Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 meatnormous Jun 09, 2011 7:48:16	does anyone know if Dragon issue #400 is going to give racial support to Kobolds, or is the article just going to be lore based?
#2 robertread3 Jun 09, 2011 8:39:02	while i REALLY wish i could tell you that it was a set of feats, alternate stat distributions, utilities and lore on PC kobolds, it was not it was a reprint of a Kobold article that was released in dragon 86 (i think) for making 2ed edition kobolds a plausable enemy at higher levels a huge disapointment for me (and im sure you mr OP) while the anaversery things are fine and entertaining i thought "tuckers kobolds" being in the features catagory meant that kobolds were getting the gnoll treatment
#3 Mock Jun 09, 2011 10:24:59	It was Dragon 127, if Googling the title is accurate. It's a funny article.
#4 meatnormous Jun 09, 2011 11:20:38	wow, yea really disappointing... who in the world would rather play gnolls than kobolds anyway? C'mon WotC, be smart.
#5 _Mithreinmaethor_ Jun 09, 2011 14:11:29	wow, yea really disappointing... who in the world would rather play gnolls than kobolds anyway? C'mon WotC, be smart. I would. And would rather not see any more monster races getting PC writeups.
#6 robertread3 Jun 09, 2011 16:16:26	wow, yea really disappointing... who in the world would rather play gnolls than kobolds anyway? C'mon WotC, be smart. I would. And would rather not see any more monster races getting PC writeups.  i posted something asking for more monster races getting PC writups and the response was overwhelmingly positive, what makes something a monster race anyway? dragonborn, teiflings, minotaurs, shifters, drow and gnolls are all much more capable and often are doing much nastier stuff then kobolds
#7 Kalnaur Jun 10, 2011 3:37:04	wow, yea really disappointing... who in the world would rather play gnolls than kobolds anyway? C'mon WotC, be smart. I would. And would rather not see any more monster races getting PC writeups.  Is there a reason behind this?
#8 Gallard Jun 11, 2011 4:21:23	even if i would never play one, id like to see writeups for the more 'normal' of monster races, as opposed to 'awesome and op!' (like gnoll/bugbear) monsters. by normal i mean orcs, goblins, kobolds, maybe lizardmen, etc.
#9 Jharii Jun 12, 2011 13:00:41	even if i would never play one, id like to see writeups for the more 'normal' of monster races, as opposed to 'awesome and op!' (like gnoll/bugbear) monsters. by normal i mean orcs, goblins, kobolds, maybe lizardmen, etc. Bullywugs, dammit!
#10 undrave Jun 12, 2011 21:34:16	even if i would never play one, id like to see writeups for the more 'normal' of monster races, as opposed to 'awesome and op!' (like gnoll/bugbear) monsters. Gnoll are op?! oO? Since when?!
#11 Gallard Jun 13, 2011 0:09:30	ever since the Stargate movie ;) i meant rp-wise, not stats-wise. it is very common in my area for players to be drawn to monster races, specifically to disrupt dm story plans. also because they are eeeeevil and emo, and have thier own demon-god.
#12 meatnormous Jun 13, 2011 9:54:37	I would love to see more monster races as PCs. There arent even any stats for lizardmen, who are classically very popular! In any case, I've been involved in tons of campaigns where the players (and DM for that matter) want to run an evil group, so why not have the support for "evil" races. I mean, HoS and Book of Vile Darkness are great and all, but how many eladrin, elves, dwarves, etc. are going to be evil anyway? For that matter, if your answer is any of those races can be evil, then why not can any of the monster races be good? I totally agree with Undeadpool on the fact that many of the old monster races already are PCs... minotaurs worship Baphomet,  drow worship Lolth.. blah blah.. but WotC has seen fit to give us plenty of reasons why they would not be evil. More Monster PCs ftw..
#13 robertread3 Jun 13, 2011 13:04:16	More Monster PCs ftw.. +1 to this the story of the character is made by you, it is not predetermined by his race/class choice. gnolls are not OP, they are in the 2ed teir of races (with tops being dragonborn, teiflings, eladrin, dwarves and drow) the bugbear on the other hand is OP if you stick a gauge on a bugbear his 1W is 2d8 so if your a barbarian you have a 6d8 encounter power at level 1, most classes dont touch that kind of damage dice until mid paragon. the Gnoll is a good example of how a monster race can be adapted into a PC races, it has mechanical balance and reasons to play it AND it is within the power level of the other  PC races. a bugbear on the other hand is an example what NOT to do. they are not outragious RP wise or inheritly evil to be PCs but they need to be so in a balanced way.  Kobolds are fine the way they are, shifting as a minor is useful but not that uncommon with all the mobility boosters out there, and its not even the best racial power out there (dragonfear? cloud of darkness? fey step? acid surge?)
#14 Mock Jun 13, 2011 22:01:02	(with tops being dragonborn, teiflings, eladrin, dwarves and drow)   I think you meant "dwarves, dwarves, dwarves, dwarves and dwarves"...
#15 robertread3 Jun 14, 2011 1:11:53	(with tops being dragonborn, teiflings, eladrin, dwarves and drow)   I think you meant "dwarves, dwarves, dwarves, dwarves and dwarves"... ah i always overlook the details!
#16 meatnormous Jun 14, 2011 9:17:55	even if i would never play one, id like to see writeups for the more 'normal' of monster races, as opposed to 'awesome and op!' (like gnoll/bugbear) monsters. by normal i mean orcs, goblins, kobolds, maybe lizardmen, etc. Bullywugs, dammit!  OMG, no doubt.. bullywugs would be FANTASTIC especially for old EQ fans who played frogloks.. And btw.. no way in any sense are bullywugs OP!
#17 ADHadh Jun 17, 2011 15:30:58	Bullywugs are all but OP. I'd be happy to DM a game for a bullywug paladin though. Show RIBBIT
#18 Samrin Jun 17, 2011 16:22:31	Gnomes are more monsterous than anything else listed could ever hope to be....
#19 robertread3 Jun 18, 2011 1:11:21	death to the gnomes!!!!!!
#20 Gallard Jun 18, 2011 3:42:25	i killed every gnome on Athas.
#21 robertread3 Jun 18, 2011 20:58:06	i killed every gnome on Athas. this is why our forums need like buttons
#22 ADHadh Jun 19, 2011 14:17:20	i killed every gnome on Athas. this is why our forums need like buttons Apparently they slowed the boards down tremendously.
#23 DoctorBadWolf Jun 26, 2011 0:02:06	wow, yea really disappointing... who in the world would rather play gnolls than kobolds anyway? C'mon WotC, be smart. I would. And would rather not see any more monster races getting PC writeups.  Are you sodding kidding me? Seriously? ****ing seriously? I too would rather play a gnoll than a kobold. the rest, however is total and complete crap so far as I'm concerned. Why the hell would you not want other players and groups to have the options they want to have? Why the hell shouldn't I get to play a fully, or even moderately, supported Kenku? Why is your preference so damned important that I shouldn't get to do what I want because you don't also want to do it, even though it doesn't take anything away from you?
#24 robertread3 Jun 26, 2011 0:57:02	wow, yea really disappointing... who in the world would rather play gnolls than kobolds anyway? C'mon WotC, be smart. I would. And would rather not see any more monster races getting PC writeups.  Are you sodding kidding me? Seriously? ****ing seriously? I too would rather play a gnoll than a kobold. the rest, however is total and complete crap so far as I'm concerned. Why the hell would you not want other players and groups to have the options they want to have? Why the hell shouldn't I get to play a fully, or even moderately, supported Kenku? Why is your preference so damned important that I shouldn't get to do what I want because you don't also want to do it, even though it doesn't take anything away from you? minus the hyperbole spot on. 100% spot on
#25 Samrin Jun 26, 2011 15:00:41	Need.... PC.... Kobolds.....
#26 salla Jun 26, 2011 15:03:21	wow, yea really disappointing... who in the world would rather play gnolls than kobolds anyway? C'mon WotC, be smart. I would. And would rather not see any more monster races getting PC writeups.  Are you sodding kidding me? Seriously? ****ing seriously? I too would rather play a gnoll than a kobold. the rest, however is total and complete crap so far as I'm concerned. Why the hell would you not want other players and groups to have the options they want to have? Why the hell shouldn't I get to play a fully, or even moderately, supported Kenku? Why is your preference so damned important that I shouldn't get to do what I want because you don't also want to do it, even though it doesn't take anything away from you? minus the hyperbole spot on. 100% spot on Seconded.
#27 DoctorBadWolf Jun 26, 2011 15:45:19	wow, yea really disappointing... who in the world would rather play gnolls than kobolds anyway? C'mon WotC, be smart. I would. And would rather not see any more monster races getting PC writeups.  Are you sodding kidding me? Seriously? ****ing seriously? I too would rather play a gnoll than a kobold. the rest, however is total and complete crap so far as I'm concerned. Why the hell would you not want other players and groups to have the options they want to have? Why the hell shouldn't I get to play a fully, or even moderately, supported Kenku? Why is your preference so damned important that I shouldn't get to do what I want because you don't also want to do it, even though it doesn't take anything away from you? minus the hyperbole spot on. 100% spot on Wait, are you agreeing with me or Mithreinmaethor? lol :D
#28 robertread3 Jun 26, 2011 16:50:47	wow, yea really disappointing... who in the world would rather play gnolls than kobolds anyway? C'mon WotC, be smart. I would. And would rather not see any more monster races getting PC writeups.  Are you sodding kidding me? Seriously? ****ing seriously? I too would rather play a gnoll than a kobold. the rest, however is total and complete crap so far as I'm concerned. Why the hell would you not want other players and groups to have the options they want to have? Why the hell shouldn't I get to play a fully, or even moderately, supported Kenku? Why is your preference so damned important that I shouldn't get to do what I want because you don't also want to do it, even though it doesn't take anything away from you? minus the hyperbole spot on. 100% spot on Wait, are you agreeing with me or Mithreinmaethor? lol :D You of corse doctorbadwolf
#29 DoctorBadWolf Jun 26, 2011 17:51:44	wow, yea really disappointing... who in the world would rather play gnolls than kobolds anyway? C'mon WotC, be smart. I would. And would rather not see any more monster races getting PC writeups.  Are you sodding kidding me? Seriously? ****ing seriously? I too would rather play a gnoll than a kobold. the rest, however is total and complete crap so far as I'm concerned. Why the hell would you not want other players and groups to have the options they want to have? Why the hell shouldn't I get to play a fully, or even moderately, supported Kenku? Why is your preference so damned important that I shouldn't get to do what I want because you don't also want to do it, even though it doesn't take anything away from you? minus the hyperbole spot on. 100% spot on Wait, are you agreeing with me or Mithreinmaethor? lol :D You of corse doctorbadwolf  Just making sure. :D
#30 incenjucar Jun 26, 2011 21:52:07	There are some very visible trends of people feeling a psychological need that is not an actual need when it comes to game options. Some feel that options that they personally don't need should not exist and that by existing their own experiences are lessened. Some feel that errata is bad because while they dislike having to alter the game they also feel that they have no choice but to play the current official version. Some do not feel that anything that isn't official (or "core") is valid material for their use. I lack the academic background to understand these issues, but they exist. While I dislike the idea of dismissing anyone's feelings, I feel positions of this nature are ultimately harmful to the hobby, and rather than cater to that position I hope that individuals instead learn that change and growth are good, especially as they have the option of ignoring both in their home games.
#31 Dragon9 Jun 27, 2011 7:45:12	the bugbear on the other hand is OP if you stick a gauge on a bugbear his 1W is 2d8 so if your a barbarian you have a 6d8 encounter power at level 1, most classes dont touch that kind of damage dice until mid paragon. Bugbear is an easy fix... you get rid of their Oversized ability (I think that's what it's called). Worked for the Minotaur.
#32 robertread3 Jun 27, 2011 9:27:16	the bugbear on the other hand is OP if you stick a gauge on a bugbear his 1W is 2d8 so if your a barbarian you have a 6d8 encounter power at level 1, most classes dont touch that kind of damage dice until mid paragon. Bugbear is an easy fix... you get rid of their Oversized ability (I think that's what it's called). Worked for the Minotaur. well then they become an incredably crappy race because they have a weak racial power and no racial feats, honestly it only has oversized going for it. but unlike other Races who typically have an encounter move or minor, it effects every single power a bugbear has (assuming they are not implement based)
#33 DoctorBadWolf Jun 28, 2011 0:44:40	Give them a damage bonus combat advantage and maybe beef up their power. Oh hey, they still feel like bugbears, and they're not crazy. win.
#34 Neutronium_Dragon Jun 28, 2011 5:14:28	Actually... I'd rather that the racial abilities be completely revisited in the event that one of the back-of-MM races is being given a full writeup. Not doing so - merely heirlooming the back-of-MM stuff into the full PC writeup - is what got the minotaur and shifter (at least) into such a mess.
#35 robertread3 Jun 28, 2011 9:47:42	minotaurs and shifters are perfectly well balanced, the high supported races still outclass them due to all their features, feats and crud like that.
#36 Neutronium_Dragon Jun 28, 2011 14:49:29	The mess that they're in is being underpowered and outclassed, not the other way around. The bizarre structure of the shifter's features, I'm sorry, one feature, certainly doesn't help.