Talk:Sangheili (5e Race)
As a fellow creative mind, I'd like to make known my personal, hard held belief that in order for critique to be fully productive, the precipitant needs to defend his work against even rational critique with it's own good potential. As such, I am prepared to defend my work against both proper and improper critique.
One critique pointed out, not wrongly in any way, that I had left some character definition unfinished, which I happily went about fixing. The other remarks are those that I have little intention of acting on. For one, the improper balance of power that is claimed to exist in this race. Admittedly, I didn't really put that many features and special properties to this race. The defining reason behind that is a writing habit that I have always and will always adhere to: accuracy to the source material. I took everything I wrote here from information pulled from Halo and its wikis, and the functional aspects were my attempts at transcribing the Elites of Halo to D&D. The complained about direct addition of AC points was an attempt to properly represent defining characteristics of speed by making them just a bit harder to hit. Now, if the fruits of my efforts do not strike you as fruitful, then I invite the admin and other editors working around this site, to change them to make them fit. I will continue to offer my work of adhering to the source material as changes are made.
The next critique falls on my use - or, incidentally, the lack thereof - of the wiki's formatting, most notably, the reference system. I'll go ahead and attribute that to a simple personal inhibitor: I just don't get it. I'm particularly not savvy to wiki formatting, html formatting in general, or just programming. As such, I don't have the time to take out of my life to try to figure it out, so if the formatting and references are that important, I'll have to leave it to the admins and more savvy individuals to take care of. To the individuals in question, feel free to consult me for any clarification on my terminology, which admittedly is quite spontaneous.
The critique that irks me is that of the grammar, which I went back through to check and found not a lot of errors. A few grammatics were definitely worth changing, but the majority of the document had grammar that really isn't nearly as flawed as the critic makes it out to be. That being said, I've seen far worse grammar than the mistakes I righted all over the place in other entries on this site and a definite lack of criticism on this fact. As such, if the critic in question cares that much about not liking my grammar, the critic can take it upon himself to alter it. If they alter it to broken grammar, I, likewise, will revert it to my own and set that critique aside for good.
- I would recommend by using the Goliath as a base of understanding for balancing out the issue of being a Large player character. ie: Reducing the size to Medium and granting them the Powerful Build trait. By doing so you give yourself more room for stronger traits to better communicate the concept. As for better communicating the races speed you could increase their speed to 35 and instead of granting them a flat increase to their AC which could break Bounded Accuracy you could allow them to, as a reaction, grant themselves advantage against Dexterity saving throws until the start of their next turn. These are just suggestions to help you get some ideas, also, make sure to read carefully through the maintenance templates other issues. Happy wiki'ing. —ConcealedLight
(talk) 14:06, 2 October 2018 (MDT)
Interesting insight. And most appreciated, at that. I'll expand on this as much as I can. Happy Wiki'ing indeed.
Musicians Score and reasonings[edit]
My reasoning behind this score is as such:
- Ability Score Increase - There are three increases of +1, so that in total is worth 3 points
- Size - Medium, so no change
- Speed - 35ft is 5ft higher than standard, so is worth an extra .5 points
- Powerful Build - A clear .5 points skill
- Innovative - This seems like Tool Proficiency to me, and that is worth .5 points. Even if it's slightly more restrictive to 2 tools instead of 3
- Agile Combatant - This seems like some kind of Cunning for Dex saves, which is worth 1 point
- Languages - The standard two languages, so no extra points here
Personally, I would suggest the addition of Weapon Proficiency (worth another .5 points) and give them a choice of weapons which they can be proficient in, depending on their rank - including Energy Swords. Otherwise, I feel this is a good score for a species considered to be equal to humans in some ways.