wrote:

    >These new races are good for NPC in D&D,not for the player.A
    >dragonborn should be a monster.Playing as a dragonborn
    >sounds....sad....who is a dragonborn?The poor son of a human mother
    >raped by a dragon?

    I could see an awnshegh or ershegh that was some sort of dragon based
    character. I`ve often been tempted to write something like that
    up. However, dragons have such an iconic, nearly mythical, role in
    Birthright that I think it would be a bad idea to create a
    dragon-based awn-/ershegh. There is a good reason why they didn`t
    have such a being in the original materials. It would dilute the
    significance of those creatures in the setting. There is "The
    Dragon" as a regent, but his/er actual origin, purpose, etc. is left
    open. I`ve long been mulling over an awnshegh write up (named
    "Tyrannus") who is based on a T. Rex. I think that`d be pretty
    doable--and even pretty cool--but that`s as close to a dragon as I`d get.

    Similarly, I could see an awnshegh who had tiefling characteristics,
    or eveb a character who was an actual tiefling from another
    world/plane and had somehow become trapped on Cerilia. I don`t think
    including such a character would be a bad idea at all. That could be
    done in an interesting way that keeps the setting`s dynamics
    intact. It could even mesh well with existing materials. A whole
    race, though.... That`d be a problem.

    >If we need new playable races on Birthright we have already goblins
    >(and even hobgoblins and bugbear),orogs,gnolls and cobolds.The
    >problem is with bugbear,gnolls and orogs:they are too strong.

    Yeah, let`s hear it for goblins as a Birthright player race! I`m all
    for that. In fact, I think any of the races you listed should be
    playable, no matter how powerful they might be. I`d even allow
    someone to play something like a giant if the adventure/campaign
    suited such a thing.

    For that matter, if someone wanted to play a hydrakin in a BR
    campaign I was running I`d probably allow that too. I`d write the
    race up in a way that differed from hydrakin, but that`s largely a
    matter of mechanics. Similarly, if someone made up a sort of
    cat-race who were descendants of the Sphynx, I`d support that. A
    player could take on a member of the Itave, or one of the
    sahuagin-based worshippers of the Kraken.

    However, in a campaign where it`s relatively unusual to see an elf
    out of his forests, such a player would have to be fully aware of
    what it was they were taking on. Nobody playing a hydrakin is going
    to be able to walk down the streets in a Cerilian city without people
    staring, slamming doors and otherwise reacting badly. He`d be as
    likely to be chased out of a small town as allowed to pass
    through. In Vosgaard he`d be a target just because warriors want to
    have bragging rights. ("I once killed this walking
    varsk-man!") Such characters should be recognized as rare, even
    freakish in Birthright, and treated appropriately.

    Gary

  4. #24
    Site Moderator AndrewTall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    2,388
    Downloads
    30
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by geeman View Post
    Nobody playing a hydrakin is going to be able to walk down the streets in a Cerilian city without people staring, slamming doors and otherwise reacting badly. He`d be as likely to be chased out of a small town as allowed to pass through. In Vosgaard he`d be a target just because warriors want to have bragging rights. ("I once killed this walking varsk-man!") Such characters should be recognized as rare, even freakish in Birthright, and treated appropriately.

    Gary
    Yup, that's the problem for poor old dragonkin. I'd expect a dwarf or elf to be treated similarly (assuming that they are recognised as non-human) - or a Vos in a civilised realm, and priest of any god bar the dark two in Vosgaard, etc, etc. One thing I like about BR is that racial and cultural differences are not blithely overlooked - PC's are often more special in accepting 'freaks' than they ever are in other ways engendering party loyalty. In earthdawn I had similar problems with obsidmen - fortunately for them popular superstition held that it's bad luck to hit an obsidman, but that didn't help the obsidmen to book passage on boats, a room at an inn, etc.

    A particular point I'd make is that anyone looking demonic risks being considered an awnshegh - and thus an evil, soul-destroying flesh eating monster. I can easily see a dragon-kin being shunned by the villagers - and promptly hunted down by the local lord/priest with a posse. Although the roleplaying of a BR nonhuman is not quite in the Earthdawn league of 'don't act like a horror', imho in the BR setting the hatred of awnshegh should not be under-estimated. Everybody knows (and the priests likely thunder it from the pulpits regularly to stop them forgetting) that demons of Azrai walk the land and those who commit great sins are twisted by the gods into monstrosities - looking monstrous is pretty much proof in such a society that you are monstrous.


    Shadowmoon, WOTC's decision to 'make a new game' with 4e rather than upgrading 3e is not capitalism, it's just abysmal marketing, lack of understanding of the game, and a failure to consider the existing customer base in a desperate attempt to reach out to a new (wider) set of customers. Capitalism is mostly just respect for property rights - everything else is more or less optional, or grows from that basic recognition. Crass marketing is only capitalist in the dismemberment of the residual assets during receivership.

    IMHO WOTC probably should have called 4e D&D tactical, leaving themselves open to bring out D&D world-builder and D&D legends for the simulationist and story-teller market segments if sufficient demand existed. As it is they appear to have alienated a significant area of their fan base, tried to barge into a market (computer games) in which they are at a significant disadvantage (they are not selling a computer game), and damaged a significant product line (3e) to boot in bringing out 4e.

    If 4e works (i.e. is significantly more profitable than 3e) then congratulations, WOTC are visionaries - in time a new game company will fill the void that players like me see yawning at the heart of 4e and position itself in the niche vacated by WOTC (a playable version of hero-system or white wolf mayhap?) and no doubt someone will make a BR conversion for their system. We shall see.

  5. #25
    Special Guest (Donor)
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    540
    Downloads
    11
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ShadowMoon View Post
    Dragonborn and tieflings as core player races are for WoW kids, better reserved for special encounters...

    Let's keep Birthright mature plz...
    Again the WoW argument... WoW average player age is around 28.5 years (or was some years ago, I suppose it has stayed more or less the same). Not sure what's the average age on these forums for example, but I bet they aren't so different (probably a little older here, but that's it).

  6. #26
    Site Moderator geeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,188
    Downloads
    4
    Uploads
    7
    At 02:20 PM 6/23/2008, AndrewTall wrote:

    >>Nobody playing a hydrakin is going to be able to walk down the
    >>streets in a Cerilian city without people staring, slamming doors
    >>and otherwise reacting badly. He`d be as likely to be chased out
    >>of a small town as allowed to pass through. In Vosgaard he`d be a
    >>target just because warriors want to have bragging rights. ("I
    >>once killed this walking varsk-man!") Such characters should be
    >>recognized as rare, even freakish in Birthright, and treated appropriately.
    >
    >Yup, that`s the problem for poor old dragonkin. I`d expect a dwarf
    >or elf to be treated similarly (assuming that they are recognised as
    >non-human) - or a Vos in a civilised realm, and priest of any god
    >bar the dark two in Vosgaard, etc, etc. One thing I like about BR
    >is that racial and cultural differences are not blithely overlooked
    >- PC`s are often more special in accepting `freaks` than they ever
    >are in other ways engendering party loyalty.

    Exactly. The standard races are often at odds in Birthright. Such
    prejudices even exist within racial groups such as those from
    Boeruine having a bias against those from Avanil. Etc. (There are
    too many such animosities to list....) Many elves won`t even
    tolerate humans in their presence, and many humans aren`t
    particularly more egalitarian.

    So the big picture is that if a DM wants to allow a player to take on
    something even more peculiar than the standard BR races then he
    should let that player know that reactions are going to be
    extreme. Birthright NPCs are sometimes moved to violence by standard
    PC races, so imagine how much less likely they would be to accept a
    humanoid lizard.... Where the most common reaction to certain
    standard races in BR might be "We don`t serve their kind here!"
    someone who wanted to play something even stranger would be more
    likely to hear "What is that thing? Kill it!" several times before breakfast.

    Gary

  7. #27
    Junior Member Capricia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    BC, Canada
    Posts
    24
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Vicente View Post
    Again the WoW argument... WoW average player age is around 28.5 years (or was some years ago, I suppose it has stayed more or less the same). Not sure what's the average age on these forums for example, but I bet they aren't so different (probably a little older here, but that's it).
    Averages are wonderful things. According to such calculations everyone on the planet has a fraction of a child and owns a hyena.

    I've played online games like WoW, Shadowbane and Guild Wars for a number of years. The comparison of 4e to them is perfectly valid in my opinion. They've made this edition faster, leaner and with a bias towards killing things instead of role playing with them. That is exactly what a money making online video game is aiming for.
    Last edited by Capricia; 06-23-2008 at 10:11 PM.

  8. #28
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewTall View Post
    IMHO WOTC probably should have called 4e D&D tactical, leaving themselves open to bring out D&D world-builder and D&D legends for the simulationist and story-teller market segments if sufficient demand existed.
    This is brilliant marketing, Andrew. Based on surveys they did when bringing 3e out, they claim that whether you divide gamers using 3 categories or 4 or 5, you find that the categories are pretty evenly divided. Based on my experience I believe this. What I think we might need more than anything is the chapter that explains how to play one game with D&D tactical, world-builder, and legends. How to get these players together and get them to all play their own games together.

    As it is they appear to have alienated a significant area of their fan base, [...] and damaged a significant product line (3e) to boot in bringing out 4e.
    Is this a New-Coke moment? We shall see.

  9. #29
    Special Guest (Donor)
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    540
    Downloads
    11
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Capricia View Post
    Averages are wonderful things. According to such calculations everyone on the planet has a fraction of a child and owns a hyena.

    I've played online games like WoW, Shadowbane and Guild Wars for a number of years. The comparison of 4e to them is perfectly valid in my opinion. They've made this edition faster, leaner and with a bias towards killing things instead of role playing with them. That is exactly what a money making online video game is aiming for.
    Sorry but you miss the point completely: average age on WoW indicates that not only children tend to play that game (as with most MMORPGs). About the rest I disagree and I have played WoW and GW a lot too (and several other online games), the experience of playing DnD 4e has been so far totally different than the experience of playing those games, even if they have some points in common (as they have with 3e, or do you think feat trees are too different from talent builds for example? Or the heavy itemization of 3e, does it sound familiar?).

  10. #30
    Special Guest (Donor)
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Posts
    419
    Downloads
    25
    Uploads
    0
    It's absurd to calculate the average age of players in WoW and BR since it has nothing to do with it.
    It's the quantity of the people that counts. Birthright community has several thousand members, count how many of them are active. Now compare it to WoW.

    I've received my 4e books few days ago, couldn't help it not to see some characters resemble those found in WoW. Pictures in PHB or DMG with monsters wielding the swords that don't look anything like the swords, they look like some horrid crossbreeds between swords and chunks of metal twisted and banded in every way to make them scarier. Monsters in MM are from the worst nightmares of nine hells. Even wolves and rats have bloody spikes on them cause they'd be like cute little puppies and hamsters compared to the others.
    Rey M. - court wizard of Tuarhievel

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. EverWarz the War of Races
    By Bane_McDeath in forum Empires of Blood
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-21-2003, 12:43 PM
  2. Races...
    By accasey in forum BRCS 3.0/3.5 Edition
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-08-2003, 04:49 PM
  3. 3e Races
    By Birthright-L in forum BRCS 3.0/3.5 Edition
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 02-06-2003, 10:08 PM
  4. Other Haman Races
    By Crazy Wolf in forum The Royal Library
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-12-2002, 06:59 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
BIRTHRIGHT, DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, D&D, the BIRTHRIGHT logo, and the D&D logo are trademarks owned by Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and are used by permission. ©2002-2010 Wizards of the Coast, Inc.