| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| farinal |
Posted - 15 May 2016 : 22:25:46
even in the player's handbook it states that:
"Half orcs are greeted with a practical caution, but tielings are the subject of supernatural fear. the evil of their heritage is plainly visible in their features. and as far as most people are concerned, a tieling could very well be a devil straight from the Nine Hells. People might make warding signs as a tiefling approaches, cross the street to avoid passing near, or bar shop doors before a tiefling can enter."
so how can a race such as this be counted as among the core player races and be suggested to the players?
also the dragonborn, since with 5E their world has returned back doesn't that mean most of the dragonborn are also back? so they should have a very low number of population, no?
I don't really see the point of the tiefling to be in the core PC races since most npcs would dislike or hate or fear the PC and most of the PCs will have no reason to trust or join forces with the tiefling. it's same as making a party with a drow on the surface and start adventuring away.
any thoughts? |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 15 Jun 2016 : 17:46:20
Gnomes with bad Hollywood Irish accents can't be any worse than all those tieflings with bad Hollywood Dracula-Russian-Slavic accents. |
| Shadowsoul |
Posted - 15 Jun 2016 : 07:01:24
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
Umm, in my view most people would form into mobs and kill them. On sight. I've always thought having tieflings and dragonborn as core races was just pandering to the "I want a kewl class to play" group.
-- George Krashos
Going to have to agree with this. I don't believe the playtest survey because on the various websites I've seen many polls done that show those races on the bottom in popularity.
Thats the trouble with a survey. You can use it as a tool to make people think it's what the masses want and there is no way we can check to see if the results are true. |
| Shadowsoul |
Posted - 15 Jun 2016 : 06:56:09
quote:
Originally posted by moonbeast
quote:
Originally posted by Thrasymachus
Also, never forget. People that play gnome/illusionists are bad people in real life. It’s true. 
I play a gnome illusionist with psionic abilities. He talks like an Irish leprechaun.
You'd hate me in real life.
Please be to god that it isn't one of those hollywood Irish accents. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 14 Jun 2016 : 04:56:04
 that's pretty good.
I will say that the Human in 3e/3.5, Pathfinder, 4e, and 5e are pretty good. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 13 Jun 2016 : 18:10:18
"What is that ... creature ... doing in the party?"
"It's called a human. According to ancient myths these things were once very numerous and - if the most truly outrageous tales are to be believed - their civilization covered the entire world and they ruled all other races."
"It looks rather weak and pathetic. And very bland. What can it do?"
"Well, nothing actually. It has no special abilities at all. That's the whole point. It's even wimpier than a kobold."
"How did it survive so long?"
"We're not entirely sure, to be honest. I think it just stubbornly refuses to die." |
| Diffan |
Posted - 13 Jun 2016 : 14:13:31
quote:
Originally posted by Gyor
Tieflings and Dragonborn are core as a peace offering for 4e fans, same with stuff like cantrips.
....or after the survey they realized that unusual races like Tiefligs, Dragonborn, and Drow are pretty popular and wanted to keep them. 5e would need a LOT more as a peace offering to us 4e fans, despite the numerous mechanics (thematically speaking) they ended up using.
quote:
Originally posted by Gyor
Tieflings and Dragonborn are major races in 5e still, Tiefling have their enlarged populations caused by Asmodeaus, plus are a major power in Unther and Mulhorand, and Dragonborn have Tymanther (which remains, including its largest cities, but terroritorially is reduced in size thanks to Unther's return), plus a refugee dispora from places like Returned Abeir throughout Faerun, plus given Unther's war on Abier against Dragonborn, they could have many Dragonborn slaves.
I think only the smallest, most isolated bergs would outright ban Dragonborn and Tieflings, most people have met or heard about Tieflings and Dragonborn. Most normal people aren't going to mess with someone who can spit fire/poison/cold/lightening/acid not to mention the assorted magic and abilities of Tieflings.
Most bigots would just say stuff behind their back, where its safe.
This, I agree with. |
| BrianDavion |
Posted - 13 Jun 2016 : 11:54:23
I tend to be of that opinion too however it is plenty popular, I just started a D&D game, and my group consists of 2 teiflings, a dragonborn and a drow elf... |
| George Krashos |
Posted - 13 Jun 2016 : 11:02:17
Umm, in my view most people would form into mobs and kill them. On sight. I've always thought having tieflings and dragonborn as core races was just pandering to the "I want a kewl class to play" group.
-- George Krashos |
| Gyor |
Posted - 12 Jun 2016 : 16:06:55
Tieflings and Dragonborn are core as a peace offering for 4e fans, same with stuff like cantrips.
Tieflings and Dragonborn are major races in 5e still, Tiefling have their enlarged populations caused by Asmodeaus, plus are a major power in Unther and Mulhorand, and Dragonborn have Tymanther (which remains, including its largest cities, but terroritorially is reduced in size thanks to Unther's return), plus a refugee dispora from places like Returned Abeir throughout Faerun, plus given Unther's war on Abier against Dragonborn, they could have many Dragonborn slaves.
I think only the smallest, most isolated bergs would outright ban Dragonborn and Tiefkings, most people have met or heard about Tieflings and Dragonborn. Most normal people aren't going to mess with someone who can spit fire/poison/cold/lightening/acid not to mention the assorted magic and abilities of Tieflings.
Most bigots would just say stuff behind their back, where its safe.
|
| moonbeast |
Posted - 25 May 2016 : 05:20:09
quote:
Originally posted by Thrasymachus
Also, never forget. People that play gnome/illusionists are bad people in real life. It’s true.
I play a gnome illusionist with psionic abilities. He talks like an Irish leprechaun.
You'd hate me in real life.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 24 May 2016 : 16:11:46
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
I feel this is why the DM guild has been given more freedom, because a lot of content people want can be found there.
I agree -- I think another consideration behind the creation of that site was simply to take pressure off of WotC. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 24 May 2016 : 15:19:35
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
I'm thoroughly convinced at this point that they truly don't plan on doing d*ck with the 5e game anymore. Its sad, it has potential, and I'm starting to see a lot of young folks start roleplaying now (which I hadn't seen for a long time). They need to get off their butts and start producing stuff before their interest fades.
In terms of supplements, I doubt we'll see a change as the designers have said that a slower release schedule (like 2 books a year) is the likely path for the time being. A slower schedule means more time to enjoy the booKS you have plus really critique the supplementsame in-house prior to release (something both 3e and 4e failed here, IMO). And the unfortunate consequence is that there's less product to purchase this, less content. I feel this is why the DM guild has been given more freedom, because a lot of content people want can be found there. |
| farinal |
Posted - 24 May 2016 : 13:04:12
quote:
Originally posted by Caolin
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
I'm thoroughly convinced at this point that they truly don't plan on doing d*ck with the 5e game anymore. Its sad, it has potential, and I'm starting to see a lot of young folks start roleplaying now (which I hadn't seen for a long time). They need to get off their butts and start producing stuff before their interest fades.
Yeah, and that stuff needs to be novels and video games a plenty. I would have never have cared about D&D or the Realms if it weren't for plenty of either of these two things.
True. They feed off from each other. I probably wouldnt play D&D if it wasnt for the FR novels and video games like IWD BG NN etc. |
| sfdragon |
Posted - 24 May 2016 : 04:07:26
only have 2 fr games.
neverwinter and swordcoast legends
and that does not count those from beemdog. |
| Caolin |
Posted - 24 May 2016 : 02:52:26
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
I'm thoroughly convinced at this point that they truly don't plan on doing d*ck with the 5e game anymore. Its sad, it has potential, and I'm starting to see a lot of young folks start roleplaying now (which I hadn't seen for a long time). They need to get off their butts and start producing stuff before their interest fades.
Yeah, and that stuff needs to be novels and video games a plenty. I would have never have cared about D&D or the Realms if it weren't for plenty of either of these two things. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 24 May 2016 : 01:44:32
I'm thoroughly convinced at this point that they truly don't plan on doing d*ck with the 5e game anymore. Its sad, it has potential, and I'm starting to see a lot of young folks start roleplaying now (which I hadn't seen for a long time). They need to get off their butts and start producing stuff before their interest fades. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 23 May 2016 : 22:05:51
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
@ Irennen: Yeah I understand that deviation on part of the creators from the original can cause that. With the base "fractured" (for lack of a better word) it's going to come down to whether or not the deviation is enough to drive people away. Considering the positive attitude many have had with 5e overall, and the Forgotten Realms specifically, some will have to make that decision but that decision will unlikely change WotC course.
Personally speaking, I haven't let RSEs, weird canon, or events change my mind about the setting overall. I've got too much invested to throw it away over something like a departure that, frankly, has been gone for almost a decade anyways. I understand that it's not just Tieflings but to me it's pretty clear that this is the way things are panning out for the long haul. There isn't enough vocal dissent on these sorts of things for WotC to even blink at, let alone honestly consider. Heck ENWorld has an entire sub-section devoted to a class that wasn't included in 5e in an attempt to get it in 5e and they haven't.
Well, the vocal dissent was enough to get them to rush and resurrect everything and everyone they could think of. I could be ok with the status quo of 5e, or ok enough to the point of still wanting to follow it. But that's another matter, as it would require WotC to actually do something with the immense amount of characters, gods, and lands that they have restored, instead of just focusing on so little, or just keeping to introduce these pseudo-RSE storylines that aren't comepelling at all (IMO, ofc, as always). |
| Diffan |
Posted - 23 May 2016 : 21:23:52
@ Irennen: Yeah I understand that deviation on part of the creators from the original can cause that. With the base "fractured" (for lack of a better word) it's going to come down to whether or not the deviation is enough to drive people away. Considering the positive attitude many have had with 5e overall, and the Forgotten Realms specifically, some will have to make that decision but that decision will unlikely change WotC course.
Personally speaking, I haven't let RSEs, weird canon, or events change my mind about the setting overall. I've got too much invested to throw it away over something like a departure that, frankly, has been gone for almost a decade anyways. I understand that it's not just Tieflings but to me it's pretty clear that this is the way things are panning out for the long haul. There isn't enough vocal dissent on these sorts of things for WotC to even blink at, let alone honestly consider. Heck ENWorld has an entire sub-section devoted to a class that wasn't included in 5e in an attempt to get it in 5e and they haven't.
@ Wooly: The one-size-fits-all approach has been prevalent for almost 10 years now. If we're being honest here, I'm fairly confident that it isn't going away anytime soon. And now that the Forgotten Realms is the "flagship" setting for 5e I'm expecting it to only get more. Whether the designers try to work with Canon to fit the Realms or just ham-fist it in there, is debatable. I wouldn't mind a looser description to allow for more variety, but then again I take all of that with a grain of salt anyways. I guess I just don't see the point considering WotC isn't going to change it's current mindset when it comes to the things they produce and how it affects the Realms. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 23 May 2016 : 19:58:45
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Not really sure what else there is in this regard?
You get rid of the one-size-fits-all approach. Nothing in pre-4E said you couldn't have a tiefling that looked like the 4E ones. So instead of "tieflings look like X" they could have say "Tieflings display a range of fiendish features such as A, B, C, D, and so on, but in the last century, due to this thing happening, a lot of tieflings have looked like X".
Just a couple of lines of text, and we've got both the 4E tieflings and the 2E/3E tieflings fully covered. And then we wouldn't have authors having to write fixes for the retcon into their novels, we'd have a lot of variety and customization options, and there wouldn't be any issue at all, for fans of either variety of tiefling. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 23 May 2016 : 19:44:10
My point was simply that, when someone says that they don't like something (or that they miss something) in the Realms, telling that they can ignore it in their game doesn't necessarily solve the problem, for the reasons that I've already pointed out. Besides, it's a mostly obvious thing, and not always doable (and the latter part might prevent someone from actually *playing* in the Realms).
So yeah, canon might lead to the point where the setting is different enough that you just don't want to buy or follow it anymore. Maybe you'll still use it, but you may end up not being involved in it and its story (and I'm not just talking about how tielfings look here). |
| Diffan |
Posted - 23 May 2016 : 19:28:45
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
Canon is also what determines if you like or not the setting and what will be published about it. Now, generally speaking (so I'm not specifically talking about different kinds of tieflings), if something that you like currently isn't in Canon, then you will likely never see more stories with it, or its presence in anything regarding the setting. And please, don't act as if this is a minor issue, because it heavily influences the enjoyment of the published setting (at least, it does for me). Because it feels awful to see something you love getting trashed and ignored, and because part of the beauty of a world like the Realms is that you can feel part of a community that is involved with its ever growing story (or was, since the community has been splitted), and that can't really happen, if everyone starts to not accept different parts of the setting.
Canon may have no relevance in particular games, but it is important when deciding if you want to continue to follow its history. That's something even authors have said.
The be blunt, WotC can't cater to everyone. There are parts of the current Forgotten Realms that I don't like. The removal of Returned Abeir and Tymanther. The emergence of Mulhorand and Unther. The re-creating of the Weave (though it's connection and heavy influence from Mystra has been toned down, thankfully) and bringing back characters like Breunor, Cattie-brie via magic are all parts of the setting I heavily dislike. Am I still playing in the current era of the Forgotten Realms? Yep. I didn't like the death of Eilistraee in 4e or Lantans sinking or whatever either. Still didn't stop me from playing in the Realms.
Looking specifically at Tieflings, they've been received positively overall. This was due mostly from the feedback WotC compiled during the playtest. If a majority of people like an option then it behooves WotC to put that into their game. For the most part, I rarely see much anger towards the non-classic races save for the so-called "broken" ones like the Aarakocra because they can fly. The artwork has been, again from reviews I've read, much better received than almost all of 4e's run and much of 3e's too.
So we have a majority in favor or keeping Tieflings (in their current incarnation) for D&D and thus, in the Forgotten Realms. Like it or not, they're here to stay just as Mulhorand and Unther and Maztica are here to say  . You can either be mad and not support that by not buying their things OR change it when it applies to you directly. Not really sure what else there is in this regard? |
| Irennan |
Posted - 23 May 2016 : 16:00:21
Canon is also what determines if you like or not the setting and what will be published about it. Now, generally speaking (so I'm not specifically talking about different kinds of tieflings), if something that you like currently isn't in Canon, then you will likely never see more stories with it, or its presence in anything regarding the setting. And please, don't act as if this is a minor issue, because it heavily influences the enjoyment of the published setting (at least, it does for me). Because it feels awful to see something you love getting trashed and ignored, and because part of the beauty of a world like the Realms is that you can feel part of a community that is involved with its ever growing story (or was, since the community has been splitted), and that can't really happen, if everyone starts to not accept different parts of the setting.
Canon may have no relevance in particular games, but it is important when deciding if you want to continue to follow its history. That's something even authors have said. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 23 May 2016 : 15:33:55
If you're new to the setting, chances are how tieflings look is a non-issue with your game. I'd say the VAST majority of people dissatisfied are older players who very well know there's pre- and post-spellplague differences with Tieflings and are primarily upset that the Tiefling's "look" didn't revert back to those player's preferences in common depictions throughout the supplements.
As for home games, yeah I'm going to be far more interested in those because they actually affect me. I don't care how someone else plays their game and I don't really care how people use the rules or what things they add because it doesn't directly effect me in any way, shape, or form. Did you know some people still put Alignment requirements on classes in 5e?! Not official rules but that doesn't stop them. Did you know that people removed Alignment reqiurements on classes prior to 4e?! Not official rules but that didn't stop them either. In both cases none were supported by WotC and yet, lo and behold, we have people changing things to fit their game and to make it fun. Not to mention that in almost every supplement of D&D that I've found, especially CORE ones, are pretty darn adamant about reassuring DMs and players alike that the rules (and I'd imagine depictions of races/classes therein) aren't carved in stone and can....heck even SHOULD be changed for a better experience. So no, I'm not going to worry about some gaming table, 2,500 miles away, that reverts all Tieflings to their pre-4e selves OR a gaming table across town that plays strictly RAW. Neither actually affect me one bit.
As for Canon, we need to let people know that Canon is a nice common ground to meet on but that experiences and expectations based on preferences are going to differ. LOADS of people don't play in post Spellplague Realms. LOADS of people don't play in pre-Spellplague Realms. LOADS of people play BOTH eres. LOADS of people ignore the Time of Troubles. LOADS of people have killed Drizzt or Elminster or Khelban, or Mystra, or don't include Tymanther or Returned Abeir, or (in my games Mulhorand and Unther) or have floating Earth Motes (or kept them).
Canon is nice as a starting point. As a fixed element within a setting to branch off of. When players enter a Canonized world (like Greyhawk or the Forgotten Realms) they have expectations based on what they've read or seen. But I think that's pretty much where Canon stops. because those same players want to immerse themselves and get involved and get into the action. They WANT to make changes like save Mystra from Shar and Cyric, stop the Spellplague. They want to help Zsass Tam and expand Thay's undead rule. They want to broker peace between Sembia and Cormyr. They want to stop the Abolethic Sovereignty (or maybe advance it?). ALL of these immediately stop Canon in it's tracks. It will change the course for their Realms to the point of perhaps non-resemblance and that's a GOOD thing. So if players and DMs are willing to change the Realms SO much and engage in non-Canon stuff, why are we arguing how Tieflings look? Or whether or not Dragonborn and Tieflings should be "Core" races? In the end the Realms will be what you make it, not WotC. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 23 May 2016 : 11:13:13
If you're new to the setting, you don't know that you have options with tieflings. That's a reduction of potential.
Changing something in your home game does not change how it goes in every game -- you, as a DM, may say one thing, but other DMs -- even those running games you play in -- may say otherwise.
And changing how it is in your home game doesn't affect all the published fiction, or published artwork, or published game material that all goes with the "one-size-fits-all" approach. That's why I used that movie analogy -- it doesn't matter how you want to see something on your own, you're still going to be slapped in the fact with the official look.
Some people want to try to stick as close to published canon as possible. That shouldn't be such a big deal. We should support that, not brush it aside. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 23 May 2016 : 06:48:39
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Why does this argument come up every time someone mentions not liking some aspect of the canon Realms?
In this particular instance, both Tieflings still exit. Tieflings looked a certain way prior to the Spellplague, yes? The spellplague didn't, as from I read, change every single one into what they appear to be now. Ergo one could assume that pre-Spellplauge Tieflings and thier offspring will have the distinct look of pre-4e era. It's what I do in my games anyways. Not to mention that the rules have changed SOO MUCH in the past 30 years that expecting Canon to remain intact or close to the original is completely absurd.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Yes, people can do whatever the heck they want... But people who came aboard later don't know that there was a time when planetouched had individual and highly varied appearances. And other people prefer to adhere as much as possible to canon, and canon is the one-size-fits-all approach.
Why? The actual creator of the Realms doesn't adhere to Canon so why burden yourself with being upset expressing displeasure when the things change? The ENTIRE point of the Forgotten Realms, and D&D by-the-by, is to have fun. If some designer, artist, or company does something that changes that, don't let it in your game. It's blatantly that simple. Further, the moment you introduced non-WotC official characters into the Realms it becomes non-canon. So what's the point when by playing the game you're deviating from source. And it really only gets more distinct the more things you do and the more people you meet and the more changes you make to the Realms in your own world.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Constantly using the "if you don't like it, change it" argument in response to dissatisfaction with the official version of something is similar to saying "if you don't like Robert Downey Jr as Iron Man, just pretend it's Jaleel White when you're watching the movie." It doesn't change anything for the person given that advice, and they're still going to be confronted by official images of the thing they don't like.
That's a terrible analogy and you know it. It actually makes no sense because I cannot change the role in how I "watch" a movie. I can, however, change my role in how a game plays and how a game works and how a games LOOKS at my home game.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I get that it's meant to be helpful advice, and for some, it would be... But at the same time, it doesn't address the original issue of WotC having created less potential for players and DMs.
I'm sorry but WotC doesn't take away or create less potential, that is SOLELY on part of the person playing the game. Period.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 23 May 2016 : 00:29:50
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
Well then it looks like you are stuck with the new tieflings because they are canon.
And that's an issue that WotC should address.
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
And for every god that says you cant there is another that says you can. Kelemvor doesnt stop all undead from being created, he doesnt even stop any powerful undead from being created. Eldath doesnt stop all wars. Shar didnt stop the second sun from being created.
The gods stop nothing, only people take actions.
And if the gods stop nothing, then saying the gods wouldn't allow something is not stopping potential. |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 22 May 2016 : 17:16:55
Well then it looks like you are stuck with the new tieflings because they are canon.
And for every god that says you cant there is another that says you can. Kelemvor doesnt stop all undead from being created, he doesnt even stop any powerful undead from being created. Eldath doesnt stop all wars. Shar didnt stop the second sun from being created.
The gods stop nothing, only people take actions. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 22 May 2016 : 17:13:49
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
Fans can be just as bad. In many threads lately i see the words 'the gods wouldnt allow that' to put down another's ideas and thus reduce the potential.
If someone wants to stick to canon, yes, there are many scenarios where something would be disallowed by the gods.
I don't see that as reducing potential, though... Just because one thing won't work, it doesn't mean others won't -- or that the limitation can't itself spur new creativity.
If I'm a kid in a playground, having a jungle gym in the playground doesn't limit my creativity -- it gives me more to work with.
I could run around in an empty field and pretend it's got everything I want -- or I could go to a playground where someone else's creativity can inspire my own and give me new ways to play.
That's how I see campaign settings for D&D -- I could create my own and do exactly what I want, or I could find one that has elements I like, including much that I wouldn't have thought of on my own, and work within that.
And for me, I'm far more creative when I have to work within someone else's boundaries, because those boundaries are often what spurs me to be creative, and trying to stay within them makes me think of things I wouldn't have come up with without those boundaries.
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
Hopefully people will realise that canon is no longer a sacred cow.
That's your opinion. A lot of us like to have a defined canon to work within. If I wanted to rewrite everything, I'd make up my own thing entirely from scratch. |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 22 May 2016 : 16:20:46
Fans can be just as bad. In many threads lately i see the words 'the gods wouldnt allow that' to put down another's ideas and thus reduce the potential.
Hopefully people will realise that canon is no longer a sacred cow.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 22 May 2016 : 16:00:46
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
quote:
Originally posted by Rymac
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Agreed. In my opinion, one of the biggest mistakes of the 4E ruleset was the one-size-fits-all, over-the-top look for all planetouched. I loved the 2E/3E approach where each one was something different, and where one planetouched might be obviously not fully human while the next would be indistinguishable from a human without looking very closely.
This ^. Tieflings descended from different demons, devils, and other entities should have different appearances. Individual variation should especially be evident in tieflings decended from entities native to the chaotic planes.
Who ever said that Tieflings "had" to change appearance to match the book in anyone's individual campaign? I mean we're literally just talking about semantics and individual imagery. Whether it's just subtle differences like in 2e/3e or more noticeable one like in 4e/5e, it's not going to matter overall.
Why does this argument come up every time someone mentions not liking some aspect of the canon Realms?
Yes, people can do whatever the heck they want... But people who came aboard later don't know that there was a time when planetouched had individual and highly varied appearances. And other people prefer to adhere as much as possible to canon, and canon is the one-size-fits-all approach.
Constantly using the "if you don't like it, change it" argument in response to dissatisfaction with the official version of something is similar to saying "if you don't like Robert Downey Jr as Iron Man, just pretend it's Jaleel White when you're watching the movie." It doesn't change anything for the person given that advice, and they're still going to be confronted by official images of the thing they don't like.
I get that it's meant to be helpful advice, and for some, it would be... But at the same time, it doesn't address the original issue of WotC having created less potential for players and DMs. |
|
|
