D&D (2024) No Dwarf, Halfling, and Orc suborgins, lineages, and legacies

[tetrasodium]

If player behaviour is so easily affected by minute wording choices, then certainly it also affected by clear directive like this:

"Your DM might set the campaign on one of these
worlds or on one that he or she created. Because there
is so much diversity among the worlds of D&D, you
should check with your DM about any house rules that
will affect your play of the game. Ultimately, the Dungeon
Master is the authority on the campaign and its
setting, even if the setting is a published world."

Trouble is that you've moved away from the character creation & background chapters (ch 1&4*) relevant to the process of creating a character & hit upon page 6 in the introduction instead of the individual sections that are about actually going to be in contention.

* Maybe 2 as well depending on howyou define character creation.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It's not an online/offline thing. I might have run or played in one or two short lived online things, but I've been doing in person meatspace games since I started many years ago. The biggest changes came with the shift in tone that 5e brought along & exacerbated with regularly saying the words "tell your story". On top of the fact that both of those italicized words are a rather toxic mindset to approach a collaborative group activity there is the glaring omission of working with the other players & critical elements like making your character fit into the GM's world. As often as I've heard Crawford & such say tell your story I can't recall ever hearing them talk about respecting the GM's world even though that's like step zero in the process of discovering and evolving any kind of story with a PC.

I do think the "personal expression through your OC" angle has been over-emphasized in gaming as of late, at least to my tastes. Especially as the hobby is presented in actual plays. I just see the setting and the party on the as whole as more important than any one PC.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I mean, if your argument is that 5e’s presentation causes this kind of toxicity, I just don’t agree.

The community had been moving towards more character-centric focus for decades; 5e captured that focus with its trad/neotrad orientation, but wasn’t the cause.

Whatever the biggest fish supports is going to shift the entire pond.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I find the honey-not-vinegar method works. I try to keep my options loose but finite and more based on vibes than restrictions. Nothing seems to murder a concept in the crib faster than cutting down player options. Some pruning seems fine, but deeper cuts like classes or PHB options tend to foment insurrection.

Which is why I use D&D to play D&D rather than the infamous "toolbox of options" method. Because the moment I do something like ban full casters or make the game human only, the players lose interest. They came to play D&D, not GoT using the PHB. Is that fair? Probably not. But I'm here to make sure everyone is having fun, so I play the hits.

I include myself in the set of "everyone".

 

[Epic Meepo]

The grammar alone is that evidence.

In a sentence using passive voice, the subject is acted upon; he or she receives the action expressed by the verb. The agent performing the action may appear in a "by the..." phrase or may be omitted. The dog is acting upon the sentence subject (the boy), meaning it uses the passive voice. - source

In the active voice, the subject of a sentence acts, like "Neil Armstrong walked on the moon." The active voice is direct, clear, and easy to read. With the passive voice, the subject is acted upon, like "The moon was walked on by Neil Armstrong". -Source

Now use that fancy dictionary of yours to look up the word "causation," because nothing you've said about active and passive voice provides any evidence of causation. That's what's missing from your argument.

As I've already said in slightly different words, I accept everything you've said about active and passive voice as true. Unfortunately, none of those true statements actually support your conclusion that grammar is to blame for players not taking an interest in your game world.

 

[tetrasodium]

Now use that fancy dictionary of yours to look up the word "causation," because nothing you've said about active and passive voice provides any evidence of causation. That's what's missing from your argument.

As I've already said in slightly different words, I accept everything you've said about active and passive voice as true. Unfortunately, none of those true statements actually support your conclusion that grammar is to blame for players not taking an interest in your game world.

Why? It's the literal purpose of using passive and active voice and you've made no attempt to actively support your own position other than calling for someone to convince the unwilling skeptic how language works. When wotc shifted background & backstory from a thing that remains in the background to a role that rests more adjacent or even in front of everything else it was no longer reasonable to keep treating it as a vestigial choice like 5e does.

 

[Remathilis]

I include myself in the set of "everyone".

As do I. And I'm the DM. But I recognize that I'm not here solely for my self pleasure. (There are easier ways to do that in the age of the Internet). My players fun is important too. It's a part of the give and take.

 

[Remathilis]

I do think the "personal expression through your OC" angle has been over-emphasized in gaming as of late, at least to my tastes. Especially as the hobby is presented in actual plays. I just see the setting and the party on the as whole as more important than any one PC.

The thing that moved me from CRPGs to TTRPGs is that personal expression. I make a character that I want to explore. I absolutely detest when MMO players call their characters "toons" and treat them as personality less pawns to move around the game. I went to D&D to escape that.

 

[Micah Sweet]

As do I. And I'm the DM. But I recognize that I'm not here solely for my self pleasure. (There are easier ways to do that in the age of the Internet). My players fun is important too. It's a part of the give and take.

Sure, and I will compromise. But I don't play just for my players, and I won't run something I don't enjoy (though it doesn't have to be my favorite).

 

[Micah Sweet]

The thing that moved me from CRPGs to TTRPGs is that personal expression. I make a character that I want to explore. I absolutely detest when MMO players call their characters "toons" and treat them as personality less pawns to move around the game. I went to D&D to escape that.

I feel there's a middle ground, and that's where I'm at.