D&D (2024) Size = Strength-Constitution?

[Mirrorrorrim]

Your comment isnt paying attention to what my posts stated.

To use "green eyes" as if a characteristic to determine a separate Elf subspecies, is absurd.

Humans are still humans in D&D.

When removing the concept of D&D "races" (and their origins from historical racist worldviews), and one instead thinks in terms of "species", it becomes clear, the Hin classify as the Human species.

We are not removing the concept of D&D species/races. We can change lore, update stat blocks to better reflect lore, and do better than old lore. We cannot erase old lore, only ignore it in favor of newly updated lore that better represents our changing, more inclusive, values.

You claim to have a problem with racism, then want to redefine it so that halflings are erased. I'm not down with erasing species/races/options like you are. You are literally trying to reduce/eliminate species in the entire multiverse because you don't like how they look in a rulebook. Take a long, hard look at what you're suggesting. Because I don't think your argument is as reasonable as you think it is.

 

[Yaarel]

There is nothing racist about various fantastical player options called either Races (game object, capital R) or Species (new term, game object, capital S).

If subspecies, can be understood by over 93% of player respondents to be 'not racist' what do you think the percentage of actual player species would be? 98%? 99%?

Are you now going to tell me that simply the existence of player options as distinct biological beings is racist?

Halflings are not Humans.

Biology is not Culture.

You are just making the same mistakes as you have in the last threads.

D&D history is a place where a "Lawful Good" Paladins can commit genocide, and "Chaotic Good" Elves can be vicious racist extremists who murder on sight.

The D&D comfort zone is a less credible source for helpful ethical advice.

 

[Scribe]

D&D history is a place where a "Lawful Good" Paladins can commit genocide, and "Chaotic Good" Elves can be vicious racist extremists.

The D&D comfort zone is a less credible source for helpful ethical advice.

Hi, welcome to 5e! I dont look to it for ethical advice, as its a game!

I certainly dont look to its first incarnations, or the views of one of its creators for ethical advice, because, well those are old, and/or individuals, and why would I consider them the source of ethical truth?

Seems like a poorly thought out position, kind of like 'the game makes kids worship Satan' is also a poorly thought out position.

 

[Yaarel]

Hi, welcome to 5e! I dont look to it for ethical advice, as its a game!

I certainly dont look to its first incarnations, or the views of one of its creators for ethical advice, because, well those are old, and/or individuals, and why would I consider them the source of ethical truth?

Seems like a poorly thought out position, kind of like 'the game makes kids worship Satan' is also a poorly thought out position.

Yet, there is a habit to perpetuate the earlier D&D lore including its the racist worldviews inherent in earlier editions.

There is anger when interfering with a racialized comfort zone.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

D&D history is a place where a "Lawful Good" Paladins can commit genocide, and "Chaotic Good" Elves can be vicious racist extremists.

The D&D comfort zone is a less credible source for helpful ethical advice.

Tell me, what is called when one calls for the erasure of an entire species? Let's say the halflings.

The modern books can be updated to more ethical standards. Whether those updates look like what Wizards has now, or what you are proposing, that does not ignore the fact that D&D didn't do a good job in the past. It's part of the history, yes. But we can set that history aside and the designers can write better lore. But that lore does not have to look completely alien and out of left field.

Thinking on it, I don't want the word "genetics" in the D&D game. At all. I'm down for "species" being redefined, but I draw the line at genetics-based eugenics design as part of the lore to justify changes to existing races (even if the gods originally created the different species).

 

[Scribe]

Yet, there is a habit to perpetuate the earlier D&D lore its the racist worldviews inherent in earlier editions.

Yes, the lore is sometimes an issue, easily corrected.

The core root concepts of fantastical beings, is not racist, despite ones efforts to convince the world that they are.

 

[Yaarel]

Tell me, what is called when one calls for the erasure of an entire species? Let's say the halflings.

Nice to meet you neighbor. I understand our kids are going to the same school.

 

[Yaarel]

Yes, the lore is sometimes an issue, easily corrected.

Not so easy to correct.

The D&D racism is structural, literally mechanical, more than accidental narratives.

 

[Scribe]

Not so easy to correct.

Very easy to correct, via errata and reprint, because the core concept of fantastical beings as distinct player options, is not racist at all.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

Nice to meet you neighbor. I understand our kids are going to the same school.

I don't get it.