Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!campaignwiki.org!.POSTED.staticline-31-183-191-26.toya.net.pl!not-for-mail
From: Kyonshi <gmkeros@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: [Bell of Lost Souls] D&D 2024 Edition Heads Back To Greyhawk,
 Makes Aasimar A Default Option
Date: Mon, 20 May 2024 13:20:42 +0200
Organization: Campaign Wiki
Message-ID: <v2fddg$c162$1@sibirocobombus.campaignwiki>
References: <v273os$1kk7s$1@sibirocobombus.campaignwiki>
 <v27r1h$27vei$1@dont-email.me> <u1gf4jldqv439e153idk2bor2j6u353fr8@4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 20 May 2024 11:50:08 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: sibirocobombus.campaignwiki; posting-host="staticline-31-183-191-26.toya.net.pl:31.183.191.26";
	logging-data="394434"; mail-complaints-to="alex@alexschroeder.ch"
User-Agent: Betterbird (Windows) Hamster/2.1.0.1548
Cancel-Lock: sha1:LJn4Z6cqFGAWZQQK6DzU2qZIdEI= sha256:rRY+aNSSrfC5iZD9fwhx2QlXp7GDhajqm2UhZmku06A=
	sha1:sjLLo+hU9ueyvVeDjk6XSJSChKg= sha256:4qBiss6XiODWWsJOKjNiUka8PbQ51pQdZdIcjNcN/VI=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <u1gf4jldqv439e153idk2bor2j6u353fr8@4ax.com>
Bytes: 4844
Lines: 74

On 5/17/2024 10:44 PM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> On Fri, 17 May 2024 07:53:37 -0700, Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> On 5/17/2024 12:58 AM, Kyonshi wrote:
>>> So... Aasimar, Goliaths, and Orcs now become player races, and Greyhawk
>>> might be a standard setting?
>>>
>>
>> Ugh.  I'm all for weird PC races, but they don't belong in the PHB.
>> It's like pulling teeth to try to ban/change anything in there.
> 
> I never had a problem saying no to PCs in that regard (just because
> it's in the core book doesn't mean I have to use it in my campaign).
> It is a bit more problematic because players have more of an
> expectation that tieflings/etc. will be available, and are sometimes
> disappointed that they can't use those critters.
> 
> But my campaigns tend to be fairly low-fantasy/low-magic and those
> races don't really fit into the feel of the game world. I'm generally
> not opposed to orcs, except any player who choses them should expect a
> much rougher time of it, since they WILL be disadvantaged by their
> choice of race in a human-dominated world.
> 
> (in fairness, elves don't fare much better ;-)

I actually would call Goliaths rather low-fantasy. They basically are 
juts the archetype of the big brutish guy.
I could imagine a game where you limit the choice of races to only 
dwarves, humans, and goliaths.
The problem with them is that they were introduced in a 3e supplement, 
and since then they always have been an also-ran of a race. I mean, who 
really wants to play a goliath in the first place when there's other 
things available. They are literally just big brutish guys. Which of 
course leads them to be played as barbarians because what else are you 
gonna do with them?

I find the choice of goliaths a bit weird. I would have thought they'd 
choose something they can trademark, but I doubt you can properly 
trademark a character type based on a biblical story, wihthout even the 
name changed.

Aasimar on the other hand I could also see in some games. They are the 
other end of the deal with the tieflings. But together with all the 
other races it kind of ends in some indistinguishable blend. Especially 
if they decide to present them in such a bland way as 5e did to the 
tieflings.
I also can see a game with those: just imagine a game where your options 
are aasimar, human, and tiefling. I think you could do a lot with that 
duality.


> 
> 
>> I was never a Greyhawk fan.  I tried to use it once or twice, but it
>> didn't do anything for me.
> 
> Yeah. I don't think WOTC is going to have much success. I don't think
> Greyhawk is the type of gameworld most people like.
> 
> Well, unless WOTC radically changes everything about Greyhawk,
> stripping away everything that made the game unloveable (and unique).
> In which case... why bother?
>>
> 

They most likely are trying to do the same thing as they did with third 
edition, which in my opinion failed pretty badly. Greyhawk was the 
"standard" setting for that edition, because it's all so vanilla (after 
all DnD/ADnD was built on that setting), and then they fail to give 
people any guidance of how to actually use that setting. I think the 
only proper stuff for Greyhawk from the 3e times were the RPGA things 
for their living campaign, with all the other stuff about Greyhawk just 
isolated mentions in the middle of their rulebooks. I think most people 
went for FR or Eberron instead, because those at least had campaign guides.