D&D 5E DMG Excerpt: Creating a New Race

[Vael]

This was struggled over in the Dragonlance and Ravenloft communities, where there needed to be an elven wizard race (the Silvanesti and the Sithican). The elf mechanically did not fit (until Essentials) but the eladrin were not an adequate substitute as the ability to teleport made no sense.

Why is the lack of a bump to Intelligence such a barrier to Elf wizards? Elven Accuracy could make a credible Wizard, plus it's not like Wizards didn't need Dex or Wisdom.

This is why I personally hate subraces, and was glad to see 4e kill them. Subraces turn more into here's your wizard-elf, fighter-elf, druid-elf, and so on. Eberron introduced the Valenar, warrior Elves that were practically Klingons, and they didn't make a brand new elf subrace, despite the penalty to Constitution was a weakness for warrior types.

I understand that this is a legacy issue, subraces populate a lot of DnD settings. But to be honest, I'd sooner just let Elves be just Elves.

 

[Minigiant]

Why is the lack of a bump to Intelligence such a barrier to Elf wizards? Elven Accuracy could make a credible Wizard, plus it's not like Wizards didn't need Dex or Wisdom.

This is why I personally hate subraces, and was glad to see 4e kill them. Subraces turn more into here's your wizard-elf, fighter-elf, druid-elf, and so on. Eberron introduced the Valenar, warrior Elves that were practically Klingons, and they didn't make a brand new elf subrace, despite the penalty to Constitution was a weakness for warrior types.

I understand that this is a legacy issue, subraces populate a lot of DnD settings. But to be honest, I'd sooner just let Elves be just Elves.

Part of it came from D&D's constantly making elves the best at 90% of everything naturally. Humans had potential but the super elf starts great.. And if elves were not the best they were at least great at it and has the highest number of elite members of the class or profession.

But the stats didn't match so a dozen subraces of elf later.. Then the elf problem is born.

 

[pemerton]

the abilities of the race don't fit.

Just houserule in INT in place of WIS!

Or, as [MENTION=57043]Vael[/MENTION] has suggested, don't worry about it. The dwarf PC in my 4e game is a fighter, and hasn't suffered in 28 levels despite starting with a 16 STR.

 

[Jester David]

Just houserule in INT in place of WIS!

Or, as [MENTION=57043]Vael[/MENTION] has suggested, don't worry about it. The dwarf PC in my 4e game is a fighter, and hasn't suffered in 28 levels despite starting with a 16 STR.

*sigh*

1) House ruling as a way of fixing is a clear example of the Oberoni Fallacy (or Rule-0 Fallacy). Just because I can fix elves (or eladrin) does not make elves or eladrin less broken/ ill-suited/ unoptimal.

2) If stats are that unimportant, why make an entirely new race for wizard elves? Your argument suggests that eladrin are even more unnecessary as the +2 to Int is irrelevant, and thus the massive retcon to the Forgotten Realms and D&D even more of a mistake.

3) That quote is pulled from a sentence discussing eladrin, with the context that the abilities of the eladrin (i.e. teleport) do not fit.
You're deliberately taking my quote completely out of context to try and make a point. Which you had to know since you ended down my entire post to that one sentence.
We're done here. Good day.

 

[Dire Bare]

Yes, that's essentially what I was asking. And getting confirmed. I have the 4E MMs I just couldn't be bothered to go dig them out of storage. So in essence the eladrin in the 4E is the 2E/3E eladrin is just a playable version of the monsters from those editions, with the added link to elves as fey creatures.

No. The 4E eladrin are a reimagining of both the classic "high elf/grey elf" and the "classic" eladrin from 2E and 3E.

While they are similar in ways to what came before, they are not the same concept. Otherwise, what would we be arguing about? (not that we need much around here)

 

[pemerton]

That quote is pulled from a sentence discussing eladrin, with the context that the abilities of the eladrin (i.e. teleport) do not fit.

You're deliberately taking my quote completely out of context to try and make a point.

It's not remotely out of context. My point is that if the abilities of the race don't fit, then don't use it! This is a time-honoured GMing technique that I myself discovered around 25 years ago.

If stats are that unimportant, why make an entirely new race for wizard elves? Your argument suggests that eladrin are even more unnecessary as the +2 to Int is irrelevant, and thus the massive retcon to the Forgotten Realms and D&D even more of a mistake.

I imagine the reason for eladrin in the PHB is primarily because the designers thought they would be fun to play. It seems that they must have been right, because after a big playtest and a lot of surveying plus collection of data from DDI they are publishing them again in the 5e DMG.

As to whethr or not the retcon of FR was a mistake, I don't have a view on that. My point is that anyone who didn't like it could keep using the old canon they did like. And that, if they wanted to keep using elves with a bonus to INT as part of that, the houserule required to do so is utterly tritival.

House ruling as a way of fixing is a clear example of the Oberoni Fallacy (or Rule-0 Fallacy). Just because I can fix elves (or eladrin) does not make elves or eladrin less broken/ ill-suited/ unoptimal.

Seriously?

I'm just trying to think myself into this situation: I want to play 4e (for whatever reason). And I don't like eladrin as 4e presents them (for whatever reason). And I want to replicate the old wood elf/high elf split (for whatever reason). But it's some sort of wrongdoing on the part of WotC that I have to come up with the idea of giving a bonus to INT instead of WIS?

Seriously? I mean, the only person who is going to have the issue you describe is someone who is already familiar with elves that get a bonus to INT! Yet you're saying it's unreasonable, or a fallacy, to suggest to them that they keep doing what they've been doing up untl now?

In my view, the person who wants to play canon but doesn't like the latest canon yet won't use trivial houserules to stick to the canon s/he likes because s/he insists on canonising the current ruleset has noone to blame but him-/herself.

 

[Evenglare]

*sigh*

1) House ruling as a way of fixing is a clear example of the Oberoni Fallacy (or Rule-0 Fallacy). Just because I can fix elves (or eladrin) does not make elves or eladrin less broken/ ill-suited/ unoptimal.
.

By your logic the whole point of discussion is completely and utterly pointless. If you can't try to fix the elves because it doesn't make the thing you fixed less broken, and if you have already made up your mind that it's broken. You are simply wasting precious life here because you can't go back and un publish it, and trying to fix it doesn't matter. It's simply completely screwed and you might as well move onto something else instead of banging your head against the wall with something that you can't (or refuse to) change.

 

[Jester David]

By your logic the whole point of discussion is completely and utterly pointless. If you can't try to fix the elves because it doesn't make the thing you fixed less broken, and if you have already made up your mind that it's broken. You are simply wasting precious life here because you can't go back and un publish it, and trying to fix it doesn't matter. It's simply completely screwed and you might as well move onto something else instead of banging your head against the wall with something that you can't (or refuse to) change.

Not... really.

I wasn't saying something was broken per se. I was saying that WotC decided to add a brand new race to the game because wood elves mechanically made poor wizards. I said this was problematic for numerous reasons I really don't want to get back into discussing. The person I was debating/arguing with countered by stating that it's not a problem because you can just remove eladrin and house rule elves.

Now, this is true, and I'm comfortable with house ruling, but it's not a productive counter to a D&D debate because that comment can be made about almost anything. There's very few problems that cannot be hand waved away with a statement that you can just house rule things. Which makes that statement, well, to quote you "completely and utterly pointless." It's a vestigial statement that goes off in its own direction but circles back leaving the debate in the exact same position it was before the house ruling statement was made.

 

[Hussar]

True Jester, but, there are house rules and there are house rules. Saying, "If you want your elves to be like older versions, just shift the +2 from wisdom to int" isn't a huge house rule. It's not like we're going to completely revamp anything. It's a pretty minor change. And one thing 4e didn't do was hand hold DM's. You are expressly expected to do this in 4e. It wasn't 3e where you needed a rule for everything. Nor is it like 5e where the expectations that the DM will change elements is even stronger than it was in 4e.

3e is something of the outlier here. Earlier editions and later editions assumed that you were going to change things to suit your taste.

 

[pemerton]

I'm comfortable with house ruling, but it's not a productive counter to a D&D debate because that comment can be made about almost anything. There's very few problems that cannot be hand waved away with a statement that you can just house rule things.

True Jester, but, there are house rules and there are house rules.

I agree with Hussar.

If someone says that the problem with 4e is that they can't use their old Tome of Magic, that's not easy to houserule. Writing new, balanced powes for 4e is not completely trivial.

But not using a published race (something D&D groups have been doing for time immemorial) and shifting a stat bonus from WIS to INT? Trivial.

And als much easier than all those people who like eladrin house-ruling them into their games if WotC had declined to publish them for fear of upsetting those who don't like them.