User talk:Summerscythe/Cardomor (3.5e Race)

Ratings

	MisterSinister opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
	Ahem, excuse me, but what the actual fuck? Animate dead as an ability useable at first level is... yeah, kinda retarded, and even the material component restriction is kinda meaningless given that they can just use their fucking nails. Just badly-thought-out full-stop.

Ganteka Future dislikes this article and rated it 1 of 4.

Thought out and interesting race. The flavor reads a little awkwardly, lacking a kind of rhythm to it. The flavor could probably stand a little updating and refreshing in general. As for mechanics, and I am aware that this is the purpose the race was built for, they are very pigeonholed into specific personalities. While, any PC can break that mold set forth, it just gives the feel that this race was developed more as a character rather than a race. If that makes sense. Playing to the idea of a self-sustaining race that has to cope with living amongst others always presents a good opportunity for ideas, and with the theme of being tied eternally to undead, there is definitely opportunities for players here. Has a creepy vibe, but that picture doesn't really help. I should go yell at Summerscythe. I was a bit lenient the first go around. While I don't hate it, it does have problems, many of which have been addressed on this talk page already. It's pegged to be a one-class race, designed to be a character rather than a race. It's probably salvageable, but needs a massive overhaul to be worthwhile.

DanielDraco opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.

There's nothing outstanding about this race. The flavor is sparse; describing their usual personality is all well and good, but a race is best defined by society and culture, which are almost entirely omitted. For the racial traits, Ganteka captured the problem perfectly: it's written to be a character, not a race. Anyone who plays a Cardomor would be a fool to not be a necromancer of some sort, and that doesn't lend itself to a believable race. If it were a single caste within a larger race, it would be forgivable, but a race consisting pretty much entirely of necromancers is not plausible to be a self-sustaining society. All that aside, the mechanics aren't anything groundbreaking (or all that useful, even within the role of a necromancer). In general, it's underpowered and overspecialized. EDIT: And to expand slightly on the problems, the little bit of flavor and mechanics that are there are not any good. According to the fluff, they're pretty much human goths -- right down to the black fingernails. And while the subculture may be fine in real life, it's a pretty lame basis for a race. The mechanics are very strange, badly written, and not useful -- zombies are fine for the first few levels, but they won't do you very much good for very long, because they get expensive even with the cost mitigated by fingernails. That leaves Corpse Crafter to be the only worthwhile racial trait, but it's flat-out worse than the human's choosable bonus feat.

Foxwarrior dislikes this article and rated it 1 of 4.

The intriguing social implications of a race that is worth 250 gp per week are completely ignored, which is disappointing. More to the point, the Animate Dead stuff is a bit excessive at level 1 and totally useless at level 8 or so; by that level, the only useful racial feature that a Cardomor who doesn't specialize in creating undead creatures has left is a +2 Wisdom. Really, the only type of mid- to high-level Cardomor that isn't worse than a Human is a Wisdom-based necromancer of some sort. And that's stupid.

Adaption

would it be alright if I made an adaption of this race as a variant of mine? It reminds me of Brook from One Piece but the mechanics would never let it play that way --Stryker-Fyre 09:50, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Do not have the authority to grant you it, but the request needs to brought back to focus. --Franken Kesey (talk) 04:15, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Uh this is not an adoption request, rather I was asking if I could make a race with a similar concept, as I did not realize at the time that I could just go and make a similar race but without asking.--Stryker (talk) 10:56, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Worship

"Those that worship a true God are more likely to worship Him than anyone else." is basically a tautology. --Foxwarrior 06:51, August 9, 2010 (UTC)

I think "Him" refers back to "death" in the previous sentence, making it not a tautology and instead terribly unclear. --IGTN 07:25, August 9, 2010 (UTC)

And on another note, capitalizing "God" and "Him" is generally only appropriate in the context of monotheism (which is very rare in D&D campaigns), and in that case articles are omitted. Also, if it does indeed refer to "death itself", the gender of the pronouns is inconsistent. --DanielDraco 07:31, August 9, 2010 (UTC)

The Ultimate Cattle Race

250 gp per week is a lot of stuff for a level 1 commoner to be producing. Admittedly, that means total bed rest for 5 days a week, but you don't need to be constantly up and about in order to tell your skeletal grandparents to go plow the fields all day and all night. This race totally blows the Elan out of the water as a slave race: each slave can provide approximately four tireless workers, each stronger than a normal person; fingernail plucking is immensely profitable; producing additional Cardomor does not require mysterious and possibly expensive psionic rituals; and Cardomor psychology seems to be such that they'd usually accept their life confined to a bed in a cage.

In a society that frowns on Cardomor-farming, the Cardomor can live cushy lives without ever having to actually work. This is definitely going to make peasants of other races incredibly jealous: when you combine that with their already unsettling nature, the only way I can see a setting with notable numbers of free Cardomor in it that doesn't include excessive amounts of genocide is if the Cardomor are the ones in control. --Foxwarrior 03:36, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Community Opposed

The community opposes this article --Franken Kesey 17:36, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Not by current standards. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 17:51, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

I didn't know Community Opposed was a thing. What are the standards on that? Because this has a pretty damn low rating. --DanielDraco 20:44, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

It's the opposite of Community Favorite, and means that an article gets sandboxed instead of living in main nav. It's part of the deletion policies at present as the "if you write something that is complete and functional but most people generally think it's terrible we won't delete it but we don't want to show it either" policy (it will be written into the Rating Articles page when I redo that one after the vote finishes). Standards are 4+ ratings, <= 0.25 average. So lots and lots of hate. If we wanted to expand that I'd also want to expand the Community Favorite range (and I think I do want to do those things), but this isn't really the place to discuss it. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 20:49, 16 July 2012 (UTC)