Post/Author/DateTime	Post
pedr 02-29-08, 06:19 PM	Xath from ENWorld has uploaded photographs of some promo campaign cards here: http://picasaweb.google.com/gertiebarden/MonsterStats Three creation cards: Orc Adventurer, Shadar-Kai Sojourner and Gnome Wanderer. They do what you'd expect (e.g. "Benefit: This card allows you to play a shadar-kai. The shadar-kai racial traits can be found in the Monster Manual") There is no campaign branding on the cards, which carry the D&D, RPGA and WotC logos. The fluff-text refers to the FR story (Kingdom of Many Arrows, Netheril, "throughout the Realms") so it seems that at least some people will be playing non-PH classes in LFR!
Verenal 03-01-08, 06:07 AM	In my opinion, this sucks. Everyone should have the same opportunity to play whatever race they want. Granting access to orcs, gnomes and shadar-kai to only some people makes the campaign unfair for those who can't get their hands on a creation card.
The_Jester 03-01-08, 11:00 AM	****!!!! I love my gnome in LG and would kill to play a gnome in LFR. But as a Canadian preparing for a honeymoon there is NO chance I can/could get to a con. And you know the card is going to be going for $25 on eBay.
MatteBlack 03-01-08, 12:08 PM	****!!!! I love my gnome in LG and would kill to play a gnome in LFR. But as a Canadian preparing for a honeymoon there is NO chance I can/could get to a con. And you know the card is going to be going for $25 on eBay. I wouldn't be surprised if gnome pecomes an "open" race once it comes out in a later PHB. The benefit here is being able to play one immediately. If you enjoy playing gnomes that much and want to play one as a primary character, the 25 bucks or effort spent arranging a trade are probably well worth it when compared to the travel, hotels and con fees most of us pay.
tombollis 03-01-08, 07:52 PM	I wouldn't be surprised if gnome pecomes an "open" race once it comes out in a later PHB. The benefit here is being able to play one immediately. If you enjoy playing gnomes that much and want to play one as a primary character, the 25 bucks or effort spent arranging a trade are probably well worth it when compared to the travel, hotels and con fees most of us pay. I hate the entire concept of creation cards. Any race that is allowed at all should be allowed to all. Reward and promo cards should be limited to once per adventure minor benefits. D&D should not become a collectable card game (though I have no objection to a separate CCG beased on D&D). Tom Bollis
MatteBlack 03-02-08, 03:28 AM	I hate the entire concept of creation cards. Any race that is allowed at all should be allowed to all. Reward and promo cards should be limited to once per adventure minor benefits. D&D should not become a collectable card game (though I have no objection to a separate CCG beased on D&D). Tom Bollis I like them as a way to add a few of a race to the campaign and still keep that race rare. I see your point but, I think that anyone who wants to really play a reward card race can do so without unreasonable amounts of effort or expense.
Puggle Halfwine 03-02-08, 04:16 AM	Where's my kobold card?! HUH!? Time to start the "Kobolds as LFR PCs!" thread...
tombollis 03-02-08, 06:40 AM	I like them as a way to add a few of a race to the campaign and still keep that race rare. I see your point but, I think that anyone who wants to really play a reward card race can do so without unreasonable amounts of effort or expense. A rare race is rare even if every PC at a table is a member. It is rare if there are few NPC members in the world and NPCs are rarely encountered. Proportions of PCs are irrelevant to rarity. Either keep a race NPC only or open it to all as the player's free choice. All players should have the same character creation options without extra real world expense or luck. Tom Bollis
Puggle Halfwine 03-02-08, 06:54 AM	Kobolds are extremely common and breed like rats!
The_Jester 03-02-08, 10:39 AM	I like the idea of the cards for the "rare" races that shouldn't be making up entire tables or as common. But gnomes aren't an uncommon race! But making a creation card for a race that's going to be open once the second PHB comes out is a waste of a card! They'll be playable without said card in 8 months. Heck, they're technically playable now. Just make the MM version open.
MatteBlack 03-02-08, 12:27 PM	A rare race is rare even if every PC at a table is a member. It is rare if there are few NPC members in the world and NPCs are rarely encountered. Proportions of PCs are irrelevant to rarity. Either keep a race NPC only or open it to all as the player's free choice. All players should have the same character creation options without extra real world expense or luck. Tom Bollis We are going to have to agree to disagree on this one Tom. If I am constantly playing mods with "rare" races and it is not the same one, the race no longer feels rare to me and others I have discussed this with. PC proportions are often relevant to the players and their sense of the campaign world.
NiTessine 03-03-08, 01:21 AM	Ack! They're starting this crap again? I hate creation cards. If it's open to players, it should be open to all players, and that's the long and short of it. The creation cards breed a false sense of entitlement into players, and the weirder race choices break setting and verisimilitude. The kobolds in LG were bad enough, but orcs are even worse. It's a stupid damn idea, and should be dropped. The only good thing about this is that this set seems to be exclusive to D&D Experience and thus I'm unlikely to ever have to see one myself.
Koushiro 03-03-08, 04:42 AM	Well I see that I'd better start my campaigning for a kobold creation card a bit earlier this time around. More seriously though, for all the gnome people, just play a halfling and run it how you would run your gnome and your golden. True story, tried it myself. No rules against it, could even call yourself a gnome if you really wanted too.
Ishorn 03-03-08, 06:36 AM	Ack! They're starting this crap again? I hate creation cards. If it's open to players, it should be open to all players, and that's the long and short of it. The creation cards breed a false sense of entitlement into players, and the weirder race choices break setting and verisimilitude. The kobolds in LG were bad enough, but orcs are even worse. It's a stupid damn idea, and should be dropped. The only good thing about this is that this set seems to be exclusive to D&D Experience and thus I'm unlikely to ever have to see one myself. What made you think that LFR was going to be safe from creation cards. It is the way of the RPGA they are not going back to Living City for any campaign. If you want to play a character that is out of the norm you will probably have to have a creation card. If you want your character to have a special ability you will need a campaign card. This is the way of the RPGA and it is not going away.
Puggle Halfwine 03-03-08, 08:51 AM	The kobolds in LG were bad enough, but orcs are even worse. Huh? Two VERY common races... races which outnumber humans in some areas (especially kobolds), and who have their own societies, cultures, language, religion, established canon in the area dating back to 1st Ed... and suddenly this is breaking verisimilitude? To me that's like saying, "WHAT?! Hispanics can be Americans now!? BREAKING VERISIMILITUDE, only Caucasian people can be Americans!" I mean, it's not like they're Warforged or something. These are races which have a long history of existing in the realms, and with 4th Ed's "Shades of Grey" at least some are certain to become adventurers.
GreenKnight 03-03-08, 10:33 AM	Two VERY common races... races which outnumber humans in some areas (especially kobolds), and who have their own societies, cultures, language, religion, established canon in the area dating back to 1st Ed... and suddenly this is breaking verisimilitude? Established canon, yes, but as villains. It isn't a question of how common they are, but how common they are as a PC race. And in that regard, orcs and kobolds aren't very common at all. They're also cast as opponents of the civilized races, and are almost all universally evil. And as such, aren't readily accepted into civilized lands. The one and only reason orcs are getting a card is because of the Kingdom of Many-Arrows, where some orcs are trying to become more civilized (Thus gaining more acceptance for orcs within civilized lands). If kobolds were trying to build a similar kingdom, and trying to change their evil ways, then they'd get a card, too. But they're not, and are still as evil as ever, so they're still just another monster race. To me that's like saying, "WHAT?! Hispanics can be Americans now!? BREAKING VERISIMILITUDE, only Caucasian people can be Americans!" Did you just compare hispanics to orcs, which are a traditionally monstrous and evil race in D&D? Heh, being hispanic, I'm not sure if I should be offended or not. ;)
Keith53 03-03-08, 02:57 PM	I realize that I will not convince everyone, but the gnome, orc and Shadar-Kai character creation cards are a good thing for the players (although they may cause the authors some headaches). Those races are NOT in the 4E PHB. RPGA is following 4E rules. Either they are offered via the player rewards/promo cards, or not at all. If those races appear in later PHB II, III, etc., then I would expect the respective card would not be needed at that point, but I don't know those plans (and probably could not say if I did). I suspect you will be able to obtain desired cards without too much trouble. Keith Hoffman LFR USA-NC Co-Writing Director (Waterdeep)
MatteBlack 03-03-08, 03:25 PM	I realize that I will not convince everyone, but the gnome, orc and Shadar-Kai character creation cards are a good thing for the players (although they may cause the authors some headaches). Those races are NOT in the 4E PHB. RPGA is following 4E rules. Either they are offered via the player rewards/promo cards, or not at all. If those races appear in later PHB II, III, etc., then I would expect the respective card would not be needed at that point, but I don't know those plans (and probably could not say if I did). I suspect you will be able to obtain desired cards without too much trouble. Keith Hoffman LFR USA-NC Co-Writing Director (Waterdeep) I see it much like you. Isn't an opportunity for some better than an opportunity for none? I won't be recieving either of these new cars but have no problem with it. If I really wanted one, I would try to trade from the cards I have for one or buy one outright. If playing a gnome earlier was thnat big of a deal, wouldn't a couple bucks or a little time spent arranging a trade be worth it? There are lots of things in LG currently that have imbalanced access distibution like items, prestige classes and meta-orgs that require playing a specific mod or in a particular region. Some times you need to do a little planning to open them up to your character. It's not like this would be any different from those accesses.
Sieylianna 03-03-08, 05:46 PM	I realize that I will not convince everyone, but the gnome, orc and Shadar-Kai character creation cards are a good thing for the players (although they may cause the authors some headaches). I don't know. I think there are enough people who are already hesitant about playing LFR due to 4th edition that the campaign should be as inclusive as possible. Ed
tombollis 03-03-08, 06:29 PM	I realize that I will not convince everyone, but the gnome, orc and Shadar-Kai character creation cards are a good thing for the players (although they may cause the authors some headaches). Those races are NOT in the 4E PHB. RPGA is following 4E rules. Either they are offered via the player rewards/promo cards, or not at all. If those races appear in later PHB II, III, etc., then I would expect the respective card would not be needed at that point, but I don't know those plans (and probably could not say if I did). I suspect you will be able to obtain desired cards without too much trouble. Keith Hoffman LFR USA-NC Co-Writing Director (Waterdeep) Put them in the LFRCS and their would be no need for a creation card in LFR. Creation cards are a BAD idea for a Living campaign. Tom Bollis
Puggle Halfwine 03-03-08, 06:43 PM	Established canon, yes, but as villains. It isn't a question of how common they are, but how common they are as a PC race. And in that regard, orcs and kobolds aren't very common at all. They're also cast as opponents of the civilized races, and are almost all universally evil. And as such, aren't readily accepted into civilized lands. The one and only reason orcs are getting a card is because of the Kingdom of Many-Arrows, where some orcs are trying to become more civilized (Thus gaining more acceptance for orcs within civilized lands). If kobolds were trying to build a similar kingdom, and trying to change their evil ways, then they'd get a card, too. But they're not, and are still as evil as ever, so they're still just another monster race. Interesting point- while I'm happy to conceed the point about orcs (although half-orcs have been in the PHB for a while now and most people I've played with them simply consider them full orcs, rarely discussing their 'half' nature) I bought Races of the Dragon and devoured it. If any race that is currently "evil" deserves to be Lawful Neutral, it's Kobolds. :) They're only really reacting to all the stuff that's been heaped on them, IMHO. Of course, you have your own opinion, which is fine. :D Did you just compare hispanics to orcs, which are a traditionally monstrous and evil race in D&D? Heh, being hispanic, I'm not sure if I should be offended or not. ;) That certainly wasn't my intention. ;) I simply grabbed a scenario out of the air. I'm Australian by the way, heh.
NiTessine 03-04-08, 12:07 AM	Yeah, a predominantly evil race with a strong reputation for being evil really doesn't work in an environment like LFR where the adventure modules assume a standard group and don't compensate for some oddball in the group and the group makeup itself is changeable and the orc would have to convince a group after group that he's really a nice guy once you get to know him. Not only would the orc never get into the bar to meet the mysterious stranger because the town guard would kill him - the party elf and dwarf would be drawing lots on who gets to stab him first. Kobolds I have nothing but pure and undiluted hatred for, since every attempt to give a kobold a personality that I've seen has resulted in a bad joke. Drow in FR are slightly more palatable because of Eilistraee, but I'd prefer if I didn't need to see any of those, either. They attract the 14-year-old player demographic and end up being played as Drizzt clones or lesbian stripper ninjas. Drow PCs make me lose my faith in humanity.
Reneshat 03-04-08, 03:15 AM	Drow in FR are slightly more palatable because of Eilistraee, but I'd prefer if I didn't need to see any of those, either. They attract the 14-year-old player demographic and end up being played as Drizzt clones or lesbian stripper ninjas. Drow PCs make me lose my faith in humanity. Boy oh boy, how many times have I seen this happen. On the other hand, isn't a 14 year old demographic exactly the demographic we want to be getting into the game, so that he can get his (or her) friends to play and the future of the game is assured? I'm not saying I like the players. Honestly they make me want to shove their heads through a wall. I'm just considering the virtues (not readily apparent) of their involvement, and whether or not allowing for options that would attract them, as annoying as they are, would be long-term beneficial to the campaign and the game at large.
NiTessine 03-04-08, 03:20 AM	Boy oh boy, how many times have I seen this happen. On the other hand, isn't a 14 year old demographic exactly the demographic we want to be getting into the game, so that he can get his (or her) friends to play and the future of the game is assured? I'm not saying I like the players. Honestly they make me want to shove their heads through a wall. I'm just considering the virtues (not readily apparent) of their involvement, and whether or not allowing for options that would attract them, as annoying as they are, would be long-term beneficial to the campaign and the game at large. Yes, well, the 14-year-olds are free to play whatever the hell they want, really. I don't care, because I'm not playing with them. If possible, I will not even be playing in the same room. The squealing is so high-pitched it gives me a headache. Then, it's starting to look more and more like 4E is the game for the 14-year-olds and us twenty-somethings are relics that should move over.
Puggle Halfwine 03-04-08, 09:06 AM	Yeah, a predominantly evil race with a strong reputation for being evil really doesn't work in an environment like LFR where the adventure modules assume a standard group and don't compensate for some oddball in the group and the group makeup itself is changeable and the orc would have to convince a group after group that he's really a nice guy once you get to know him. Not only would the orc never get into the bar to meet the mysterious stranger because the town guard would kill him - the party elf and dwarf would be drawing lots on who gets to stab him first. I am actually insulted by this. Allow me to retort! Half-orcs, of course, NEVER have this problem. The dwarf and the elf, of course, just draw lots on who's going to walk up and stab the combat-reflexes, spiked chain wielding half-orc barbarian/fighter because that's *totally* within their power. He'll just keel right over and die. Next game you're at, try it and see what happens. Just like the two of them are going to try and stab the winged, scaled, gold-dragonwrought kobold, who'll go "Ouch, that dinted my false life slightly", defensively cast greater invisibility, fly up into the air and then open up on them both with cheaply-empowered-and-maximized fire spells that burn like a thousand suns. I'd like to see that actually. Strangely enough, teiflings don't have this problem either. A race with GREAT BIG DEMONIC HORNS that come out of their foreheads, that are frequently unholy demon-associating warlocks and whose very taint warps and twists their forms beyond all recognition. A race that has pure, elemental evil so heavily tainted into their bloodline that its physical presence is *visible and obvious*. But teiflings are not going to be excluded from any LFR module on the grounds that the town guard murdered them before they got inside. Or that their companions slaughtered them and divided up their gear. And no elves are going to be excluded from playing the module set in the xenophobic dwarven enclave because the king's last elven plaything died of blood loss an hour or so ago and he needs another one. So why kobolds? Why should kobolds have to suffer? All three races so far have a strong history and reputation for doing evil. But, surprisingly, both do not have to explain themselves to every group they meet. Nor do we have to explain why the elves are saving the human kingdom that hates and oppresses their kind *yet again*, nor do we have to explain why the nobles-in-some-kinda-trouble-but-not-even-that-serious hire low class, mud dwelling adventuring scum. Or why the dwarven kingdom has all these elves with badges of honour. Or why... etc etc etc. I could go on all day. Bottom line: Does your character try to murder every half-orc he meets in the name of "realism"? Or even perform a citizens arrest and have them magically interrogated? Or even question them at all? Why single kobolds out? So why don't kobolds just "get stabbed"? Becaues adventurers are a *cut above the rest*. They are better than people; superhuman even. They have spells, powers, martial abilities that outshine anything most people have ever seen or dreamed about. The day that an angry mob forms because a half-orc strode into own is the day a lot of angry townsfolk die. These are the kinds of people that, when sufficiently strong, can fall from a height of ten thousand feet and survive every time, just shrugging it off saying, "Well that hurt. Not below half yet. Cure crit, please." They are like gods amongst insects and this is just so obviously visible to anyone who sees them. It manifests itself like some kind of halo- a glowing beacon of power and hope in a land swathed in eternal nightfall. Even if they're two feet tall and have wings. It's that burning stare in his eyes- the fact that by level fifteen or so he's killed not hundreds, but THOUSANDS of living creatures. Looked straight into their eyes and burned them to cinders with arcane power so immense it threatens to bubble out of his body like mentos dropped into diet coke. The creature is a killing MACHINE. His mind is full of nothing but magical ways to dispense death and destruction on a massive scale ... got a bit too poetic there. But it had to be said. Kobolds I have nothing but pure and undiluted hatred for, since every attempt to give a kobold a personality that I've seen has resulted in a bad joke. And every half-orc I've seen only took that race for the strength. And dwarves are rare because they're ugly. And bards suck. And there were more half-orc PCs registered on the Perrenland database than there were half-orcs in the whole bloody nation according to our population statistics. And every single grey elf is a wizard. What about the grey elf wizard who does nothing but try to eat everything he sees? What about the characters "Boris Yeltson, Margaret Thatcher, Jennifer Love-Hewart"? What about the horndog cleric of Ehlonna who has a whip, wears full bondage gear and will sleep with ANYONE and ANYTHING? What about other silly characters that aren't kobolds? Do you have "nothing but pure and undiluted hatred" for those characters? So why kobolds? Can I ask- what DO you like? Serious question now. What race meets your approval? What class? Is there anything you actually like? Or is it just other people having fun that you don't like? Drow in FR are slightly more palatable because of Eilistraee, but I'd prefer if I didn't need to see any of those, either. They attract the 14-year-old player demographic and end up being played as Drizzt clones or lesbian stripper ninjas. *sigh* Here we go again. Your centaur was lifted straight from Harry Potter. Your dwarf is just a carbon-copy of Bruenor. Your elf character is a DIRECT ripoff of Legolas. Your half-elf character is just *way too close* to Tanis Half-Elven. Your half-orc is just a green Tanis half-elven. Your halfling? Total Bilbo rip. Your human character is a DIRECT Conan the Barbarian ripoff. Your kobold is a Deekin clone. (but I doubt you have one) Your gnome is plain-and-simple ripped straight for World of Warcraft. God, you unoriginal 14-year-old lesbian-stripper-ninja copyright-infringing hack. Go make an original character. Edit: As a side note, I'm a twenty-something but I was playing D&D back when I was fourteen. Second Ed, of course. Some of the younger players we have these days out-roleplay ANYONE of ANY age. Edit2: Woah! I think I had my flamethrower turned up too high. Still...
ORC_Tao 03-04-08, 09:32 AM	Gentlemen... Behave yourselves.
darrell_uk 03-04-08, 10:53 AM	Now that is good moderation.
NiTessine 03-04-08, 11:10 AM	I am actually insulted by this. Allow me to retort! Half-orcs, of course, NEVER have this problem. The dwarf and the elf, of course, just draw lots on who's going to walk up and stab the combat-reflexes, spiked chain wielding half-orc barbarian/fighter because that's *totally* within their power. He'll just keel right over and die. Next game you're at, try it and see what happens. Half-orcs are usually more or less socialised. They're not liked, they're often ostracised, but rarely outright attacked. Just like the two of them are going to try and stab the winged, scaled, gold-dragonwrought kobold, who'll go "Ouch, that dinted my false life slightly", defensively cast greater invisibility, fly up into the air and then open up on them both with cheaply-empowered-and-maximized fire spells that burn like a thousand suns. I'd like to see that actually.This, like the previous example, strangely assumes the character ever got past first level. Strangely enough, teiflings don't have this problem either.Which irks me greatly. Believe me, they should. Probably dragonborn, too. All three races so far have a strong history and reputation for doing evil. But, surprisingly, both do not have to explain themselves to every group they meet. Nor do we have to explain why the elves are saving the human kingdom that hates and oppresses their kind *yet again*, nor do we have to explain why the nobles-in-some-kinda-trouble-but-not-even-that-serious hire low class, mud dwelling adventuring scum. Or why the dwarven kingdom has all these elves with badges of honour. Or why... etc etc etc. I could go on all day. Bottom line: Does your character try to murder every half-orc he meets in the name of "realism"? Or even perform a citizens arrest and have them magically interrogated? Or even question them at all? Why single kobolds out?Kobolds, as a race, worship an evil deity. Half-orcs, as a race, are merely ugly, stupid and hard-hitting. My characters, generally, don't like half-orcs, but appreciate the meatshield. Kobolds I've had to suffer because it would break the the table if I walked away and they're otherwise among the better class of LG adventures. Becaues adventurers are a *cut above the rest*. They are better than people; superhuman even. They have spells, powers, martial abilities that outshine anything most people have ever seen or dreamed about. The day that an angry mob forms because a half-orc strode into own is the day a lot of angry townsfolk die. As does the half-orc. Player characters are not invulnerable, nor are they special in the eyes of the NPCs, especially the law. The town guards don't let orcs enter, they shoot them on sight. Half-orcs aren't liked, but they're let in. Hell, in Naerie we oppress even human subraces. These are the kinds of people that, when sufficiently strong, can fall from a height of ten thousand feet and survive every time, just shrugging it off saying, "Well that hurt. Not below half yet. Cure crit, please." That's actually a side effect of the falling rules sucking. They are like gods amongst insects and this is just so obviously visible to anyone who sees them. It manifests itself like some kind of halo- a glowing beacon of power and hope in a land swathed in eternal nightfall. Even if they're two feet tall and have wings. It's that burning stare in his eyes- the fact that by level fifteen or so he's killed not hundreds, but THOUSANDS of living creatures. Looked straight into their eyes and burned them to cinders with arcane power so immense it threatens to bubble out of his body like mentos dropped into diet coke. The creature is a killing MACHINE. His mind is full of nothing but magical ways to dispense death and destruction on a massive scale Are you sure you're still playing D&D? This sounds more like Exalted, and reflects neither my experiences with Living Greyhawk nor any of the editions of D&D that I'm familiar with. Characters don't have class and level floating atop their heads, and especially not their alignment. What about the grey elf wizard who does nothing but try to eat everything he sees? What about the characters "Boris Yeltson, Margaret Thatcher, Jennifer Love-Hewart"? What about the horndog cleric of Ehlonna who has a whip, wears full bondage gear and will sleep with ANYONE and ANYTHING? What about other silly characters that aren't kobolds? Do you have "nothing but pure and undiluted hatred" for those characters? So why kobolds? Yes, actually. I have a great capacity for hatred. Overt silliness disrupts the game, decreases the enjoyment of more serious players, and generally fails to be actually funny. Can I ask- what DO you like? Serious question now. What race meets your approval? What class? Is there anything you actually like? Or is it just other people having fun that you don't like? I like to see verisimilitude, a semblance of realism in the setting. The setting and NPCs are very important in a Living campaign, where you don't have as much continuity inside the party as you have in a home game. In a world plagued by hordes of marauding humanoids, where drow are used as a bedtime tale to scare the children and Bob from down the street was killed by some monster in the woods last winter, it's profoundly unrealistic to expect that the town guards who likely have defended their home against orcs would then allow the very same critters to enter it just because they claim to be adventurers, a class of people with a penchant for causing mayhem. You can see it in the Drizzt novels and the Starlight and Shadows trilogy. Evil humanoids aren't liked, aren't allowed to enter towns (even Silverymoon turned Drizzt away) and get angry mobs and bounty hunters chasing them. This is fine for a home campaign, but you can't do it in a goal-oriented game like a Living campaign, where they'd merely pose a liability for the group, should have difficulties participating in urban adventuring at all, and would have to convince each new adventurer he meets that he's really okay. Naturally, we'll get a decree for political correctness from the top and everyone will like those orcs and drow and kobolds. Goodbye, verisimilitude, welcome lesbian stripper ninjas.
gomeztoo 03-04-08, 11:26 AM	Now that is good moderation. Better if he would have included the gentlewomen ;) *runs* Anyway, I think kobolds are currenbtly not an interstign choice, simply because they won't have political clout. Orcs have Many Arrows, Shadar-Kai have Netheril, and Drow have... well, lot's of dark hiding places. Most of these races actually have baggage that makes them part of the realms in a way other than 'creature that wanders dungeons'. Ok, not sure about the thieflings, myself, but I never really understood why they made it into the PHB anyhow...
Dempster 03-04-08, 03:35 PM	[QUOTE=Puggle Halfwine;15252995]I am actually insulted by this. Allow me to retort! What about the grey elf wizard who does nothing but try to eat everything he sees? Hey!!! thats my elf!! Anvil "Baconbane" Lorariel has far more depth to his personality than just trying to eat everthing he sees. As he has matured he has become less enamoured of food. He has gotten in touch with his Elvan heritage and his ambition to be named archmage of Highfolk comes into play alot these days. He may have been annoying but people remember him.
Reneshat 03-05-08, 12:09 AM	Personally, I think that I am rather accepting of a wide range of characters. I can even appreciate the Half-Orc that starts playing with himself during the important diplomatic talks. I can explain away orcs, especially with the rise of Many-Arrows. Shoot, I even think the rise of the orcs in FR is a good thing. All this being considered, I hate, HATE the idea that I will be more or less "forced" to play with tiefling characters if I do organized play. I hate the idea of a race that is the result of trafficking with devils, and is suggested to be an "evil-curious" warlock, are considered heroes in this day and age.
CdrcJsn 03-05-08, 03:07 AM	1) The Orcish kingdom of Obould is a tolerated ally in what was the Silver Marches 100 years after the spellplague according to the prelude to the most recent Salvatore book. Pre-spellplague, the orcish mercenaries living in the Unapproachable East in Thesk were accepted by the city states of that area. 2) Shadar-Kai are strange looking fey, but look enough like elves to probably pass muster for most folk. 3) Gnomes...well, they have overly large hands, smell of cabbages and should be killed on sight. None of the above races are in the PHB, but the developers have said that half a dozen or so races in the Monster Manual were given rules to allow them to be played as PCs.
theliel 03-05-08, 02:23 PM	My only issue with the promo cards comes from the inevitable power creep that comes from them. Authors start to write modules assuming people have the cards, or the tasty candy from the cards (these "quest" modules for example) and anyone who only play sporadically and/or didn't get into the current pwnz card fest is utterly obliterated by the upgraded combats. y'saw the same thing in LG all the time with certian regions.
Dempster 03-05-08, 02:46 PM	3) Gnomes...well, they have overly large hands, smell of cabbages and should be killed on sight. Hey!! When will the hatred stop? I love playing gnomes. I have always had at least one gnome character in LG and Xendrick. I was really sad when I found out I might not be able to play one in LFR. I will do whatever I have to to get a creation card so that I can play a gnome. With that said let me say I have mixed feelings about convention exclusive awards. I realize that they help attract people to the big cons but they are a bit unfair to people who can't make it to these big cons all the time. Even if you do get to the con there is a chance you will not be able to get into the games that grant these rewards. I remember when I couldn't get into the core special that gave you the shadow template. That really made me mad. I went to Gencon and still couldn't get the special benefit because they were sold out of tables. Last year at Gencon I saw at least 1-2 tables of people turned away from the Undermountain mustering area each time I mustered. Sure they could play them as home games but they don't get the special benefit and that sucks when you shell out 500-700$ to go to a con and can't even get the benefits exclusive to the con. Overall I don't like Con exclusive benefits but I understand why RPGA does them.
TWG_Prometheus 03-05-08, 03:42 PM	My only issue with the promo cards comes from the inevitable power creep that comes from them. Authors start to write modules assuming people have the cards, or the tasty candy from the cards (these "quest" modules for example) and anyone who only play sporadically and/or didn't get into the current pwnz card fest is utterly obliterated by the upgraded combats. y'saw the same thing in LG all the time with certian regions. For this to be true, the races unlocked by the promotional cards would actually have to be better than the standard PHB races. We don't know that yet. In fact, since the Monster Manual playable races won't have the same race-specific feat choices available as the PHB races, they may well be structurally less powerful due to a lack of options...but we don't know that either.
theliel 03-05-08, 04:22 PM	For this to be true, the races unlocked by the promotional cards would actually have to be better than the standard PHB races. We don't know that yet. In fact, since the Monster Manual playable races won't have the same race-specific feat choices available as the PHB races, they may well be structurally less powerful due to a lack of options...but we don't know that either. The creation cards i'm not so much as worried about, except for poor canada, who's region is full of things you need a card to be a native of, but that cards give you various powers that normal characters wouldn't have. feign surprise, let's try that again, not this time being the biggest offenders, but if the cards offer any significant advantage then authoros will have to either a) make combats harder (same with high power regions in LG) so that they are a challenge to characters with cards or b) run the risk that those who play the most will simply obliterate the encounters. now, as an author i'll take b any day, but i've been in enough modules where a was rigioursly chosen at all costs that it still is a concern for me.
Ishorn 03-06-08, 06:29 AM	I posted this on the marketplace page and have had no takers. I am hoping that someone who went to D&D XP has extra Orc Adventurer card and wants to do a deal.
Keith53 03-06-08, 07:08 AM	The creation cards i'm not so much as worried about, except for poor canada, who's region is full of things you need a card to be a native of,... I don't believe any LFR admin has posted such; is this your assumption? Or were you thinking of the orcs and gnomes? Keith Hoffman LFR USA-NC Co-Writing Director (Waterdeep)
MatteBlack 03-06-08, 09:56 AM	I posted this on the marketplace page and have had no takers. I am hoping that someone who went to D&D XP has extra Orc Adventurer card and wants to do a deal. My guess is that this might be a bit early for folks to be looking to trade/sell them since we don't know what the campaign rules will look like yet. Also, a search under "RPGA" on ebay pretty reliably turns up most of the cards out there for sale.
coastiemike 03-06-08, 11:00 AM	Yeah, there is an auction for all 3 promo cards at the moment on ebay. The current bidding with 6 days remaining is $75+ :eek: As I was at the DDXP, I know how much time it took playing the delves to get these. But sheesh, in excess of $25 per card is almost crazy for me.
Dempster 03-06-08, 11:30 AM	As I was at the DDXP, I know how much time it took playing the delves to get these. But sheesh, in excess of $25 per card is almost crazy for me. Compare that to the $500 and the time to go to DDXP and $25 is a bargin.
bitznarf 03-06-08, 01:23 PM	With that said let me say I have mixed feelings about convention exclusive awards. I realize that they help attract people to the big cons but they are a bit unfair to people who can't make it to these big cons all the time. So let me see if I have this right... You want all the benefits to attending a con to come in the form of something that doesn't have any impact on actual game play? Am I understanding you correctly?
JohnnyBlaise 03-06-08, 01:39 PM	First of all, you should know I have been a con coordinator and long time con goer, so take this with a grain of salt. That being said, I can give you a little more information as someone who attended DDXP and is not subject to the NDA. I am told that all of the playable races balance. There is no more "effective level adjustment". That means unlocking new races for players does not result in giving them more powerful characters to play. It does mean that they get more unusual character choices if they do not intend to release these cards again at another time. However, given how hard it was to get these promo cards (each card required completing the Dungeon Delve about 5 times to get, which means for one person to get all three cards they had to Delve 15 times, which likely meant they did nothing else the entire convention), I suspect that there is still a big stack of them in the production department to be given out at a later date. So basically, I am saying I expect they wont be as rare as you might imagine. I would also argue that even if they were rare, that is totally acceptable. One of the fun things about a living campaign is that you get to do something that will impact the game world, and you get to tell your characters unique story. If there is one heroic Half Giant that rescues a city from his Giant Kin neighbors, and becomes a hero of the nation, well thats a pretty awesome thing for a player to get to experience. It is much better than being just one of a hundred people that played the same adventure, whose average results based upon tallied adventure summary results become the history of the realm. That is what convention gaming in a living campaign is all about. Interactives, special events and special missions give you the chance not just to be known at your gaming table but in your entire real life region. How cool is that?! So if I go to a convention and I single handedly resuce the fairy princess, and I get the unique chance to take her as a cohort, I am super psyched. It is the kind of thing that gets me invested in the campaign and is likely to make me come back to that convention again. If everyone and thier mother had a fairy princess cohort, I wouldnt really care, and I wouldnt bother shelling out the $500 for the weekend. In a nutshell, I am saying give people the chance for something special, just dont unbalance the game while doing it.
Dempster 03-06-08, 03:46 PM	So let me see if I have this right... You want all the benefits to attending a con to come in the form of something that doesn't have any impact on actual game play? Am I understanding you correctly? I don't think so. I do not like the idea of con exclusive benefits. There seems to be something unfair about no ever being able to get that benefit after the con. At the same time I know why con organizers like them and I do not expect them to go away. I like campaign cards as rewards because they reward you for playing and are relatively easy to get. I like that you get more reward points for cons. This gives a benefit to con goes but the benefit is not something that people who missed the con have no opportunity to get.
theliel 03-06-08, 04:17 PM	I don't believe any LFR admin has posted such; is this your assumption? Or were you thinking of the orcs and gnomes? Keith Hoffman LFR USA-NC Co-Writing Director (Waterdeep) orcs and gnomes mostly. i'm assuming anything in the phb and the setting book will hopefully be [core] or whatever we're calling it then. If it's not then i'll really feel bad for the great white north. Nothing's worse than explaining to a new player "welcome to your region, a bit of a far off place bamphed into existince by the spellpurge, populated with msyerious and exotic peoples...but you need to get a card to play one. sorry. no, they arn't the evil invader race that everyone's fighting either!) I'm also pretty sure that orcs and gnomes will be not so nifty to start, what with them just being half-done in the MM so you can play one right away. either that or they'll be so blazingly overpowered that the nerf cannon will be required. though feel free to make drow requrie a card:) (Ducks)
TWG_Prometheus 03-06-08, 04:48 PM	I don't think so. I do not like the idea of con exclusive benefits. There seems to be something unfair about no ever being able to get that benefit after the con. At the same time I know why con organizers like them and I do not expect them to go away. I like campaign cards as rewards because they reward you for playing and are relatively easy to get. I like that you get more reward points for cons. This gives a benefit to con goes but the benefit is not something that people who missed the con have no opportunity to get. I can agree with you but only to an extent. I was considering giving Xen'drik Expeditions a go at one point, until I heard that a con exclusive card would allow characters to be made with a 28 point build instead of a 25 point build. I haven't given Xen'drik a second thought since really...there's nothing a campaign could do to make up for that kind of disparity. This situation is different. Assuming that the card races aren't overpowered, there is only a disparity in character concepts available to the players that went to the con and those that did not. There isn't a disparity in power. In a broader sense, your argument is that nothing should be given out at cons that couldn't be gotten elsewhere. Maybe cons can give XYZ more easily, but everyone should still be able to get XYZ. Con exclusive material is a big promotional tool for conventions, however, and if you assume that we still want to have conventions, you're going to continue to see con exclusive events and rewards.
Sieylianna 03-06-08, 05:22 PM	I can agree with you but only to an extent. I was considering giving Xen'drik Expeditions a go at one point, until I heard that a con exclusive card would allow characters to be made with a 28 point build instead of a 25 point build. I haven't given Xen'drik a second thought since really...there's nothing a campaign could do to make up for that kind of disparity. You would be incorrect. Using that card for character creation not only meant you couldn't choose anything unusual for a PC, but it also counted as three of the cards in your stack. Which cost you 3 action points and the difference between 25 and 28 points isn't that much. Now at 10th level, the action points wouldn't be as big of deal, but but when you're playing the lower level meatgrinders, action points are a necessity. I had access and used that card, but it was a mistake. Ed
tombollis 03-06-08, 05:49 PM	<snip> So if I go to a convention and I single handedly resuce the fairy princess, and I get the unique chance to take her as a cohort, I am super psyched. It is the kind of thing that gets me invested in the campaign and is likely to make me come back to that convention again. If everyone and thier mother had a fairy princess cohort, I wouldnt really care, and I wouldnt bother shelling out the $500 for the weekend. Can benefits for doing something in an adventure / interactive at the con, or getting fame for your character beyond the table us different from a promo card, which is normally somehing you get merely by attending thecon orplaying a specific event. Promo cards should be fluff - interesting, but with no impact. Earned rewards should not be so labelled. RPGA reward cards are for playing a number of events (with some events counting more than others) or given out for other reasons, not linked to a PC's story. They should be generic, with minor impact, and none should be rare. Something character shaping, like choice of race, should be open to all or none, without need of a promo or reward card. Something that influences the advancement of a specific character, such as an item of sifnificant use, entry into an organization, etc., should be gained via the activity of that PC, not given out as a promo card or random reward card. Creation cards are inherently unfair, even if, as is probably the case, the races granted aren't unbalanced. Tom Bollis (who isn't interested in any of the races from the D&D XP promo cards)
bitznarf 03-06-08, 06:08 PM	Creation cards are inherently unfair, even if, as is probably the case, the races granted aren't unbalanced. Is it 'unfair' if a $5 bill randomly falls to my feet and yet one doesn't land at someone else's feet? Is it 'unfair' if I go looking for lost $5 bills and find some compared to someone else doesn't go looking for them doesn't find any? (( Never mind the fact that $5 bills have an inherent value in our culture, whereas RPGA promo cards have no inherent value and are only differing amounts to different people. ))
tombollis 03-06-08, 06:21 PM	Is it 'unfair' if a $5 bill randomly falls to my feet and yet one doesn't land at someone else's feet? Is it 'unfair' if I go looking for lost $5 bills and find some compared to someone else doesn't go looking for them doesn't find any? Irrelevant. I can do the same with $5 from any source, not just $5 given out as a special promotion or as a reward for past purchases. Creation cards limit who can create a member of a race to those with the limited distribution card. Even if some can buy the card on ebaym probably for a lot of money, that isn't a savings over going to a con to get the card - unless getting the card was the only benefit you got from the con (no fun plating games, visiting sites, meeting people, getting away from home, etc., which are common benefits that make the expense worth while). Most businesses that give out promotional prizes allow people to write in for free chances ("no purchase necessary"), which does not seem to be the case with RPGA promo and rewards cards. Tom Bollis
MatteBlack 03-06-08, 10:23 PM	Something character shaping, like choice of race, should be open to all or none, without need of a promo or reward card. Is open to none actually a better situation? No one gets to play the race, cons are less promoted but, at least some guy doesn't get to play a race that I can't. Region, schedule, table composition, dice rolls and the order I played the mods in may cause me to have different accesses to items, metaorgs and etc. than another player but, rewarding the extra expense/effort of making it to and playing in a special event would be such an offense to balance? I guess my point of view here is that the benefit of the cards grant to table variation without over populating a rare race and to the promotion of conventions far outweighs any possible frustration from the sense that another player may have been more fortunate than myself that can be overcome in a number of ways.
tombollis 03-07-08, 07:25 AM	Is open to none actually a better situation? Yes, in my opinion, open to none is a better situation than open only to those with promo or reward creation cards. No one gets to play the race, cons are less promoted but, at least some guy doesn't get to play a race that I can't. Region, schedule, table composition, dice rolls and the order I played the mods in may cause me to have different accesses to items, metaorgs and etc. than another player but, rewarding the extra expense/effort of making it to and playing in a special event would be such an offense to balance? If the race is playable, open it to all. The design phylosophy and reported DMG advice is to let the players try whatever they think is fun and use he existing rules to judge it. If there exist official rules for playing a race (which there are if a creation card is issued), let all have the choice to play it. If reules aren't released yet, or it's fealt that a race isn't balanced for play, don't allow it for anyone in the campaign. PC actions in adventures can limit access to items, organizations, companions, etc., but should not affect the race or class of a new PC. Cons can be promoted in other ways. Campaign participation can be rewarded with more generic cards, or ones that are just interesting fluff with no real game impact. Penaliziing new players (joined after a reward card run is over), or those who can't get to a con (financial difficulties, bad health, conflicting commitments, remote point of origin, etc.) is unfair (which I consider different from unbalancing). It's unfair if I get to play a human, an elf, or a gnome and you don't; it's unbalancing if I get to play a character with additional abilities at a given level that you don't. I guess my point of view here is that the benefit of the cards grant to table variation without over populating a rare race and to the promotion of conventions far outweighs any possible frustration from the sense that another player may have been more fortunate than myself that can be overcome in a number of ways. I have no repect for the over populating a rare race argument. PC races have no impact on racial rarity in a campaign, which is a concept for NPC and monster encounters only. U have no respect for the I hate to play at a table with PCs of race XYZ because the players will be annoying arguments, as they are an attempt to limit the fun of others based on personal predudice; the annoying players are likely to be annoying regardless of PC race; inherently annoying races should not be allowed at all if they stop enough others from having fun. If a promo card with significant game impact is given out as a bonus to those who attend a con, or as a reward for past RPGA participation, then it should also be available for free or at a nominal charge (possibly marked as a reprint) by sending in to RPGA headquarters or WotC, or by download from the internet. Tom Bollis
Kagehito 03-07-08, 07:47 AM	I have no problem with the "Creation Cards" at all. It's like an added bonus saying "Hey, thanks for comming to *enter convention name here*! Heres this card thats lets you play/do *insert effect here* in the *insert living campaign here*! If you've never tried it, now maybe you will! And BAM! Now I have more players! Woot!! How is this bad again? Or alternetly, "This card sucks, Ebay!" And BAM! Now my players that do play have access to it! (albeit at a price.) They could do a similar thing like they did in Xen'drick Expeditions, where you have "Slots" at every level you can use to "Buy" access to restricted feats, classes, races, etc. Would that be more towords the liking of the card naysayers? That way, if you don't want it, you don't have to spend your "slots" to get it, but in turn you have the option of getting something else you want. That way EVERYONE gets something special, and NO ONE gets left out. Savvy? O_o
MatteBlack 03-07-08, 12:38 PM	Yes, in my opinion, open to none is a better situation than open only to those with promo or reward creation cards. If the race is playable, open it to all. The design phylosophy and reported DMG advice is to let the players try whatever they think is fun and use he existing rules to judge it. If there exist official rules for playing a race (which there are if a creation card is issued), let all have the choice to play it. If reules aren't released yet, or it's fealt that a race isn't balanced for play, don't allow it for anyone in the campaign. PC actions in adventures can limit access to items, organizations, companions, etc., but should not affect the race or class of a new PC. Cons can be promoted in other ways. Campaign participation can be rewarded with more generic cards, or ones that are just interesting fluff with no real game impact. Penaliziing new players (joined after a reward card run is over), or those who can't get to a con (financial difficulties, bad health, conflicting commitments, remote point of origin, etc.) is unfair (which I consider different from unbalancing). It's unfair if I get to play a human, an elf, or a gnome and you don't; it's unbalancing if I get to play a character with additional abilities at a given level that you don't. I have no repect for the over populating a rare race argument. PC races have no impact on racial rarity in a campaign, which is a concept for NPC and monster encounters only. U have no respect for the I hate to play at a table with PCs of race XYZ because the players will be annoying arguments, as they are an attempt to limit the fun of others based on personal predudice; the annoying players are likely to be annoying regardless of PC race; inherently annoying races should not be allowed at all if they stop enough others from having fun. If a promo card with significant game impact is given out as a bonus to those who attend a con, or as a reward for past RPGA participation, then it should also be available for free or at a nominal charge (possibly marked as a reprint) by sending in to RPGA headquarters or WotC, or by download from the internet. Tom Bollis For most of these racial cards, the only real difference is essentially fluff. They are supposedly balanced against the other races and actually suffer penalty of having used a card slot to be those races. Mostly we are talking about the exclusivity cool factor of playing these races who operate on the fringes or shadows of the adventuring community. Their rarity is most of what they have to offer and seeing 3 at a table would often diminish their appeal. Access to certain feats, powers and prestige classes will likely have a bigger impact on the character's effectiveness and these often hinge on out-of-game randomness(table composition, order of modules, APL) as in-character decisions. Ruling out racial cards because they are based on out-of-game activity is a sort of pointless dsitinction to make while other similar factors can have a large impact. Certainly one man's nominal fee can be another's exorbitant expense. Last time I checked a set of the 3 LFR cards were $76.00. I expect this will be at the high end of the scale of what the going rate will be when compared with what I have seen other cards go for once they have been out a bit. Let's call it $25.00 per card. At one end of the scale,it's a piece a paper and at the other, it is opportunity to enhance every play experience with that character they may have taken an investment of 12+ hours and hundreds of dollars. To me 25 bucks is reasonable if, that is a race I want to play and I heartily believe I could could have one for much less by the time I begin playing LFR whether through more timely purchase, trading my other reward cards or maybe even appealing to borrow it from a fortunate friend who might not be using it. I have the card that grants access to Snow Elves in LG that was one of 5 cards I bought for $12.00 shipped. It may not be an automatic online sale for a dollar plus shipping but, I feel we have our nominal fee method as it stands and we have also helped support DDXP and kept those races as cool exclusive additions to the campaign. Probably, Tom and I still disagree. I doubt he is going to be swayed on this one but, I think his argument hinges more on semantics than actual campaign factors and realities. If you want to play a gnome once, it is probably a bad set-up but, if you are planning to play the character on a serious basis, it can be done through reasonable means and expense.
Dempster 03-07-08, 08:29 PM	In a broader sense, your argument is that nothing should be given out at cons that couldn't be gotten elsewhere. Maybe cons can give XYZ more easily, but everyone should still be able to get XYZ. Con exclusive material is a big promotional tool for conventions, however, and if you assume that we still want to have conventions, you're going to continue to see con exclusive events and rewards. I agree that we will always have con exclusives. It is a proven way for organizers to ensure attendance.
CdrcJsn 03-07-08, 09:35 PM	I agree that we will always have con exclusives. It is a proven way for organizers to ensure attendance. This is true. Is it fair? No. Is it fair that some people have time and money to travel to these events and others don't? No. Oh well. Nobody said that everything in life has to be fair. Frankly I don't understand those people that get upset because someone is getting a reward for something that they did that not everyone can do (get voted top roleplayer, win a raffle, attend a far away convention, whatever). I especially don't understand people who state that they would be happier if nobody got anything instead.
CdrcJsn 03-07-08, 10:16 PM	Speaking of DDXP promo cards... I didn't go this year so obviously missed out. Anyone willing to trade any of theirs for another reward card? I have most of the LG legal ones and would welcome any of them. An Orbital Spellstone for your Gnome good sir? How about a Lucky Slip for your Shadar-kai? Cedric Atizado Pale
waytoomuchcoffee 03-07-08, 10:20 PM	Certainly one man's nominal fee can be another's exorbitant expense. Last time I checked a set of the 3 LFR cards were $76.00. I expect this will be at the high end of the scale of what the going rate will be when compared with what I have seen other cards go for once they have been out a bit. Let's call it $25.00 per card. Maybe, but remember that the character creations cards in LG were mass-mailed out to 100s or even 1000s of RGPA players. I would expect there are a lot less of the DDXP cards out there, and people really had to work for them. Not that Wizards won't keep handing them out until they are gone - at Gencon one year I got a ton of special cards and even a free Fist of Emirikol just by walking past their booth. I kind of wonder how they will treat these cards though, as handing them out for nothing might make the people that spent their tokens for them upset. Personally, I like having rare PC races out there even if it doesn't mean I have one myself. If everything is available to everyone, then nothing is rare or special. The only way you can get rare stuff yourself is to allow others to get stuff you can never have. In any event, there are lots more race creation cards sure to show up, as there are lots more races ready to play as PCs in the upcoming MM. I just hope they make the Kobold card VERY rare, or we will be infested with them. Edit - I see that a set of three cards already sold for $99 this week on Ebay.
tombollis 03-07-08, 11:40 PM	I especially don't understand people who state that they would be happier if nobody got anything instead. I said "open to none is a better situation than open only to those with promo or reward creation cards", not that that I would be happier, and I specifically referred to creation cards, not to anything. I would be happy with anyone being able to gain racial access by purchase of a campaign supplement, possibly via download. Restrict promo cards and reward cards to things like I have that, or an influence point with some NPC, or a plot of land somewhere, etc. with at most limited use in adventures. Something as fundamental to character concept as race should not be restricted if allowed at all. The LFR campaign should be promoting players having fun in their own ways, not creating elite players due to attendance at specific cons, frequency of play, or they ability to trade for or purchase rare cards. If cards are to be used for racial access an be give for free to some, then others should be able to purchase them from WotC or the RPGA for a fixed low cost. Tom Bollis Tom Bollis
CdrcJsn 03-08-08, 01:12 AM	I said "open to none is a better situation than open only to those with promo or reward creation cards", not that that I would be happier, and I specifically referred to creation cards, not to anything. Haha. Okay. I amend my statement to "I especially don't understand people who state that they would be happier if nobody got a reward creation card." instead. What next? Those that don't get to play as often as other should level at the same rate to be fair to everyone? It's a logical extension of your premise after all The LFR campaign should be promoting players having fun in their own ways, not creating elite players due to attendance at specific cons, frequency of play,...
gomeztoo 03-08-08, 02:31 AM	Actually, I agree partially with Tom. Creation cards are not a good way to deal with new races as long as these cards are acquired randomly. What might work is if you would obtain these cards when you buy the book containing the racial rules. So, say, acquire the gnome card when you buy 'Ye Great Book of Gnomes', or something. That way, if you *want* to play a gnome, you can - but you have to buy the book first, and it costs you the use of a card.
CdrcJsn 03-08-08, 02:54 AM	The intent of these limited access race cards is not for everyone to have access to a new race. It's to reward people for attending limited events at special conventions. I think there are two issues here. 1) Special events giving limited access to rare things (races, items, classes, etc.) 2) Whether race selection (or any character creation option) should be given out as a reward.
JohnnyBlaise 03-08-08, 03:47 AM	I think Tom and I have different ideas about the purpose of reward cards (and con rewards). I like knowing that I get something "special" for my big cash and time investment in a con. I do not care if that something is a race, a class, an item, or a plaque (and I think at one point or another Ive gotten all of these). For me there is no difference between having access to a "rare" race and having access to a "rare" item. Hand of Vecna is about on par with "Spell Stitched Norker" for me. I do not see a relevant difference. And I will never complain about that. It encourages con attendance, purchase of gaming materials and if done correctly, good roleplaying. All of which are good for the hobby.
tombollis 03-08-08, 08:58 AM	What next? Those that don't get to play as often as other should level at the same rate to be fair to everyone? It's a logical extension of your premise after all I don't understand your concept of logic. My premises are 1) that all should have the same freedom to create characters and 2) that benrfits that sugnificantly improve a specific PC should come from that PC's adventuring. The logical extention would be that PCs should not level based on others leveling at a different rate (in spite of the fact that it seems to be an official 4e suggestion to give out xp to those who miss adventures to let them keep up - that seems useful in a small home campaign but not in a large extended campaign like :FR). I'm a proponent of playing multiple PCs at different levels. If you are to play with someone who doesn't have a PC high enough for your preferred PC, then choose (or create) one that allows you to play together and have fun. At a large con, everone should be able to put together tables for adventures for which they have suitable PCs. At game days, adventures should be selected that allow all to play, rather than catering to the highest level PCs. The play experience is more important to me than getting a high level PC. Tom Bollis
tombollis 03-08-08, 09:28 AM	I think Tom and I have different ideas about the purpose of reward cards (and con rewards). I like knowing that I get something "special" for my big cash and time investment in a con. I do not care if that something is a race, a class, an item, or a plaque (and I think at one point or another Ive gotten all of these). For me there is no difference between having access to a "rare" race and having access to a "rare" item. Hand of Vecna is about on par with "Spell Stitched Norker" for me. I do not see a relevant difference. And I will never complain about that. It encourages con attendance, purchase of gaming materials and if done correctly, good roleplaying. All of which are good for the hobby. I see the purpose of reward cards as to show a token of apreciation to those who have participated alot in the RPGA. The purposes of promo cards are to thank players for attending a con and to promote the play of RPGA games and sale of WotC products by giving away something interesting that is only useful if you give playing a chance. I don't see racial creation cards as suitable for either reward or promotion. I don't believe in the concept of "rare races" when it comes to PCs - that is a concept for likelyhood of encountering the race as monsters in adventures. A race is playable or it isn't in a given campaign; rarity shouldn't enter into it. I also don't see powerful magic items as suitable rewards or promotions. In LC, I was happy to get a commemorative towel or plush toy for my PC (certs, not real items) for one of my PCs as a bonus for attending GenCon. It was the ability to play for days with lots of different people, con only adventures, the dealers room, the social aspects, and taking a vacation that got me to travel more than 12 hours each way and spend hundreds of dollars, not the prospect of playing a rare race or getting a rare item. I don't need extra player rewards for playing adventures; the play was reward itself. Tom Bollis
dkay807 03-08-08, 11:26 AM	I see the purpose of reward cards as to show a token of apreciation to those who have participated alot in the RPGA. The purposes of promo cards are to thank players for attending a con and to promote the play of RPGA games and sale of WotC products by giving away something interesting that is only useful if you give playing a chance. I don't see racial creation cards as suitable for either reward or promotion. I don't believe in the concept of "rare races" when it comes to PCs - that is a concept for likelyhood of encountering the race as monsters in adventures. A race is playable or it isn't in a given campaign; rarity shouldn't enter into it. I also don't see powerful magic items as suitable rewards or promotions. In LC, I was happy to get a commemorative towel or plush toy for my PC (certs, not real items) for one of my PCs as a bonus for attending GenCon. It was the ability to play for days with lots of different people, con only adventures, the dealers room, the social aspects, and taking a vacation that got me to travel more than 12 hours each way and spend hundreds of dollars, not the prospect of playing a rare race or getting a rare item. I don't need extra player rewards for playing adventures; the play was reward itself. Tom Bollis I love that the people who were at DDXP are excited about the promo cards and appreciate them, and that those that weren't speak out so loudly against them. This will forever be the debate between the "haves" and the "have nots." People shell out a lot of money to go to these premium conventions. Promo cards and other delve rewards are a way of a) providing incentive for people to spend money playing the delve and b) reward players for their dedication to the hobby. I'm sure (a) is the bigger reason, but still...
tombollis 03-08-08, 12:56 PM	I love that the people who were at DDXP are excited about the promo cards and appreciate them, and that those that weren't speak out so loudly against them. This will forever be the debate between the "haves" and the "have nots." Please don't jump to assumptions about the motives of posters. I am not posting as a "hav not" jealouse of the "haves", I truely see an injustice here, re something that does not directly affect me, as I have no interest in playing the races involved. I don't like the "I get to play something cool that you don't" attitude that creation cards seem to promote. I have no objection to CCGs (played MtG from the start), but don't like to see it incorporated into RPGs. Tom Bollis
MatteBlack 03-08-08, 01:26 PM	I love that the people who were at DDXP are excited about the promo cards and appreciate them, and that those that weren't speak out so loudly against them. This will forever be the debate between the "haves" and the "have nots." While I don't agree with most of Tom's position on this topic, he is sort of right here. True he does not seem to have gone and gotten one of these cards and is very vocal against them but, I have been pretty vocal for their existence and don't have such a card or really see myself going to any of the special promo events anytime in the near future. It's not entriely a "have" and "have not" argument because the battle lines aren't falling on whether we have them or not. Time spent finding and trading for a card and a reasonable amount of money and the grand scheme of likely LFR play expenditures should be able to land you a card you want. I think it has less to do with whether or not people can get these cards but, whether they want to put in the effort too. Whether grinding it out in the delve, travelling to a con, playing mods to get rewards cards for access to a race or to trade for another such card getting these special accesses boil down to putting in some sort of effort in support of the campaign based mostly on participation. The way I see it, it's only unfair if you are lazy and even then, puts the player without an access card at no disadvantage within the campaign. As I see it, you often take a hit to play one of these rare races. They are certainly not elite but, might feel a little special for what they have earned (or bought).
waytoomuchcoffee 03-08-08, 01:29 PM	I am not sure where the "injustice" angle comes into it. The cards are not a basic necessity of life or anything, they are a luxury item provided by a company with the sole purpose of increasing sales. That's like saying there is an injustice that Apple isn't giving you a free Ipod. WotC decides who deserves to get a card, in this case the people with enough money to attend a con (and who would be a good bet to buy more stuff later, and as early adopters to convince others to as well). No one is forcing you to play their game in their campaign world with cards that they paid to design and manufacture. They can give them to whomever they want. And at this I have to say they did a good job at marketing, as the three cards now are up to $123.50.
Keith53 03-08-08, 04:45 PM	From my point of view, character creation (player reward) cards merely offer an additional choice, somewhat limited, but generally accessable to those gamers determined to take advantage of it. Since every gamer gets with no effort a standard suite of choices, saying that some gamers, whether by luck or by effort, get additional options does not phase me. Now, if the options were only given out on a basis of personal contacts, then that would be unfair. It is like a business (such as a bank) giving somewhat better options for their best (meaning money spending) customers. Keith
Dempster 03-10-08, 03:00 PM	Has anyone else noticed that the cards being sold on ebay are mostly being sold by events staff.
Greyson 03-10-08, 04:37 PM	I like and support the idea of exclusive promotional campaign cards at conventions. I think it adds to the uniqueness, scale and atmosphere of a convention. Why deprive a convention of items or material that makes it a unique event? I think the idea of a convention is to offer an event on a grand scale and that has something truly unique to take away from the experience. These much aligned promotional creation cards are the perfect element for that purpose. Without these kind of goodies, all you have is a glorified gameday. Having something that says, "Yeah, I was at D&DXP 2008" is not gonna diminish another person's game. The promotional creation cards are not gonna ruin the game or hurt LFR. This kind of invective, however, can: Ack! They're starting this crap again? I hate creation cards... The kobolds in LG were bad enough, but orcs are even worse.... It's a stupid damn idea, and should be dropped. I am, by the way, the proud holder of an Orc Adventurer card. Five times through the Dungeon Delve earned that opportunity. I consider it a benefit earned for delving, not an entitlement. Fortunately, Wizards of the Coast and the RPGA agree with me. Happy gamimg.
NiTessine 03-10-08, 05:23 PM	I am, by the way, the proud holder of an Orc Adventurer card. Five times through the Dungeon Delve earned that opportunity. I consider it a benefit earned for delving, not an entitlement. Fortunately, Wizards of the Coast and the RPGA agree with me. Things are earned by working. If the Delve feels like work, that you should earn something for playing a game, it's usually an indication that something in the design phase went horribly, horribly wrong. In my view, there's exactly one scenario when rewarding the players for playing game aren't a completely stupid idea, and that's commercial playtesting. When convention rewards make DMs happy that RPGA conventions aren't happening within a thousand miles of them, there may be something wrong with the rewards. And that's apart from the fact that Creation cards as a concept should be canned, no matter how they're given out. I repeat: If it's open, it should be open to all. If it breaks verisimilitude, it should not be open to anyone. Of course, we'll probably end up with drow as a race open to all. The day that one is announced is the day I abandon all hope for this campaign.
waytoomuchcoffee 03-10-08, 05:28 PM	Things are earned by working. If the Delve feels like work, that you should earn something for playing a game, it's usually an indication that something in the design phase went horribly, horribly wrong. Oh please. You are really stretching it in order to try to make a specious argument. Earn also means to acquire or deserve as a result of effort, action or merit. He never said anything about it seeming like work. Oh, and you used verisimilitude wrong too.
tombollis 03-10-08, 05:51 PM	I like and support the idea of exclusive promotional campaign cards at conventions. I think it adds to the uniqueness, scale and atmosphere of a convention. Why deprive a convention of items or material that makes it a unique event? I think the idea of a convention is to offer an event on a grand scale and that has something truly unique to take away from the experience. These much aligned promotional creation cards are the perfect element for that purpose. Without these kind of goodies, all you have is a glorified gameday. Having something that says, "Yeah, I was at D&DXP 2008" is not gonna diminish another person's game. You can get a t-shirt that says that. In my opinion, exclusive creation cards (not promotional cards in general) do diminish the game for those who can't cheaply get one for a race thay wish to play. The promotional creation cards are not gonna ruin the game or hurt LFR. This kind of invective, however, can: What invective? Stated opinions don't constitute invective. The existence of such creation cards do seem to detract from the game for some. For some, it's because others get to play something they like but aren't allowed to play. For some others, it's because they allow some people to play characters at their tables of races they hate to see anyone play - they think the races are inherently disruptive. I am, by the way, the proud holder of an Orc Adventurer card. Five times through the Dungeon Delve earned that opportunity. I consider it a benefit earned for delving, not an entitlement. Fortunately, Wizards of the Coast and the RPGA agree with me. My point is that it is not an apropriate benefit for delving. WotC and the RPGA made a bad choice offering creation cards, inappropriately referred to as promo cards, as a rewards for delving. THey should have given something else. The fact that you will be allowed to play an orc proves that an orc is considered a playable race. If the card is allowed in LFR (which seems to be the case), it proves that the race is acceptable for the LFR campaign, so anyone with the appropriate racial rules should be allowed to play one in LFR. You might fairly be able to play one earlier if the character information i not in a released book or suppliment, but all should have access if the info is available in any core rules source or official publication (paper or ellectronic). Tom Bollis
NiTessine 03-10-08, 05:54 PM	Oh please. You are really stretching it in order to try to make a specious argument. Earn also means to acquire or deserve as a result of effort, action or merit. He never said anything about it seeming like work. Oh, and you used verisimilitude wrong too. Work or no work, rewarding people for playing game is... weird. Playing a role-playing game should be its own reward. Adding in something more gives it a competitive edge, and making this exclusive to conventions inaccessible to the majority of the player base makes it unequal. But then, the nature of these rewards is such I would not want to have one, or see one in a game I'm running. They're handy for bookmarks, I suppose, but I already have promotional M:tG cards for that. And I'm using the word quite correctly, according to both the dictionary and the DMG definitions. It's going to be the kobold thing all over again. Monsters waltz in and out of settlements and the most they'll get is a small penalty to Charisma-based skills, even if locals have a religious mandate for genocide against them. It breaks verisimilitude by introducing a logical contradiction to the gameworld and reminding me that the highest in the campaign bureaucracy are the marketing people.
bitznarf 03-10-08, 05:58 PM	Work or no work, rewarding people for playing game is... weird. Now this is a concept I don't understand when it comes to D&D. By its very nature, you get rewards for playing. Your PCs get stronger (more experience) and get more nifty items. That sure sounds like a reward to me. And none of the above has to have any sort of competitive edge to it - any that is there is simply a product of the player's attitude, not the game as I see it.
NiTessine 03-10-08, 06:01 PM	Now this is a concept I don't understand when it comes to D&D. By its very nature, you get rewards for playing. Your PCs get stronger (more experience) and get more nifty items. That sure sounds like a reward to me. Those are in-character. Your character kills the orc, he gets XP and the orc's pie. It rewards the character. This is OOC - your character kills the orc, you get to play the orc's brother. This rewards the player. There's a crucial difference.
bitznarf 03-10-08, 06:05 PM	I don't see the seperation. I like to see my PCs succeed and get stronger. Thats a reward for the player.
tombollis 03-10-08, 06:20 PM	I don't see the seperation. I like to see my PCs succeed and get a reward for the stronger. Thats a reward for the player. A reward for a PC is automatically a reward for the player, but not for another of his characters. The only character that earned a reward from the delve was the one in the delve, which was not an orc. If you had been allowed to play an orc in the delve, then being allowed to keep that PC for ;ater use would have been an earned reward. (The con promotion would have been the opportunity to play the orc at the con, not an unrelated card that aloows creation of an orc later.) Others should still be allowed to freely choose to start an orc character when they have the rules for the race. Tom Bollis
waytoomuchcoffee 03-10-08, 07:05 PM	And I'm using the word quite correctly, according to both the dictionary and the DMG definitions. It's going to be the kobold thing all over again. Monsters waltz in and out of settlements and the most they'll get is a small penalty to Charisma-based skills, even if locals have a religious mandate for genocide against them. It breaks verisimilitude by introducing a logical contradiction to the gameworld and reminding me that the highest in the campaign bureaucracy are the marketing people. Considering that *by definition* (in the new MM) an orc (or a kobold or that matter) can be a PC, they it cannot break verisimilitude. It might break verisimilitude of the old FR campaign, but since this isn't the old campaign world and there is a more or less civilized orc country in the new one, your statement makes no sense. You don't get to write the definitions, only WotC does.
waytoomuchcoffee 03-10-08, 07:12 PM	A reward for a PC is automatically a reward for the player, but not for another of his characters. The only character that earned a reward from the delve was the one in the delve, which was not an orc. If you had been allowed to play an orc in the delve, then being allowed to keep that PC for ;ater use would have been an earned reward. (The con promotion would have been the opportunity to play the orc at the con, not an unrelated card that aloows creation of an orc later.) Others should still be allowed to freely choose to start an orc character when they have the rules for the race. Tom Bollis I take it you didn't sacrifice your character to play a different race with another character in that one LG mod. Once again, you don't get to make the definitions. Just like that mod, WotC made the determination in those cards of what "reward" meant.
NiTessine 03-10-08, 07:17 PM	Considering that *by definition* (in the new MM) an orc (or a kobold or that matter) can be a PC, they it cannot break verisimilitude. It might break verisimilitude of the old FR campaign, but since this isn't the old campaign world and there is a more or less civilized orc country in the new one, your statement makes no sense. You don't get to write the definitions, only WotC does. If orcs have come from a kill-on-sight menace in the wilderness to an accepted part of society in all the regions of the Living Forgotten Realms in a single century, that breaks verisimilitude, regardless of how WotC writes it.
waytoomuchcoffee 03-10-08, 07:21 PM	Yeah, there isn't any way at all in a FANTASY WORLD that after five generations there is an uneasy truce between two races. Lol. Next you will be telling me that in the old FR world that a drow could walk around and become a hero without being KOS.
NiTessine 03-10-08, 07:27 PM	Yeah, there isn't any way at all in a FANTASY WORLD that after five generations there is an uneasy truce between two races. Lol. Only two or three generations of dwarves, and barely one of elves - both of whom are races with a history of mutual genocide with the orcs. It's in their religion. Remember, it was Corellon that took Gruumsh's eye. It's a hatred that runs deep, and is not forgotten in a century. Remember, the western society took longer than that to accept blacks as human beings, and that was without a few thousand years of racial warfare. As an aside, having an evil, thinly-veiled KKK reference killing orcish farmers is just tacky.
tombollis 03-10-08, 08:15 PM	I take it you didn't sacrifice your character to play a different race with another character in that one LG mod. I don't know which mod you mean, but it's irrelevant. That would be an example of gaining the race in a specific chracter's adventure history, replacing the character, not adding the option of an additional character with a separate history. (I would not have chosen to replace a PC in such a situation. I deliberately took no race, class, prestige class, feat, spell, etc, in LG that didn't come from the core rule books. Once again, you don't get to make the definitions. Just like that mod, WotC made the determination in those cards of what "reward" meant. This is a case of WotC deviating from it's own rules. By the core 4e rules, these creation cards are for playable races, by the core rules, and the DMG apparently will suggest that DMs allow players to do what they wan't, using the rules (or extrapolating from the rules) to judge etermine the mechanics. By cire rules, these cards are for playable races. I have made no "definition" of a game turm or rule, just given my opinion on whether creation cards are reasonable rewards. WotC does not have the right to define the term "promo", as it isn't a game term, and is a coloquial abreviation of "promotional" - pertaining to promotion or advancement; preparatory to, or serving to bring about, promotion. "Ptomotion" basically means, in this context, the stirring up of interest in an enterprise. The negative opinions given show that the cards are having a negaive impact, opperating against the advancement of interest of soime people in 4d D&D in general and LG in particular, for some people. I get the impression that those who got these "promo" creation cards aren't being swayed one way or the other re playing 4e and LRF, so they aren't realy promoting the WitC products. Promotion of cons is a separate issue, and Idoubt the cards made much difference who would attend this con. It may have made a difference how often some people played the delve, but most are likely have played games using WotC products in any case. I believe other promotional products would have better served the con and WotC interests. Tom Bollis
The_Jester 03-10-08, 09:02 PM	Only two or three generations of dwarves, and barely one of elves - both of whom are races with a history of mutual genocide with the orcs. It's in their religion. Remember, it was Corellon that took Gruumsh's eye. It's a hatred that runs deep, and is not forgotten in a century. Remember, the western society took longer than that to accept blacks as human beings, and that was without a few thousand years of racial warfare. As an aside, having an evil, thinly-veiled KKK reference killing orcish farmers is just tacky. Food for thought: 1000 years ago Europe was smack in the middle of the Dark Ages seeing just how fast they could forgot everything learned from the Greeks and Romans. Meanwhile, in the Middle East and Northern Africa (and eventually Spain), the Muslim empire was translating Plato and making great advancement in philosophy and chemistry/alchemy. Blacks and Arabs were the cultured people who looked down on those poor, dumb whites. Slavery and black oppression, while HUGE events from our perspectives, were footnotes in the last millennium. And the US has considered themselves an independent nation for 232 years. Slavery was semi-legal for 86 of those (until 1862) and has been history for 146 years. In another generation (26 years) there will have been twice as many years without slavery in the States as there was with slavery. Just feeling introspective. As for orc and drow PCs, I can expect some antagonism. This can be done well or this could be done poorly. Some rivalry or kidding or teasing expands the game. The dwarf being Gimli-esque and trying to out-do the orc or "show him how it's done". Or an elf being aloof and refusing to talk to "it". Maybe having to be encouraged to heal them or offer them food. As for "kill on sight", there were more than one LG regions were elves were almost though of that poorly. And from a LFR perspective, there was that Sea of Falling Stars nation that was heavily populated by orcs after the invasion of the horde.
The_Jester 03-10-08, 09:15 PM	As for the cards themselves... this is a perfect example of a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation. 1) They drop the cards or only have the generic cards anyone can get through point mailings. Then the people who go to the Con for something they can only get in the big conventions feel unexcited. They have doubles of some card they already likely have. 2) The cards are unique but only offer some very minor, insignificant bonus. Then the collectors still pay crazy amounts of money for them (The current LFR ones are going for $123 on eBay). clicky (http://cgi.ebay.com/RPGA-DDXP-Living-Forgotten-Realms-Promo-Cards-all-Three_W0QQitemZ270217400190QQihZ017QQcat egoryZ44115QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZ ViewItem) But no one is going to use them because the regular cards are so much better. 3) The cards offer some in-game power or benefit that is better than normal cards. A super "Fatal Strike" or "Bane of My Enemies". This, of course, annoys the people missing out. 4) The cards offer some minor in-game benefit that is different from the regular cards so it doesn't compete with them, but offers some small benefit to the people who have them. This is what they went with. All the other players aren't at a disadvantage. The cards are a nice bonus but not game-breaking. And, as an added bonus, they're self-restricting. Few attendees who use them and few people who can find them elsewhere, mean that there's a limited population of gnomes, shadar, and orc PCs. And, with the car filling a "slot" they're sacrificing a card, and also limited in their choice of feats/abilities.
CdrcJsn 03-10-08, 10:48 PM	There seems to be two main points of opposition coming about here, Tom's and NiTessine's views. Tom's main argument seems to be that if a race or character build issue is allowed, everyone should have equal access to it. NiTessine's seems to be that allowing rare races seem to break his sense of versimilitude when encountering such races in play. I don't agree with either of them in this case. Allowing access to rare builds for everyone might be fairer, but it eliminates the rarity of said options if everyone can do it. In addition, I don't share some people's reservations that it hurts the campaign to reward these as bonuses for attending exclusive events. Obviously my point of view is a tad skewed since I've actually contributed to the campaign by organizing several hundred tables worth of games over the years in game days and conventions. As for the versimilitude question, there really shouldn't be the issue. Races are rare or not according to the DM's ruling. In this campaign, that falls to the admins. And before anyone starts citing a break from canon, orcs ARE accepted by civilized races in various parts of Faerun in the old time line (Thesk, Moonsea). In the new time line, the kingdom of Obould is now a tolerated ally in the North. Who's to say that after a century of hardship for most of Faerun, full blooded orcs have been relegated to mere animosity at the same level once bestowed upon half-orcs?
NiTessine 03-11-08, 03:52 AM	As for orc and drow PCs, I can expect some antagonism. This can be done well or this could be done poorly. Some rivalry or kidding or teasing expands the game. The dwarf being Gimli-esque and trying to out-do the orc or "show him how it's done". Or an elf being aloof and refusing to talk to "it". Maybe having to be encouraged to heal them or offer them food. As for "kill on sight", there were more than one LG regions were elves were almost though of that poorly. And from a LFR perspective, there was that Sea of Falling Stars nation that was heavily populated by orcs after the invasion of the horde. Your view of history is interesting, but bears little relevance to the current discussion and makes me happy it's not my job to pick up the pieces after your education system. The "friendly competition" angle is how it'd be done poorly. When Gimli "showed how it's done", if you recall, he went on to kill some fifty orcs. That's how it should be. The elf, on the other hand, will likely still remember the last big orc horde in the North. Having people with lifespans typically in the centuries just forget millennia of genocide decreed by their own gods in just a hundred years is profoundly unrealistic and smacks of forced political correctness - and in the case of a memory lapse, the deities are there to remind them. The only reason I can think up for a setting change like this (because it's poorly developed) is trying to make it more palatable to white American middle-class moms so they'd buy the game for their kids. Their reasons for removing half-orcs from the game would seem to support this. I'm really worried about their target demographic. As for the versimilitude question, there really shouldn't be the issue. Races are rare or not according to the DM's ruling. In this campaign, that falls to the admins. And before anyone starts citing a break from canon, orcs ARE accepted by civilized races in various parts of Faerun in the old time line (Thesk, Moonsea). In the new time line, the kingdom of Obould is now a tolerated ally in the North. Who's to say that after a century of hardship for most of Faerun, full blooded orcs have been relegated to mere animosity at the same level once bestowed upon half-orcs?Well, Thesk is no longer there, and even around the Moonsea they were second-class citizens who were only allowed to exist because they were good soldiers for the Zhentarim. In Hillsfar, they met the same fate as all other nonhumans. They were not "accepted" but tolerated. I'm not citing a canon break. The canon is what it is, and in this case it seems to be that orcs are accepted - at least in the North, not necessarily the other regions. I'm stating the canon has been developed poorly, in a way that makes no sense and detracts from the play experience. And really, the anti-orc KKK is just stupid, no matter how you spin it. During times of crisis, people generally do not embrace the stranger with the grey skin, bad hygiene and tusks. They either kill him outright, or if he behaves well, find an excuse to kill him. The clergy will demand the abomination be destroyed. There will be torches and pitchforks. Again, this should also apply to the tieflings and dragonborn.
tombollis 03-11-08, 07:14 AM	The only reason I can think up for a setting change like this (because it's poorly developed) is trying to make it more palatable to white American middle-class moms so they'd buy the game for their kids. you are being overly specific in singling out this demographic. There are lots of others who are offended by condoning genocidal behavior, and some in your specified demographic who would not view the killing of orcs as such. I don't fit your demographic, enjoy D&D, but don't find it very palatable. The canon is what it is, and in this case it seems to be that orcs are accepted - at least in the North, not necessarily the other regions. I'm stating the canon has been developed poorly, in a way that makes no sense and detracts from the play experience. And really, the anti-orc KKK is just stupid, no matter how you spin it. During times of crisis, people generally do not embrace the stranger with the grey skin, bad hygiene and tusks. They either kill him outright, or if he behaves well, find an excuse to kill him. The clergy will demand the abomination be destroyed. There will be torches and pitchforks. Again, this should also apply to the tieflings and dragonborn. This applies to all strangers, not just those of specific races, as seen in real world history, and tends to be restricted to limited areas for limited periods of time. Foreign humans are likely to run into similar prejudice in some places. It should not affect the general playability of a member of any race. The orc, goblin, elf, or whatever PC should run into prejudice in some places, but it shouldn't normally be kill on sight. 4e seems tp be getting away from the "this race is always evil" stereotype, allowing for a full spectrum of alignment within each race, even if there are racial rendencies towards certain behavior. I thibk that is a definite improvement to the game. Tom Bollis
NiTessine 03-11-08, 07:47 AM	you are being overly specific in singling out this demographic. There are lots of others who are offended by condoning genocidal behavior, and some in your specified demographic who would not view the killing of orcs as such. I don't fit your demographic, enjoy D&D, but don't find it very palatable. I singled them out because they are relevant from a marketing point of view. There are many signs of the game being simplified in both rules and setting flavour for a younger generation. The World of Warcraft design is another example of this. In the rules, I could live with it, but when it saps the depth of a setting and removes extant conflict and adventure hooks, it pisses me off. This applies to all strangers, not just those of specific races, as seen in real world history, and tends to be restricted to limited areas for limited periods of time. Foreign humans are likely to run into similar prejudice in some places. It should not affect the general playability of a member of any race. The orc, goblin, elf, or whatever PC should run into prejudice in some places, but it shouldn't normally be kill on sight. It means the development of orcs into a tolerated race is unlikely to have happened in the first place. They've traditionally been killed on sight, and a change like this is not credible. Some of the other races should have hefty penalties in certain regions. Looking back at the kobold debacle, however, I suspect this will not be. Truly, it has to be a fantasy world, for people to be this open-minded and accepting. 4e seems tp be getting away from the "this race is always evil" stereotype, allowing for a full spectrum of alignment within each race, even if there are racial rendencies towards certain behavior. I thibk that is a definite improvement to the game. Yeah, the full spectrum of good, evil or unaligned. They should've kept the old system or just removed it altogether. This monochromatic bastardisation is pretty much useless, unless it's a tool for simplifying moral quandaries into bite-sized chunks, in which case it is even worse.
Greyson 03-11-08, 12:36 PM	LMAO, you guys still going at it in this thread? I thought this would've died down over night. I got a good laugh to see this desultory argument continued. My point is that it is not an apropriate benefit for delving. WotC and the RPGA made a bad choice offering creation cards, inappropriately referred to as promo cards, as a rewards for delving. They should have given something else. The promotional creation cards are here and a part of the new campaign. This thread can go on for three hundred more indignant posts and it shall not change the fact that convention goers earned the cards and are probably gonna use them. And, I doubt that any more acrimonious declamations shall prevent the RPGA from presenting like cards at future shows. Fortunately, they get to decide what to offer at their events. I support then one hundred percent. Happy gaming, lol. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have an Orc fighter/paladin to make for LFR. :evillaugh
Fsi-Dib 03-11-08, 01:59 PM	I, for one, see little interest in creation cards. As rewards they are lousy, since it doesn't add anything to the depth of the character or the game. And living on the other side of the atlantic outright means I'm unable to attend any kind of big big D&D con ever (partly due to the airport security; I don't want to come in contact with that). Then again if you have to pay ridiculous amounts of money for attending a convention ... in addition you have to *PAY* for the games?! No, no no no no no no... NO! This whole thing is horrible, horrible commercialism, and I'm wondering what on earth is driving people to go and PAY $25 or more just to create a kobold, orc or whatever in a living campaign? Why not just play the odd character in a home campaign? Also I agree on NiTessine's point of view of them partially destroying realism. As much as it would be a fantasy world, D&D itself is unrealistic enough. Not everything must be pink and blue just because it's fantasy. And Tom raises good views on the equality on the issue. Sure, it's certainly unchangable that WotC will give out reward cards; because people want them. I don't understand why (in the local LG scene we just give them to whoever wants them. I also consider it "hard toiletpaper"). I still have my snowelf card, which just exists since I have no feelings towards the race. It's pointless! Then again I find all cards pointless. I shall see if LFR becomes any good... in case it doesn't, I stop playing it. Though I don't hold high hopes for Dalelands altogether. Seems like this scene dies with LG.
CdrcJsn 03-11-08, 03:48 PM	Yeah, the full spectrum of good, evil or unaligned. They should've kept the old system or just removed it altogether. This monochromatic bastardisation is pretty much useless, unless it's a tool for simplifying moral quandaries into bite-sized chunks, in which case it is even worse. It seems that 4e has pushed most creatures into the "Unaligned" category. The average person is not a crusader for, or an embodiment of, good, evil, law, chaos or true neutrality. Most creatures only care about their immediate prosperity and the welfare of their family/tribe/clan. I don't see where you're getting monochromatic bastardization from. If anything, the greying of morality makes for tough roleplaying encounters and adds to the game in my opinion.
NiTessine 03-11-08, 05:11 PM	I don't see where you're getting monochromatic bastardization from. If anything, the greying of morality makes for tough roleplaying encounters and adds to the game in my opinion. It worked pretty well in the old system. Considering the commentary that got us from across the pond, I expect to see less of this, not more.
RanielK 03-11-08, 07:36 PM	I don't think so. I do not like the idea of con exclusive benefits. There seems to be something unfair about no ever being able to get that benefit after the con. At the same time I know why con organizers like them and I do not expect them to go away. I like campaign cards as rewards because they reward you for playing and are relatively easy to get. I like that you get more reward points for cons. This gives a benefit to con goes but the benefit is not something that people who missed the con have no opportunity to get. So how about AR favors? Where does "If I don't get it you don't get it" end? After all, there are about 5 or 10 Aasimar and 1 or 2 Frost Dwarves out there. And it all came out of very specific choices from a very specific mod that pretty much only ran at DDXP and a few other places (aka the Core Special Hanging Glacier).
tombollis 03-11-08, 09:11 PM	So how about AR favors? Where does "If I don't get it you don't get it" end? After all, there are about 5 or 10 Aasimar and 1 or 2 Frost Dwarves out there. And it all came out of very specific choices from a very specific mod that pretty much only ran at DDXP and a few other places (aka the Core Special Hanging Glacier). It is not "If I don't get it you don't get it"; it is "choice of race should not be a benifit of attending specific cons or getting a reward for number of events played". The awardiung of those races in LG through special mods was also wrong. It wasn't a benefit to the PC in the mod but to the player, thus not appropriate. An exclusive cohort for the character in the adventure would have been appropriate but not an exclusive PC. I don't want to see the same in LFR. Tom Bollis
waytoomuchcoffee 03-11-08, 10:06 PM	The negative opinions given show that the cards are having a negaive impact, opperating against the advancement of interest of soime people in 4d D&D in general and LG in particular, for some people. Tom Bollis Being very bored, I was curious about the huge outflow of negative opinions of character creation cards, so I look at how many of the 30 different posters on this thread expressed disapproval. I found 7 - Verenal, tombollis, nitessine, sieylianna, dempster, gomeztoo, and fsi-dib (although I wasn't sure about fsi I included him/her anyway). Out of the 97 posts, 30% are made by just two posters - tombollis and nitessine. So I don't quite really see the hate over these cards. If only 6-7 people out of the entire RGPA managed to log in and express their opinion, I don't seriously think that is a bad thing. To avoid feeding the trolls, I am over and out.
tombollis 03-11-08, 11:48 PM	Being very bored, I was curious about the huge outflow of negative opinions of character creation cards, so I look at how many of the 30 different posters on this thread expressed disapproval. I found 7 - Verenal, tombollis, nitessine, sieylianna, dempster, gomeztoo, and fsi-dib (although I wasn't sure about fsi I included him/her anyway). Out of the 97 posts, 30% are made by just two posters - tombollis and nitessine. So I don't quite really see the hate over these cards. If only 6-7 people out of the entire RGPA managed to log in and express their opinion, I don't seriously think that is a bad thing. To avoid feeding the trolls, I am over and out. You are misrepresenting the statistics here. If you check all the posts in this thread, you will finf that many say nothing about whether or not the poster consideres character creation cards a good or bad idea, and that may of the posts on either side are by a few people. The number who have spoken for the cards seems similar to the number who have spoken against. The fact that about as many people on a thread re promo cards have indicated a dislike of creation cards indicates that the general dislike should be expected to be similar to like - a significant negative impact on the market. As I think those interested in the cards are more likely to be reading this thread, it is suprising how few have spoken out in favor of the cards. Tom Bollis
Fsi-Dib 03-12-08, 03:05 AM	Yes, I'm pretty much against the cards. However it's not an issue that would stop me from playing. I merely see cards useless game-wise. While I admire Tom's devotion to "core books only", I also feel like the usage of new books and their material was essential, since some module writers started an arms race with the players with bad results.
Verenal 03-12-08, 04:28 AM	So I don't quite really see the hate over these cards. If only 6-7 people out of the entire RGPA managed to log in and express their opinion, I don't seriously think that is a bad thing. Your logic seems faulty. According to that logic, if 30 people out of the entire RPGA managed to log in and express their opinion, I don't think these creation cards succeeded in promoting DDXP or 4e. Apparently nobody cares about these cards. Out of the 97 posts, 30% are made by just two posters - tombollis and nitessine. You know, this is often the case when people start arguing on message boards. Only a few posters post for their side of the argument. If more people posted their arguments, they'd mostly just repeat previous arguments. I for one haven't posted here since page one because I had no new insights to add to this thread. Other posters express my feelings on the matter more elegantly than I would myself.
_metz_ 03-12-08, 08:55 AM	Kobolds, as a race, worship an evil deity. Half-orcs, as a race, are merely ugly, stupid and hard-hitting. So do some humans. So do many humans, whole nations of them in fact. My characters, generally, don't like half-orcs, but appreciate the meatshield. Kobolds I've had to suffer because it would break the the table if I walked away and they're otherwise among the better class of LG adventures. SO you enjoy playing out rascism in your PCs? If the kobold is good and trying to do away with thier racial stigma, what justification do you have apart from arbitrary ideals of specism? Do you like lording it over other PCs and being the most pure and important person on the table? In Naerie we oppress even human subraces. Odd, as non human races are ususally more powerful and wiser/older than humans. So if your nation was so arrogant I am surpirsed it hasn't been destroyed. But hey if it gets your socks of being superior than sure, whatever works. Just try and be speciest to my PC and he will inform you that he is 543 years old, cares little for your human politics, but if you want to start something with him he will unleash some 8th level spells on you. Yes, actually. I have a great capacity for hatred. Overt silliness disrupts the game, decreases the enjoyment of more serious players, and generally fails to be actually funny. Some people play DnD because it is lighthearted. Interest rates, Work etc are all plenty serious, and you'd be surprised to know that many people use role-playing as escapism for things other than just being the 'cool' serious silent type. That is your opinion, but don't walk onto a table and judge other PCs. Unless they are breaking the 4th wall and are well roleplayed, then you are just imposing your views of role-playing on others. As long as it fits the world, its perfectly acceptable. I have a 15th level Pirate who fits his region PERFECTLY, and is a member of all the metaorgs and so on. Doesn't mean he won't tar and feather you if you are a jack**s on his ship. My Kobold is extremely serious, and thats why he hates gnomes. Each to thier own, you are prejudicing a race based on the fact that it is usually the more whacky/character concept committed players who play kobolds, and as such often the ones more likely to play serious characters.. (They are suboptimal for anything but a caster really) I like to see verisimilitude, a semblance of realism in the setting. The setting and NPCs are very important in a Living campaign, where you don't have as much continuity inside the party as you have in a home game. Well none of my 'good' PCs hang out with rascists, so here is some semblance of realism, come to my table and expect some proselytizing. Whilst LG is human based, you do realise most of the people with lots of power aren't necessarily human? Also I play a serious human in real life. WHY DO I WANT TO PLAY ONE IN D&D? Naturally, we'll get a decree for political correctness from the top and everyone will like those orcs and drow and kobolds. Goodbye, verisimilitude, welcome lesbian stripper ninjas. Mate do you realise what you sound like? You demand a serious environment in a game that has: Sailor moon elves Gnomes BARDs (I mean honestly!) *Muscular action closes the hole* LOTR rippoffs left right and centre (see Elminster the silly) Hobbits For someone demanding versimilitude, you haven't read Lord of the rings or seen a lot of fantasy have you? Even in Lord of the rings they joke, sing do little dances and ham up the silly when they aren't FORCED to be serious, and half the fantasy mythos of DnD is based around that... (Meet Tom Bombadil my good fellow) If you want to play serious braveheart/conan/I don't know what you are referencing then persuade someone to home game DM for you. A living campaign must appeal to a MASS AUDIENCE and some people don't like being serious all the time, or playing the same human rascists over and over again. I play a serious Human in real life. Why should I do it in D&D? (feel free to add that to your signature) NiTessine: go play a home campaign. I am not a fan of 4th ed, but you are just attacking people now with baseless statements. Don't talk about demographics either, I've done marketing, you are just espousing rubbish. I know I am responding to an earlier post, but I get the impression that the reason you are argueing so strongly for living campaigns to be more like a home game, is that you are too obnoxious to be invited to one. There I've said it. You've all been thinking it.
Fsi-Dib 03-12-08, 10:01 AM	Whoah whoah, Metz, you couldn't be more wrong about NiTessine. He's an absolute junkie when it comes to fantasy novels. He's also more critical about them (I believe he studies or studied medieval history?), and as a sidenote he has written and published a book about role-playing games. I know him in real life, and considering he's broad knowledge on medieval cultures, racism and xenophobia were common subjects during the medieval eras. Even though D&D might set in a fantasy world, it doesn't mean it has to scrap away the bad parts of the culture and create an utopia. A serious character doesn't mean the character is all grumpy. It means that the character can be sincere and imagined well better. A gnome of mine has achieved both sincerity and humor, so it's not impossible either. NiTessine also participates in numerous home games, and is a frequent player in LG. Why? Because he's a good gamer, follows the plot, responds accordingly and yadda yadda yadda. I don't want to continue this brown licking any longer. Bringing you "543 year old 8th level spell slinging" character was somewhat of a ... unthought move. It's irrelevant. Furthermore, in the future be more careful with what you say. I, for one, would consider your post as a personal attack towards NiTessine. Oh, and I too find "shoot on sight" policy much more realistic. The players accept this, so what's the problem? This whole thread has derailed far from the original topic, though I have nothing more to add to my previous statements, so I can't do squat about it.
The_Jester 03-12-08, 10:05 AM	I singled them out because they are relevant from a marketing point of view. There are many signs of the game being simplified in both rules and setting flavour for a younger generation. The World of Warcraft design is another example of this. In the rules, I could live with it, but when it saps the depth of a setting and removes extant conflict and adventure hooks, it pisses me off. The wish to play orcs predates WoW. In fact, one could *easily* argue that orcs area a playable race in WoW because people want to play them and have in other games, including D&D. Heck, half-orcs were introduced waaaay back in 1e specifically so people could play orcs. So why allow us to play full-blooded orcs now. Partially because the base races are more powerful so they're finally equal to orcs. But mostly because of anti-half-orc sentiment. There was always this unacceptable darkness and the shadow of sexual assault hanging over every half-orc. This isn't some mandate from on high or a game design decision meant to emulate another game. This is the RPGA wanting to make it possible for players to have choices and play a favored race in the new game.
_metz_ 03-12-08, 10:49 AM	Whoah whoah, Metz, you couldn't be more wrong about NiTessine. Bringing you "543 year old 8th level spell slinging" character was somewhat of a ... unthought move. It's irrelevant. Furthermore, in the future be more careful with what you say. I, for one, would consider your post as a personal attack towards NiTessine. Sorry, but NiTessine may be a fine historical roleplayer for games which are based on medieval worlds. I would like to point out that magic exists, there a people who can determine evil just by looking at them, and so on. You cannot apply such medieval realism to a fantasy world. I actually regret the statement as to my PC telling off one of NiTessine's PCs, but THAT is my precise point. one PC shouldn't tell another how to act, NOR should they act superior because they play a human not a dwarf/elf/half orc. In much of what he has said I agree, particularly pertaining to the influx of MMO style DnD, but I do not like the earlier comments he made in this thread. Particularly about wishing to leave tables JUST because there was a Kobold. If a character annoys you because it is an evil race, then ROLE play it, don't leave the table. That is immature. Its pretty hard to be rascist as a human when essentially everyone else is better than you... That in itself is a bit of a stretch. IF you wish a shoot on sight policy was more acceptable, than If you attacked a kobold without evidence or justification other than "he is from an evil race" then my PC would intervene. That is the point I was getting at. Medieval worlds were rascist. Medieval worlds were also all basically lawful evil, had no magic, and aside from some similarity in cinematics and weaponry have next to NOTHING to do with contemporary DnD. Lets not even get started on the theological issues in the dark ages. They are so dissimilar that i find it hard to beleive someone who has studied the period can take comparing them seriously at all. The other day I had to endure someone who claimed they studied history who said that Japanese swords were inferior to western weapons because they had to be layered. He was argueing this was why oriental weapons weren't in DnD so much, becasue they were inferior. This bloke even had a history major in an art degree. He failed to realise that the layering was early carbon bonded steel. Thus, I find that people who claim to know what they are talking about often don't (myself included!) and so I find the comparison between the real world, and dungeons and dragons downright laughable. I roleplay because its NOT real, I can be a dwarf, I can be an elf, I can cast magic! I don't want to be told I should have to play a serious human who hates all non humans, operaties in a xenophobic monotheistic setting and uses only a hand and a half sword because its the realistic thing to do. I like choices, whilst I feel they should match the region and its character, I don't like the arbitrary edict that a living campaign must reflect a pseudo european medieval campaign setting, where everyone uses historical weapons, plays only humans and rapes, pillages, loots, oppresses serfs. Not exactly heroic. Maybe we should joke at/marry off/exploit/sexually harass/abuse any female PCs that are wandering about unassisted. Wait, that would be Historically ACCURATEwith the medieval world. Forgive me, but hey if you make such comparisons, I'll fire up and point out the flaws in them. So far its been pretty hypocritical. And to say that the players are ok with it - do you notice the reaction in this thread? a lot aren't.
Rerednaw 03-12-08, 11:58 AM	I think that limited promo access is a terrible idea. I've gone to conventions because I wanted to and NOT for the 'cool promo card' drives. Those have NEVER made a difference to me. If indeed it was the goal for promoting such events...why not announce what the cards are before the event? If they are as good as the promoters claim, then having them out before an event would no doubt increase the number of convention goers. By far the reaction I've seen (in our small gaming group here in Las Vegas) is a negative one. In the past when I was writing a mod, I really did not like the "oh cool, I have access to classes/player races that players do not." If it is unbalanced for player, how does it become balanced when I'm writing the entire mod with a custom APL14 build? If it is a flavor (fun) choice and not a balance issue, then why forbid a player from having the option? If a race/class is open...then let it be open. Let the decision to play a 'unique' be a roleplaying one.
Simpi 03-12-08, 12:46 PM	Sorry, but NiTessine may be a fine historical roleplayer for games which are based on medieval worlds. Odd, as non human races are ususally more powerful and wiser/older than humans. So if your nation was so arrogant I am surpirsed it hasn't been destroyed. But hey if it gets your socks of being superior than sure, whatever works. Just Just to come to locals defence: Nitessine is an excellent player and and I fully support what Fsi-Dib has said. As for arrogant nation, I find the comment somewhat tacky when the "oppress other humans" bit is about population being not so friendly with Scarlet Brotherhood soldiers who conquered Idee (now Naerie) 12 years ago before being kicked out by South Province (later Ahlissa). The ethnic tension and strife has formed an important and well received storyline in our region and could be perhaps descriped as "mature" or "controversial". However, so far the only ones who were offended were a group of foreign playtesters when one part of the storyline showed a typical commoner as uneducated, bloodthirsty yokel who was quite willing to take his kids to see a public execution since it is nearest equivalent of a good family entertainment in typical fantasy world. Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad/LFR Dalelands POC
NiTessine 03-12-08, 07:18 PM	So do some humans. So do many humans, whole nations of them in fact. Yes, but you can't tell a man's nationality or religion by glancing at him from a hundred feet away. A kobold, on the other hand, will be quite recognisable as one. SO you enjoy playing out rascism in your PCs? If the kobold is good and trying to do away with thier racial stigma, what justification do you have apart from arbitrary ideals of specism? Do you like lording it over other PCs and being the most pure and important person on the table?In order: yes, none whatsoever, what the hell are you talking about? Odd, as non human races are ususally more powerful and wiser/older than humans. So if your nation was so arrogant I am surpirsed it hasn't been destroyed. But hey if it gets your socks of being superior than sure, whatever works. Just try and be speciest to my PC and he will inform you that he is 543 years old, cares little for your human politics, but if you want to start something with him he will unleash some 8th level spells on you."My PC can beat up your PC!" Some people play DnD because it is lighthearted. Interest rates, Work etc are all plenty serious, and you'd be surprised to know that many people use role-playing as escapism for things other than just being the 'cool' serious silent type. Yeah, in fact, I just came back from a home game I was invited to. 1st Ed. AD&D, very lighthearted and silly. However, when I come to a Living Greyhawk table, that's not what I seek, and not what I expect. That is your opinion, but don't walk onto a table and judge other PCs. Unless they are breaking the 4th wall and are well roleplayed, then you are just imposing your views of role-playing on others. As long as it fits the world, its perfectly acceptable. I have a 15th level Pirate who fits his region PERFECTLY, and is a member of all the metaorgs and so on. Doesn't mean he won't tar and feather you if you are a jack**s on his ship.Yes, "unless", and "if", and so forth. My Kobold is extremely serious, and thats why he hates gnomes. Each to thier own, you are prejudicing a race based on the fact that it is usually the more whacky/character concept committed players who play kobolds, and as such often the ones more likely to play serious characters.. (They are suboptimal for anything but a caster really)Don't forget I'm also prejudiced against kobolds because I don't think they fit the campaign. Whilst LG is human based, you do realise most of the people with lots of power aren't necessarily human?Yes. Why is this relevant? Also I play a serious human in real life. WHY DO I WANT TO PLAY ONE IN D&D?I don't know why you want to play things. If you don't know what you want, I suggest seeing a therapist. It may not help a lot, but it'll be less embarrassing than airing out your uncertainties on a public forum. Mate do you realise what you sound like? You demand a serious environment in a game that has: Sailor moon elves Gnomes BARDs (I mean honestly!) *Muscular action closes the hole* LOTR rippoffs left right and centre (see Elminster the silly) Hobbits Not so much serious as realistic and believable. There's a difference. For someone demanding versimilitude, you haven't read Lord of the rings or seen a lot of fantasy have you? Even in Lord of the rings they joke, sing do little dances and ham up the silly when they aren't FORCED to be serious, and half the fantasy mythos of DnD is based around that... (Meet Tom Bombadil my good fellow) Your character also has boots of jumping to conclusions? I've read several hundreds of fantasy novels, including most of the ones D&D is based on and a goodly amount of those based on D&D. Humour has its place in D&D, but it's a very large concept, and while a great many styles of humour work in Living Greyhawk, an equally large amount do not. There are differences in style and tone between Terry Pratchett, Mary Gentle and Terry Goodkind. (Subtle, overt, inadvertent.) What annoys me is when people try playing Living Greyhawk in the style of The Epic Movie - disruptive, unoriginal, repetitive and not funny. It ends up much like the D&D movie, really. If you want to play serious braveheart/conan/I don't know what you are referencing then persuade someone to home game DM for you. A living campaign must appeal to a MASS AUDIENCE and some people don't like being serious all the time, or playing the same human rascists over and over again.Trying to appeal to everyone rarely yields quality. I play a serious Human in real life. Why should I do it in D&D?See my comment above about the therapist. NiTessine: go play a home campaign. I am not a fan of 4th ed, but you are just attacking people now with baseless statements. Don't talk about demographics either, I've done marketing, you are just espousing rubbish. I know I am responding to an earlier post, but I get the impression that the reason you are argueing so strongly for living campaigns to be more like a home game, is that you are too obnoxious to be invited to one. There I've said it. You've all been thinking it. I just came back from playing a home game, ironically enough. The first baseless personal attacks in this thread were just posted by you. While I have no powers of telepathy and cannot claim to know what the rest of the posters here think, I've always been under the impression that you were a 15-year-old. A summer job at a telemarketing firm doesn't count, sorry. I will not reply to your second post, because it seems to be an even greater chore to read than this one was, and I have no patience for another piece of stream-of-consciousness drivel riddled with bad grammar and worse spelling at this hour. The wish to play orcs predates WoW. In fact, one could *easily* argue that orcs area a playable race in WoW because people want to play them and have in other games, including D&D. Heck, half-orcs were introduced waaaay back in 1e specifically so people could play orcs. If you'd read my post carefully, you'd have noticed that I differentiated the orc race from the WoW design, which is a different issue entirely. But mostly because of anti-half-orc sentiment. There was always this unacceptable darkness and the shadow of sexual assault hanging over every half-orc. Unacceptable to whom? I never had any particular problem with it. Also, removing it after it's been a part of the game for three decades without anyone complaining smacks of marketing to kids.
Surgebuster 03-12-08, 07:58 PM	However, so far the only ones who were offended were a group of foreign playtesters when one part of the storyline showed a typical commoner as uneducated, bloodthirsty yokel who was quite willing to take his kids to see a public execution since it is nearest equivalent of a good family entertainment in typical fantasy world. Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad/LFR Dalelands POC Since your region's adventures will be playable by these 'foreign playtesters' and indeed, foreigners everywhere, perhaps the above statement is an indicator that some attitudes (apparently) common to your region may need to be reflected upon when writing adventures? Just a thought. :) Joe Fitzgerald Event Manager Dragon Coast
The_Jester 03-12-08, 08:30 PM	But mostly because of anti-half-orc sentiment. There was always this unacceptable darkness and the shadow of sexual assault hanging over every half-orc. Unacceptable to whom? I never had any particular problem with it. Also, removing it after it's been a part of the game for three decades without anyone complaining smacks of marketing to kids. It was removed from 2nd Edition, and the sentiment has popped up in Developer blogs. And unacceptable to whom? Well, anyone who doesn't approve of rape I would hope. Although probably mostly women who the idea of being ravaged by bestial monster is really unappealing too or touches a nerve. (Honestly trying not to be sensationalist here; it's a really touchy topic for obvious reasons) Half-elves at least have the possibility of love, albeit tragic (or emo). Humans swooning after a green-skinned pig-snouted monster is slightly less likely unless the entire half-orc race is the result of drunken one-night-stands.
Ferol, Debtor of Torm 03-12-08, 08:30 PM	I never got access to anything rare or unique in LG. I know a couple people with special stuff, unique rings, full-blooded orcs, frost dwarves, assimars, and neanderthals, access to special magic from another setting, or access to rare base classes. I was never once was jealous or felt cheated by the whole thing. In fact I was always pretty jazzed about playing with a rare race or class. Let people have their rare/unique races and classes. I don't see how it hurts anyone. It's quite likely that whatever they did to get access you could have participated in as well.
tombollis 03-12-08, 09:00 PM	Yes, but you can't tell a man's nationality or religion by glancing at him from a hundred feet away. A kobold, on the other hand, will be quite recognisable as one. But, under the 4e system, you cannot determine whether or not the individual is evil on sight, without a special ability. Many kobolds in the past may have been misjudged to be evil, for all you know. Your prejudice is not firmly rooted in 4e D&D and FR fact. Don't forget I'm also prejudiced against kobolds because I don't think they fit the campaign. Your opinion, but it isn't everyones. The rules allow for good kobolds that will fit the campaign. I don't want to play one, but I have no objection to others playing them at the same table. I don't object to you playing a prejudiced PC, but I don't sympathize with your desire to do so. I don't know why you want to play things. If you don't know what you want, I suggest seeing a therapist. It may not help a lot, but it'll be less embarrassing than airing out your uncertainties on a public forum. I do object to remarks like this on a public forum. Not so much serious as realistic and believable. There's a difference. I find kobold PCs in LFR realistic and believable. You seem blind to the realities of race in the new system. Trying to appeal to everyone rarely yields quality. Nor does trying to appeal to a biased "elite". The 4e rules seem aimed at allowing player choice, not restricting it. Tom Bollis
_metz_ 03-12-08, 09:50 PM	Yes, but you can't tell a man's nationality or religion by glancing at him from a hundred feet away. A kobold, on the other hand, will be quite recognisable as one. "My PC can beat up your PC!" Yes, "unless", and "if", and so forth. Don't forget I'm also prejudiced against kobolds because I don't think they fit the campaign. Yes. Why is this relevant? Not so much serious as realistic and believable. There's a difference. Trying to appeal to everyone rarely yields quality. See my comment above about the therapist. ...
Surgebuster 03-12-08, 10:47 PM	My good fellow, lets not devolve this into who is a 'cooler' person or who is more mature. <snip> Come on Metz, you know that rant was neither mature nor cool. It also should have been a PM. One of those two wrongs don't make a right situations methinks.. :) Joe P.S. Any chance we can all get back on topic now?
_metz_ 03-12-08, 10:58 PM	Come on Metz, you know that rant was neither mature nor cool. It also should have been a PM. One of those two wrongs don't make a right situations methinks.. :) Joe P.S. Any chance we can all get back on topic now? Yeah you are right I guess. I get fired up far too often Joe. Need to go get a good game of footy into me to clear up some pent up frustration! I won't bother PMing him, it won't achieve anything. ON the topic of the cards, as an Australian I do feel a little marginalised that it is difficult for me to get to some of these events. So my attitude is that as long as there is a reasonable chance for each region to get to them, then I can live with it. I would prefer it if they were based on rewards for playing rather than rewards for travelling/spending money, then that way you still get it to the dedicated gamers, instead of just those who can afford the money, or for many, more importantly, the time to go on such trips. just my (relevant) 2 cents.
Surgebuster 03-12-08, 11:09 PM	ON the topic of the cards, as an Australian I do feel a little marginalised that it is difficult for me to get to some of these events. So my attitude is that as long as there is a reasonable chance for each region to get to them, then I can live with it. I would prefer it if they were based on rewards for playing rather than rewards for travelling/spending money, then that way you still get it to the dedicated gamers, instead of just those who can afford the money, or for many, more importantly, the time to go on such trips. just my (relevant) 2 cents. All three cards will be available at Gen Con Australia in July, plenty of time in advance of the campaign launch. :) I know a guy who knows a guy.
_metz_ 03-12-08, 11:29 PM	All three cards will be available at Gen Con Australia in July, plenty of time in advance of the campaign launch. :) I know a guy who knows a guy. I know you do Joe, I expected they would be, and am hoping to make it. As long as they don't hold stuff in Cairns too often its ok with me :P sure Queensland is nice, but its a bit out in the styx innit! (joking)
waytoomuchcoffee 03-12-08, 11:33 PM	All three cards will be available at Gen Con Australia in July, plenty of time in advance of the campaign launch. :) Those 3 cards on Ebay sold for $176. That's $187 Australian ;-)
Surgebuster 03-12-08, 11:51 PM	Those 3 cards on Ebay sold for $176. That's $187 Australian ;-) They did? :twitch: Then you'll excuse me...as I am...off. To...buy a....house. In other news, there will be no RPGA reward cards at Gen Con Australia. Joe <Ex>Senior GM Gen Con Australia
Simpi 03-13-08, 12:32 AM	Since your region's adventures will be playable by these 'foreign playtesters' and indeed, foreigners everywhere, perhaps the above statement is an indicator that some attitudes (apparently) common to your region may need to be reflected upon when writing adventures? Dalelands is not Naerie or vice versa. Also, I am not a writing director for Dalelands. That does not mean i'm not feeding our most excellent writing director some ideas. At least for end of LG and my final modules, I don't see need to change my style since I can say my modules are pretty good and players opinions seem to reflect this. Even so, I can admit that I put out crap occasionally like NAE4-03 or COR7-18. Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad/Dalelands POC
NiTessine 03-13-08, 03:29 AM	It was removed from 2nd Edition, and the sentiment has popped up in Developer blogs. And unacceptable to whom? Well, anyone who doesn't approve of rape I would hope. Although probably mostly women who the idea of being ravaged by bestial monster is really unappealing too or touches a nerve. (Honestly trying not to be sensationalist here; it's a really touchy topic for obvious reasons)Hey, I don't approve of rape. Not even a bit. However, it happens. In a world with barbarous orcs who loot and pillage as a way of life, it's going to happen. No use pretending it wouldn't. When I play a PC, I play the character, not the character's parents. Besides, since when has ever a PC had a happy childhood? You figure that the full-blooded orc would've had loving parents that bought him a pony? He's the product of a warrior culture whose racial pantheon reads like the accused bench at the Nuremberg Trials. Personally, I think that any given D&D player character would have to have an exceptionally unhappy childhood or some sort of mental disorder and possibly a deathwish to do the stuff they do. But, under the 4e system, you cannot determine whether or not the individual is evil on sight, without a special ability. Many kobolds in the past may have been misjudged to be evil, for all you know. Your prejudice is not firmly rooted in 4e D&D and FR fact.You couldn't tell that in previous editions, either, and racial prejudices in the Forgotten Realms are quite firmly established. Drizzt wouldn't have been nearly as popular if everyone had just accepted him as one of the guys. I find kobold PCs in LFR realistic and believable. You seem blind to the realities of race in the new system."Race" in the new system seems to be merely a set of bonuses and cool abilities. Nor does trying to appeal to a biased "elite". The 4e rules seem aimed at allowing player choice, not restricting it.No half-orcs, gnomes only available with a special campaign card, less classes with narrower definition... Hell, we can't even decide how our tieflings look anymore. No, the wealth of options we enjoyed in 3E is a thing of the past. Monsters as PC races have been around for a couple of editions as well, with varying degrees of success in execution.
Madfox11 03-13-08, 07:11 AM	Personally, I find the idea of any shoot-on-sight attitude purely based on race in the FR (or Greyhawk*) weird and trying to compare FR (or even Greyhawk) to RL medieval Europe even weirder. When your neighbor is a 3 ft. tall gnome, and your other a dwarf who can cast spells with a cat that can talk as a friend who cares that that other thing walking into town is a 3 feet tall speaking lizard? Hack, it might be an adventurer** or an avatar of a god and if you shoot at it, it might become angry and kill the whole village with one wave of its hands. In the end though D&D is a game and LFR is a worldwide game. The RPGA's aim is to make sure that as many people as possible are going to have fun. Enforcing others to fit into a particular style of gaming is not the RPGA's aim. If Nitissine and his fellow players prefer to run a game where the locals are extremely prejudiced that is up to them as long as they realize the majority of people prefer lighter games. Lets not get too wound up about this people ;) * Especially when the kobolds do not even look like regular kobolds... ** The power difference between a typical villager or militiamember and an adventurer is so immense that no sane person would risk attacking them. In fact, a typical villager is going to want to avoid a conflict since they do not like taking risks as much as the typical adventurer ;) Pieter Sleijpen Global Administrator LFR
tombollis 03-13-08, 07:26 AM	No half-orcs, gnomes only available with a special campaign card, less classes with narrower definition... Hell, we can't even decide how our tieflings look anymore. No, the wealth of options we enjoyed in 3E is a thing of the past. Monsters as PC races have been around for a couple of editions as well, with varying degrees of success in execution. No half-orcs or gnomes in the initial core books doesn't meen they don't exist in 4e D&D cand aren't playable if a player wants and a DM allows it. They may or may not eventually show up in LFR. Until the books come out, we don't know the full details of any race, including humans. Campaign cards aren't part of the core rules, as far as I know, but something specific to the RPGA. There is a different initial selection of core classes, and they all would seem to have undergone changes, parly due to the changes in magic. I don't know that there will be fewer in the core books, nor that their definitions will be narrower - I get the impression that we will have broader choice for abilities and development within each of the classes. I get the impression that the simplified and standardized rules will make for a greater wealth of options than ever before, with monster PCs more balanced and playable than ever. The nonstandardized monsters of the past were harder to adapt into reasonable PCs, but that is no reason to exclude any from 4e campaigns, if the race exists in the campaign world and players want to play such characters. The creation cards are just a mechanism for desiding who can play non core races in RPGA campaigns, and I don't think they are a good way. Tom Bollis
NiTessine 03-13-08, 08:09 AM	No half-orcs or gnomes in the initial core books doesn't meen they don't exist in 4e D&D cand aren't playable if a player wants and a DM allows it. They may or may not eventually show up in LFR. Until the books come out, we don't know the full details of any race, including humans. Campaign cards aren't part of the core rules, as far as I know, but something specific to the RPGA.I am, of course, speaking in the context of the LFR campaign. They've stated that half-orcs will be in there, eventually, with alternate origin stories. This, to me, does not bode well. Also, the new gnome seems to have little in common with the merry tricksters 3E. I'll be interested in seeing how they're going to explain that one in the campaign settings. Especially Eberron. There is a different initial selection of core classes, and they all would seem to have undergone changes, parly due to the changes in magic. I don't know that there will be fewer in the core books, nor that their definitions will be narrower - I get the impression that we will have broader choice for abilities and development within each of the classes.Eight core classes in the 4E PHB, as opposed to the eleven in 3E. The rogue class preview they posted sure seemed to be narrower. It seems to me that everything is balanced toward combat and each class guards their niche jealously. I'd assume the rogue's incapability to sneak attack with a bow, for example, is because allowing it would open the doors for an overly powerful synergy with the ranger's archery powers. More balance, possibly, but at the cost of flexibility. Overall, I remain unconvinced that 4E is an actual improvement. Signs point to "no".
Madfox11 03-13-08, 08:22 AM	They've stated that half-orcs will be in there, eventually, with alternate origin stories. This, to me, does not bode well. Also, the new gnome seems to have little in common with the merry tricksters 3E. I'll be interested in seeing how they're going to explain that one in the campaign settings. Especially Eberron. Huh? Considering the gnome in Eberron is quiet different from the PHB 3E gnome in culture and theme I would say that is real easy. Just do what they did in 3E: change the fluff for that race in the Campaign Setting Guide.
gomeztoo 03-13-08, 09:10 AM	Aw.... I was looking forward to playing a gnome that goes about poking other and gleefully saying in a squeeky voice: 'I got a lair! How cool is THAT? Eh?' :D
CdrcJsn 03-13-08, 11:39 AM	Aw.... I was looking forward to playing a gnome that goes about poking other and gleefully saying in a squeeky voice: 'I got a lair! How cool is THAT? Eh?' :D So was I. Then I spoke with some people that had the gnome card. Apparently, so are they. :rolleyes: Now looking for a different concept in case I do get a gnome card...
JamesRegister 03-13-08, 12:43 PM	Did I miss something? I have not seen any campaign documentation saying that Orcs are commonly accepted. There was a post that talked about one city of Orcs that decided to play nice or maybe I should say nicer that the rest of the tribes, but that was in a book not official campaign documentation right. Even if there is one city the rest of the Orc hordes may be acting as we have seen in the past. It’s not like we didn’t see areas in LG that were the exception to the rule. There was the Bandit Kingdom where the major religion was IUZ. I can’t think of another place in LG where if you walked up to the city gates openly wearing a holy symbol of Iuz that the guards would not have taken notice. I forget the name but there were several core mods that took place in a city where the accepted religion was Hextor lawful evil god of slaughter I believe. My cleric of Kord wanted nothing more than to burn the place to the ground but there were too many innocents. The point I am trying to make is that if it’s just one city that we are talking about that’s not enough to really break the verisimilitude of the game. If you can’t stand orcs stay out of Obould if it’s even in LFR. As for the creation cards yes they are out there and yes some people are going to use them. However having been at D&DXP and having seen what the line was like to get into the dungeon delve, I think that you are overreacting. For one thing you would have to have beaten the delve three times to get the 15 tokens to buy a single creation card, I think the number of tables to actually beat the delve was under 10(6 was the last number I heard). Most would have to have beaten the delve 5 times to buy a creation card if they saved all there tokens, many people did not. They bought the magic item sheets and a few people bought the minis. So the average person would have to have run thru the dungeon delve 6 or 7 times before getting the tokens to buy ONE creation card. The second thing to consider is the line for the dungeon delve was very long. Each table was given 30 minutes to run the delve (several GM’s gave people a little extra to finish the round they were in). You basically would have to run the delve and the stand in line for more than a hour to get to run it again. I would say that you had to invest about 10 and a half- 14 hours to get you first creation card. The second and third card would take another 7 and a half- 10 hours of role-playing and standing in line. I know this will not appease the people that believe that if a race is allowed to one person it should be allowed to all. I just want those that were not there to realize that the people that got the creation cards were not simply handed them for running the delve once we had to work a bit to earn them. Lastly I would like to point out that the creation card that everybody seamed to want most was not the Orc that seems to be the major bone of contention here in this thread. The card they ran out of twice (or so I was told) was the Shadar-Kai Sojourner. Once again I am not sure I see what the major alarm is unless a whole table of Orc’s or one of the other races walks into town. But then I recall several tables of Centaurs when they first became available to play in LG. At least the Orcs, Gnomes or Shadar-Kai will have class levels. I myself have two of the cards. I plan on playing a Orc fighter and unless I see something different in the LFCS I am expecting to have problems with the locals when I come into town. I will have my weapon peace knotted and my hands in plain sight. Things like the inn suddenly being full or the general store closing wont surprise me. Local kids might throw dirt clods, rocks, horse apples at me. However from the way the beginning mods will be written the players will be affecting a small area farming communities or small villages I hope to have a chance to prove that I can rise above my race and become a hero. Kind of like the drow ranger what was his name?
gomeztoo 03-13-08, 01:02 PM	Apparently, so are they. :rolleyes: Well, we might need to encourage that a bit more, so we can step into the unused niche of gnomes as trickster illusionist/bards ;)
NiTessine 03-13-08, 01:45 PM	Huh? Considering the gnome in Eberron is quiet different from the PHB 3E gnome in culture and theme I would say that is real easy. Just do what they did in 3E: change the fluff for that race in the Campaign Setting Guide. The 3E gnome is still mechanically identical in FR and Eberron. However, the 4E gnome seems to be a strange fey thing, presumably with racial feats and powers to match. I believe someone mentioned phantasmal terrain. Fluff can always be rewritten, but obstrusive mechanics are more challenging.
Surgebuster 03-13-08, 07:29 PM	No half-orcs or gnomes in the initial core books doesn't meen they don't exist in 4e D&D cand aren't playable if a player wants and a DM allows it. You realise the Monster Manual is a core book, yes?
tombollis 03-13-08, 08:02 PM	You realise the Monster Manual is a core book, yes? I don't know if half-orcs or gnomes will be in the MM. I was responding to statements that there won't be half-orcs or gnomes (to begin with). If they're in the MM, they should be presented well enough to be playable; if more info is required for them to be playable, that info sgouldn't be long in coming. Tom Bollis Tom Bollis
Surgebuster 03-13-08, 10:11 PM	I don't know if half-orcs or gnomes will be in the MM. I was responding to statements that there won't be half-orcs or gnomes (to begin with). If they're in the MM, they should be presented well enough to be playable; if more info is required for them to be playable, that info sgouldn't be long in coming. Tom Bollis Tom Bollis All three reward cards specifically mention using the rules in the MM for creating PCs of those races. I could have sworn that was mentioned already in the thread. :thinks: Joe
CdrcJsn 03-13-08, 10:17 PM	I don't know if half-orcs or gnomes will be in the MM. We've been told at DDXP that there will be a dozen or so races suitable for PCs. There will be a separate appendix for it apparently, in the back of the book.
Fsi-Dib 03-14-08, 02:33 AM	I was wondering, how a normal human commoner would separate half-orcs and orcs. They practically look the same to a person who has seen orcs only at close range. Thus why would half-orcs be tolerated and orcs shot on sight? We're still talking about how common people would view a monster entering the town.
NiTessine 03-14-08, 03:08 AM	I was wondering, how a normal human commoner would separate half-orcs and orcs. They practically look the same to a person who has seen orcs only at close range. Thus why would half-orcs be tolerated and orcs shot on sight? We're still talking about how common people would view a monster entering the town. I'd presume that orcs are common enough that most commoners, especially in rural areas, would have some experience with them. Especially town guards and militiamen. Based on the art - which is a bad thing to base it on due to spotty art direction in this particular case, but there's nothing better - I'd say half-orcs can be discerned from orcs by a straighter posture, paler skin, less muscle and smaller tusks. Dress would also probably affect it, and an orc might theoretically be able to pass for a really ugly half-orc if he wore clothes instead of the dirty furs and badly tanned leathers that seem to be the norm. Here's a half-orc: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/Dragonmarked_Gallery/101340.jpg And here are a couple of orcs: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/dmg35_gallery/DMG35_PG23_WEB.jpg Not too hard to tell apart, really.
tombollis 03-14-08, 06:45 AM	I'd presume that orcs are common enough that most commoners, especially in rural areas, would have some experience with them. Especially town guards and militiamen. I don't know about that. I think relatively few towns or farms have actually been raided by orcs - they probably aren't seen in areas other than where they live or raid if they are subject to shoot on sight. If the common folk and town gards in most areas have seen them, some must visit such areas, and likely leave alive - an indication that they aren't normally shot on sight, even if they are viewed with suspision. Tom Bollis
NiTessine 03-14-08, 08:49 AM	I don't know about that. I think relatively few towns or farms have actually been raided by orcs - they probably aren't seen in areas other than where they live or raid if they are subject to shoot on sight. If the common folk and town gards in most areas have seen them, some must visit such areas, and likely leave alive - an indication that they aren't normally shot on sight, even if they are viewed with suspision. Just because they'd try to off every orc they can see doesn't mean they'd have a 100% success rate. Not every raiding party is killed to the last. Also, there seem to be orc infestations just about everywhere, at least in the Heartlands of Faerûn and in the North. Not sure about the situation down south.
Madfox11 03-14-08, 08:55 AM	Did I miss something? I have not seen any campaign documentation saying that Orcs are commonly accepted. There was a post that talked about one city of Orcs that decided to play nice or maybe I should say nicer that the rest of the tribes, but that was in a book not official campaign documentation right. Even if there is one city the rest of the Orc hordes may be acting as we have seen in the past. It’s not like we didn’t see areas in LG that were the exception to the rule. Actually, in 3E FR material orcs are part of the Zhentil Keep army, which is not necessarily good for their reputation as friendly people, but they are organized and not prone to random looting. There is also an area (I think it was Thesk) where orcs and humans worked together against the Tuigan horde and the bandits that followed and they were quite accepted in the region. There was the Bandit Kingdom where the major religion was IUZ. I can’t think of another place in LG where if you walked up to the city gates openly wearing a holy symbol of Iuz that the guards would not have taken notice. I forget the name but there were several core mods that took place in a city where the accepted religion was Hextor lawful evil god of slaughter I believe. My cleric of Kord wanted nothing more than to burn the place to the ground but there were too many innocents. The point I am trying to make is that if it’s just one city that we are talking about that’s not enough to really break the verisimilitude of the game. If you can’t stand orcs stay out of Obould if it’s even in LFR. FR novels published by WotC are considered canon. Note that in 3E outside the North (where this city is located) and the Moonsea orcs are rather uncommon (at least not the main threat). Mulhorand and Unther of course have good cause to hate orcs, but they chased them all away millenia ago. Chances are the average citizen outside these regions only knows stories and not exactly how they look. So they would not react with more suspicious towards an orc as to any stranger that looks like a gorilla ;)
Puggle Halfwine 03-14-08, 09:51 AM	I plan on playing a Orc fighter and unless I see something different in the LFCS I am expecting to have problems with the locals when I come into town. I will have my weapon peace knotted and my hands in plain sight. Things like the inn suddenly being full or the general store closing wont surprise me. Local kids might throw dirt clods, rocks, horse apples at me. However from the way the beginning mods will be written the players will be affecting a small area farming communities or small villages I hope to have a chance to prove that I can rise above my race and become a hero. This is how I play when I play my Kobold. I EXPECT people to hate me- it's part of the fun. I get to grovel, simper, beg to be allowed to live... much different than every other character I've played. It's refreshingly different... The comic Goblins - Life Through Their Eyes really changed my perceptions of what it is to be a "monster" in D&D. More than once I've drawn a quote from Goblins when I'm playing Ixen, or paraphrased a story, event, character... it's really a fantastic comic. I highly recommend it to anyone who thinks that "monster's can't be PCs!". It's here: http://www.goblinscomic.com/
dkay807 03-14-08, 06:39 PM	LMAO, you guys still going at it in this thread? I thought this would've died down over night. I got a good laugh to see this desultory argument continued. The promotional creation cards are here and a part of the new campaign. This thread can go on for three hundred more indignant posts and it shall not change the fact that convention goers earned the cards and are probably gonna use them. And, I doubt that any more acrimonious declamations shall prevent the RPGA from presenting like cards at future shows. Fortunately, they get to decide what to offer at their events. I support then one hundred percent. Happy gaming, lol. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have an Orc fighter/paladin to make for LFR. :evillaugh Best... post... ever.
tombollis 03-16-08, 07:51 AM	Gnome Wanderer Creation Card "Home is wherever you will find me." - Commonly heard gnomish quip Traveling throughout the Realms, gnomes fit in wherever they can be found. Most of the time, the other races pay them little heed. Gnome adventurers let their curiosity for the unknown get the better of them, and often can be found in the company of elf or dwarf adventurers. Benefit: This card allows you to play an gnome. The gnome racial traits can be found in the Monster Manual. Orc Adventurer Creation Card "I always thought the wonders of our former foes were fanciful tales. There is so much more beyond the mountains than I ever thought possible." - Taug, orc warlord Brazen and bold, a few orcs courageous leave the Kingdom of Many-Arrows to make their fortune in the wide expanse beyond the Spine of the World The sight of an orc adventurer within a large city outside of the North is becoming more common nowadays, although they are still given a wide berth. Benefit: This card allows you to play an orc. The orc racial traits can be found in the Monster Manual. Shadar-Kai Sojourner Creation Card "Freedom from my sinister brothers and sisters still does not free me from the binds of the Shadowfell." - Inareth, shadar-kai warlock Hailing from the ramparts of might or escaped from there Netherese masters, some shadar-kai venture to other places. Tales of sinister plots of the shadar-kai known to the well-informed, and those folk treat the shadow people with caution. Benefit: This card allows you to play a shadar-kai. The shadar-kai racial traits can be found in the Monster Manual. The card text implies the Monster Manual is needed to create a character of any of these races, and that all of the pertinent racial information is there. It is implied that there is no general shoot on sight attitude towards any of them. The existance of the cards clearly indicates that these races are officially considered playable in RPGA campaigns in general, though the descriptive text seems specific to the Forgotten REalms setting. Tom Bollis