D&D 5E Player's Handbook Races

[Herobizkit]

The list is exactly as expected.

I will express disappointment [though hardly surprise] that Drow are going to be in there. It could have been much much worse.

Aw, come on, [MENTION=92511]steeldragons[/MENTION]... you can't have the Forgotten Realms as the newly assumed standard D&D campaign world and NOT have DROW... how will children play angsty Drow scimitar dual-wielding Rangers?

I wish I were joking.

 

[Sadras]

I think, and correct me if I'm wrong @Sword of Spirit, you imply using Angels as setting backdrop or even as something mysterious where perhaps the discovery or learning thereof is part of the "fun to be had"
I do not believe @pemerton is denying any of that - he just takes it a step further by bringing the PCs into conflict with Angels as he believes it heightens their interest.

For instance, Lancelot was an interesting character and there was 'fun-to be had' with the discovery of his backstory, but he became much more interesting after he betrayed Arthur (the conflict).

So essentially where you would introduce things purely for the sense of discovery and exploration, Pemerton's style of play essentially would introduce, have discovery/exploration and lead to conflict. I'm not sure if in Pemerton's style he ever introduces characters that are not integral to conflict (whether as allies or otherwise) and just act as setting backdrop, but I could be wrong on that.

 

[Yaarel]

I am disappointed the Eldarin didn't return in some form.

Me too.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Aw, come on, [MENTION=92511]steeldragons[/MENTION]... you can't have the Forgotten Realms as the newly assumed standard D&D campaign world and NOT have DROW... how will children play angsty Drow scimitar dual-wielding Rangers?

I wish I were joking.

I love this bizarre idea that "children" play "angsty" characters. That is something so directly opposite to my actual experience of childhood, playing with kids, and just y'know, RPGs in general that I find it totally implausible. Every "angsty" character I've ever seen has been played by someone 16+.

Having an OTT ridiculous background doesn't make for an actual angst-y character. I've seen plenty of "Last of my Kind" or "Rebel against my people"-type backgrounds when we were younger, but were any of those characters, in actual play:

1) Emo.

2) Angst-y.

3) Depressive.

4) Tortured.

Or whatever? Um. No. Not ever. The issue was never, ever, in my experience, that they were those things. They had backgrounds which would naturally lead to that, but kids do not, in my experience, play characters that way. That's a late-teen or young-adult thing. If anything the problem is more that younger players are likely to play every PC as brave, clever, happy and generally go-getting, IME.

Also, people think only kids love Drizzt? I think they may be confused about the passage of time. The Icewind Dale trilogy was 1988 to 1990, dude. Homeland was 1990. If you were "a kid" reading them, say, 10, you'd be 34 now. Practically decrepit!

I'm not a huge fan of Drow, but how about we don't act like it's the early '90s and accept that, two decades later, a lot of people like Drow? People who are not children on any level. In fact, insisting that they are strikes me as rather ironically petulant and juvenile in itself.

Frankly, even back in the the '90s, players who loved Drow were way less of an issue for me than Elf-Worshippers, who felt that Elves were in all regards, superior beings to humans, who would literally play nothing else (no matter what game you were running!), and who embodied every hilarious stereotype from the Complete Book of Elves (which was their bloody Bible!).

 

[Ruin Explorer]

A group of angels decides that, as there are more good souls than evil in the world at this moment, the best way to ensure Heaven's victory over Hell is the Apocalypse. No more mortals to tempt, and more souls added to the armies above than below.

Really fun suggestions, but this particularly begs a fascinating-to-me question. Can a soul change it's alignment? If not, why not? I mean, I think being murdered by a being supposedly dedicated to "Good" would lead one to question some life-choices, and souls in D&D generally seem able to think, make decisions, understand the passage of time, remember things that happened to them, and so on.

(If they can't it leads to even more "alignments as football teams" shenanigans, of course)

 

[I'm A Banana]

Yeah, I think it is MORE challenging to bring good PC's into conflict with good creatures, but it's not so dramatically more challenging as to make agents of good in a monster manual prohibitive.

For instance, arguably, you can look at most of human history for inspiration -- no dictator or despot ever thought they were doing anything more than making the world a better place for their iron-fisty control. No revolutionary in a bloody civil war ever assumed they were doing anything other than improving the lives people lead in the long run. Wars are fought and people die here in the real world because people disagree about what is the most good. Peace and inaction can be just as troublesome in their own ways.

But there's lots of ways out there.

 

[Herobizkit]

I love this bizarre idea that "children" play "angsty" characters. That is something so directly opposite to my actual experience of childhood, playing with kids, and just y'know, RPGs in general that I find it totally implausible. Every "angsty" character I've ever seen has been played by someone 16+.

Or whatever? Um. No. Not ever. The issue was never, ever, in my experience, that they were those things. They had backgrounds which would naturally lead to that, but kids do not, in my experience, play characters that way. That's a late-teen or young-adult thing.

Late teen, young-adult thing. Exactly. Kids. But more specifcially, the "next gen" of players who may be joining 5e for the first time because they loved Neverwinter Nights 2. Or some such.

Also, people think only kids love Drizzt? I think they may be confused about the passage of time. The Icewind Dale trilogy was 1988 to 1990, dude. Homeland was 1990. If you were "a kid" reading them, say, 10, you'd be 34 now. Practically decrepit!

38, actually. Anyone younger than half my age is a kid to me, by comparison. You must not have been around for the dark-is-cool... oh wait, yes you were... or rather, are. Just look at all of the gritty reboots and how "darker, edgier" stories have come to the fore. A PC Drow is basically the New Batman. *lol*

I'm not a huge fan of Drow, but how about we don't act like it's the early '90s and accept that, two decades later, a lot of people like Drow? People who are not children on any level. In fact, insisting that they are strikes me as rather ironically petulant and juvenile in itself.

Exactly how it was meant to be. If you were THERE to absorb all the Driz'zt love and hate in its heydey, you must have been able to see the sarcasm in my other post. :3

Frankly, even back in the the '90s, players who loved Drow were way less of an issue for me than Elf-Worshippers, who felt that Elves were in all regards, superior beings to humans, who would literally play nothing else (no matter what game you were running!), and who embodied every hilarious stereotype from the Complete Book of Elves (which was their bloody Bible!).

We all did it. Don't pretend you didn't.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Late teen, young-adult thing. Exactly. Kids. But more specifcially, the "next gen" of players who may be joining 5e for the first time because they loved Neverwinter Nights 2. Or some such.

I don't think anyone particularly loved NWN2 so that seems a little implausible.

You didn't say "kids", though, you said "children", which is much more specific, and extremely demeaning if applied to adults, like, say, late-teens and young twenties. Or to imply that anyone who likes such a thing is such.

38, actually. Anyone younger than half my age is a kid to me, by comparison. You must not have been around for the dark-is-cool... oh wait, yes you were... or rather, are. Just look at all of the gritty reboots and how "darker, edgier" stories have come to the fore. A PC Drow is basically the New Batman. *lol*

Dude.

You really don't get it. This is not a "kid" or "child" thing. You are describing a late '90s and early '00s thing. How old, EXACTLY do you think the writers of "the New Batman" are? How old do you think most of it's audience is? What about our new, neck-snapping Superman? How old are the people involved in that, directors, writers, fans? Yeah, they're 30 and 40 somethings, or even older, for the most part. How old do you think Frank Miller is, exactly? He may be utterly obsessed with juvenalia, but he's 57...

What about the New BSG, the poster-child for "dark-is-cool" and "dark reboots"? You think that was huge largely with teens and young twenties? Nuh-uh. It was huge with the entire 18-49 market. And it's from a decade ago! I could go on and on - virtually all mainstream TV has an element of "dark is cool", with the possible exception of some of the cheesier detective shows, but they go with "dark is salacious and thrilling" instead, which isn't hugely different. I feel like you're completely suck in the past here, in a really spectacular way.

So let's not pretend dark-is-cool is either:

1) New.

or

2) Popular solely or even mainly with people half your age or less (let alone actual children).

Plenty of people of all ages like such stuff, and plenty dislike such stuff. We should not be calling anyone "kids" or "children" because they do.

Exactly how it was meant to be. If you were THERE to absorb all the Driz'zt love and hate in its heydey, you must have been able to see the sarcasm in my other post. :3

Sarcasm? Wrong word. Irony, I think, is what you're trying to say, but really, to me it read nasty, not intentionally ironic, so you may have messed that up.

We all did it. Don't pretend you didn't.

No, no "we all" did not. A small, devoted, cult-like minority did that, and jesus, they were a problem, in my experience, because they were ten times more obsessed than the fan-iest Drizzt fan (who could easily be diverted to making "A Highlander" or "A Jedi" or whatever - anything as long as it was cool and had a sword). I remember my first reaction to this Elf-obsession (my early D&D PCs largely being human) was "What is wrong with you guys? This is creepy." - especially because there was a lot of quasi-racial-superiority stuff with elves.

 

[TwoSix]

No, no "we all" did not. A small, devoted, cult-like minority did that, and jesus, they were a problem, in my experience, because they were ten times more obsessed than the fan-iest Drizzt fan

Yea, I've met a few elf-obsessives in my time. The one time I played in a game where one was DMing, I got around it by playing an aasimar cleric/MU, which is about the only way to out-sanctify and out-magic an elf.

 

[Lwaxy]

Embrace new stories, new ideas, take what you like from the past, add it to your own stories.

Exactly. Seriously, they could put in 300 races I don't like, wouldn't change if I buy or not.

I'm more sad when stuff is missing because it's more work to house rule them in than out because you will need to adapt stats.