D&D (2024) How did I miss this about the Half races/ancestries

[Micah Sweet]

What is WotC's job as a game designer if not to design how the game is to be played? Give a quick "alternative rule" sidebar if they wish, but "just describe your character however you want" isn't game design when they had rules that interacted with the game mechanically for decades previous.

It's not really game design at all to my mind.

 

[Scars Unseen]

It's not really game design at all to my mind.

I mean, one could argue that taking away options is technically game design. It's how OSR games are designed, at least in part. The difference is that those games have a firm, gameplay centric goal in taking those steps. So many of WotC's decisions feel more like they're coming from a desire to design less than to design a game that benefits from the decisions they make.

 

[Kinematics]

Saying the word "half" is an insult is like saying the word "gamer" is an insult. Sure, if someone comes up and calls you a "gamer", dripping with condescension and disdain, that's most definitely an insult, but that doesn't make the term itself an insult, nor does it require that every person in the world using that term to be insulting everyone they talk to.

 

[Faolyn]

Removing racial ASI removed incentive to only play races where your bonuses align with your class. It made it ok to play a flavourful but mechanically inferior combo (like a shadar-kai shadow sorcerer). That is loads different than picking which two species are going to give you the best advantages and saying "those two had a baby".

There's not as big a difference as you're saying. Picking a race/ASI package just to minmax isn't much different than picking a race/race combo just to minmax. If anything, the latter is more work.

As to the second, you walk a fine line between powerful and flavorful. What to you speaks to an aarakroca: flight, talons, or gust or wind? How about a changeling: shape changing or social proficiencies? You could certainly say a changeling/aarakroca gets talons, gust of wind and two skill proficiencies, but does that say "part birdman, part shapeshifter" to you?

Let's go to Level Up for a moment.

In Level Up, to play a person of mixed heritage, you pick one heritage's traits and a second heritage's gift--each heritage has 2-4 gifts to choose from. So a hypothetical aarakocra/changeling PC would pick the aarakocra traits and one the changeling's gift. Now, I created a changeling-esuqe heritage, the Mimickers, for my Handbook of Heritages (not an affiliate link; I forgot how to do that) which had a single-form shapechanging as a heritage trait (you can switch between your base "unfinished changeling" look and that of one specific humanoid; you also get Mimicry and at 3rd level, alter self). One of the gifts granted doppelganger-like abilities (including detect thoughts and being able to mimic any other humanoid you can observe).[1] There was a birdfolk heritage in issue #5 of Gate Pass Gazette, the simirengo. The heritage traits included gliding, and the gifts included your choice of talons and darkvision or full-fledged flight.

So, in Level Up, if you wanted to play a "changeling/aarakocra" using the Mimickers and Simirengo as your parent's heritages, then your choice would be: a PC who can shift between an "unfinished" bird-thing and a single humanoid form plus full flight, or a bird-folk that can only glide but can assume any number of humanoid forms, or, perhaps, the ability to assume a "were-raptor"-like shape.

So, with how Level Up works, both of those say "part birdman, part shapeshifter" quite well.

And that is one good way that D&D could do half-species. They won't, because it would involve rewriting all of their races to include something like the heritage/gift divide. But they could. It's not overpowered. You can have full flight or you can have full shapechanging, but you can't have both. Can you minmax this? Probably. But it would take a lot of careful reading of all the many, many options for a combination that probably is of fairly limited use. Because min/maxing is usually good for one specific purpose and mediocre at best for everything else. If you really want to cripple your character for one bonus, go ahead.

===

[1] The other gifts included shifter-style animalistic-appearance (and at 5th-level, a 1/day wildshape) or the ability to turn into immobile plants and extrude mobile vines. Because I wanted to get shifters in their as well and plants need more love.

 

[Hussar]

If someone wants to play a fighter, or a wizard, WotC definitely tells you the right way to play, at least in the way you're talking about. Of course, I'm sure that's completely different.

Missing the point.

Npcs aren’t automatically hostile to you because you are a fighter. Some should be if you play a half elf or a half orc. It’s right there in the text.

You aren’t a misfit in your society if you play a fighter. But you are if you’re a half elf.

See the difference?

 

[Hussar]

Saying the word "half" is an insult is like saying the word "gamer" is an insult. Sure, if someone comes up and calls you a "gamer", dripping with condescension and disdain, that's most definitely an insult, but that doesn't make the term itself an insult, nor does it require that every person in the world using that term to be insulting everyone they talk to.

Again missing the point.

You’re right. Half by itself isn’t really an issue. Half tied to being a misfit, subject to fetishization and bigotry right there in the description IS.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Missing the point.

Npcs aren’t automatically hostile to you because you are a fighter. Some should be if you play a half elf or a half orc. It’s right there in the text.

You aren’t a misfit in your society if you play a fighter. But you are if you’re a half elf.

See the difference?

Whether or not you're a misfit due to your heritage should be a setting decision, but I see zero problem with it being noted as a possibility for certain heritages (or all heritages, why not) in the core book.

Heck, even the tiefling druid in the new movie mentioned experiencing prejudice from their human parents. Pretending this sort of thing doesn't exist doesn't help anyone.

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

"Half"-anything just isn't going to fly with the sensitivity readers. I have a friend who is getting her autobiographical memoirs published and her editors are having her change every instance with the word "half" because it is considered a slur even though she is referring to herself in those terms and a big part of the book is about her growing up as a combination of Jewish and African ancestry. They also had her remove words that were actual slurs that she included as being directed at her growing up because they might be considered triggering and get a content warning which might keep it out of certain libraries. Publishers are very careful with this stuff these days.

Anyway, I am sure after the Hadozee debacle WOTC going to include anything that the sensitivity readers find problematic even if the community as a whole doesn't. The word "Half" isn't going to cut it. Though I hope they do include some sort of more robust customization options, perhaps in books outside the core set, if they don't want to devote room to the topic in the new Players Handbook.

 

[Bedrockgames]

"Half"-anything just isn't going to fly with the sensitivity readers. I have a friend who is getting her autobiographical memoirs published and her editors are having her change every instance with the word "half" because it is considered a slur even though she is referring to herself in those terms and a big part of the book is about her growing up as a combination of Jewish and African ancestry. They also had her remove words that were actual slurs that she included as being directed at her growing up because they might be considered triggering and get a content warning which might keep it out of certain libraries. Publishers are very careful with this stuff these days.

But this is exactly the kind of problem people were pointing to earlier. I think it is a little outside topic, but relevant. These sorts of very narrow approaches, that don't consider the full context, the nuances, and the complexities (and lead with the most bad faith interpretation) end up doing things like muffling your friend's ability to speak openly and honestly about her experience, her heritage, etc. And it doesn't seem like these changes are done in the interest of improving books, but rather just in the interest of hedging the publisher's bets.

 

[Hussar]

, but I see zero problem with it being noted as a possibility for certain heritages (or all heritages, why not) in the core book.

Now you’re getting the point. Why is being a misfit or experiencing bigotry only called out for the half races?

Why specifically those races?