Search results for query: *

In my homebrew game one can play humans, humanish (e.g. dwarf, elf), a number of creatures such as red pandas or even dragons since they are not the massive killing machines they are in D&D. But then you must play them according to what they are. Humans are so varied you can play one in any way...

Maybe that's part of the problem? As far as I know modern D&D allows many kinds of character creatures, but they are played simply as humans with maybe some unusual attributes. Motivations, personalities, etc., you might just as well play a human.

It seems as if you want to put non-human characters in a game they shouldn't just be humans that look different. An otterish creature should be exceptionally good at swimming for example. As far as I know the only thing dragonborn have going for them is breath weapon, but other than that why not...

Yes. I liked the first book especially, the second book okay, and the third as much as the first because you couldn't help but like the characters, including Whisper. Their interaction was spot-on.

If I allow non-human characters there has to be a logical basis behind it. If I'm running a classic low-level dungeon ("Feat? What is that?"), then you are NOT going to play a tiefling or a silver dragon. For such dungeons I'll allow humans or humanoids, and maybe some low-level monsters if it...

Depends on the game. If it's old 1977 AD&D then you get to choose human or "demi-human" races, as listed. In my own homebrew you can also choose a number of others, even dragons since on that world they are not nearly as powerful as in AD&D. Why does that "Spam" warning keep appearing? How...