D&D General Two underlying truths: D&D heritage and inclusivity

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

In 2020, the default lore of a game should be inclusive and not smack of language that is insanely similar to how some people referred to other people they were oppressing/enslaving/categorizing as not people. That's just basic human decency.

If you and your group happen to like non-inclusive stuff and that kind of language and depiction, YOU add them in. It's beyond bizarre that the base game, meant to be consumed by the general public, should HAVE to have non-inclusive elements in it. In 2020. Jeez....

Exactly this.

 

[Hussar]

In these discussions I don't recall reading much explanation of why, as well as avoiding descriptions tainted by racism and colonialism, it's better to make orcs more like morally diverse people rather than more absolutely monsters. One reason, I see, is that there's long been a cultural trend towards psychological realism in fantasy, 'monsters are people too' and liking to play monsters as PCs. But the Wizards statement doesn't explain why more moral and cultural complexity is the solution.

Mostly because orcs and especially half orcs are player character races. If orcs become absolute monsters, that places half orcs in a REALLY uncomfortable position. You're right, they could go that way and makes orcs full on monsters. But, since players seem to want to play orcs, it seems probably better to go the other way. Funnily enough, in my group, I've seen more orcs played than half orcs.

If that's the case, I want my playable Vampire race RIGHT NOW in the PHB!

4e tried to do that but people piddled all over 4e. Now, a vampire race cannot be included in 5e because it has 4e cooties.

 

[Lanefan]

But orcs don't have this in negative in 2 of the few 5e settings, so why shouldn't stupid monster orcs be a variant, and people orcs be the main type?

So what? Every other race (except kobolds) gets at least a +2 to an ability score and a +1 to another ability score with no negatives.

And to me that's a bigger design problem. If the +1 was instead -1 it'd be a little better; ideally Humans would be +0 across the board and each other playable creature types adds up to +0 net after bonuses and penalties (so e.g. if there's a +2 it's cancelled off with a -2 or two -1s).

That way balance is maintained, power creep is denied, and creature types are mechanically differentiated right from the get-go.

 

[Lanefan]

4e tried to do that but people piddled all over 4e. Now, a vampire race cannot be included in 5e because it has 4e cooties.

Playable vampires can't be included mostly because at low level intra-character balance would go completely out the window, unless everyone plays a vampire.

That, and those who don't like PvP would quickly be left crying in the corner while the party sorted out whether their goal was to destroy undead or run with them...

 

[Mecheon]

Playable vampires can't be included mostly because at low level intra-character balance would go completely out the window, unless everyone plays a vampire.

That, and those who don't like PvP would quickly be left crying in the corner while the party sorted out whether their goal was to destroy undead or run with them...

That's why you go with the player race variant, like what Shifters are to werewolves

Mind the Plane Shift vampire's decent enough to play

 

[Hussar]

And to me that's a bigger design problem. If the +1 was instead -1 it'd be a little better; ideally Humans would be +0 across the board and each other playable creature types adds up to +0 net after bonuses and penalties (so e.g. if there's a +2 it's cancelled off with a -2 or two -1s).

That way balance is maintained, power creep is denied, and creature types are mechanically differentiated right from the get-go.

But, not all stats are equal. And, all that leads to is people cookie cutting their characters. Got a +2 Str -2 Int? Well, fighter here I come. I much prefer the "just plusses" approach which means that you aren't pigeonholing races into specific classes. Add to that the fact that stats are a lot less important in 5e than in any other edition of D&D, it's not a big deal. A character with a 16 for the highest stat is perfectly viable in any class. Long gone are the days where every fighter had to have an 18 strength or they just weren't worth playing.

 

[Aldarc]

Of course, I mentioned it before, but another option is simply for races to not give stat bonuses, but, rather, have those come from classes. Choosing to play a Wizard as your primary class, for example, may give you a bonus to Intelligence because your studies expanded your mind. If you want more varied stats for picking a class, then have it so the PCs are asked questions about their character.

"I solve my problems with..."

• Logic, reason, and facts: +1 Intelligence
• Patience, observation, and careful study: +1 Wisdom

 

[Remathilis]

4e tried to do that but people piddled all over 4e. Now, a vampire race cannot be included in 5e because it has 4e cooties.

Ah yes, the one thing 4e got right. [emoji39] Still, if dragonborn can make the jump, I'm sure one of the vampire options will.

[Sblock] especially with one of the NPCs you get in Baldur's Gate 3 being a vampire spawn [/sblock]

 

[Micah Sweet]

But, not all stats are equal. And, all that leads to is people cookie cutting their characters. Got a +2 Str -2 Int? Well, fighter here I come. I much prefer the "just plusses" approach which means that you aren't pigeonholing races into specific classes. Add to that the fact that stats are a lot less important in 5e than in any other edition of D&D, it's not a big deal. A character with a 16 for the highest stat is perfectly viable in any class. Long gone are the days where every fighter had to have an 18 strength or they just weren't worth playing.

Stat bonuses affect virtually every roll you make in the game, and bounded accuracy means every point up or down means more, not less. You don't need to max out your stats, but higher ones really matter mechanically.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

And to me that's a bigger design problem. If the +1 was instead -1 it'd be a little better; ideally Humans would be +0 across the board and each other playable creature types adds up to +0 net after bonuses and penalties (so e.g. if there's a +2 it's cancelled off with a -2 or two -1s).

That way balance is maintained, power creep is denied, and creature types are mechanically differentiated right from the get-go.

Okay, but this literally has nothing to do with anything in this thread. The fact of the matter is, in Volo's you're punished for playing Orcs. You're punished for playing Kobolds and Drow and Duergar and so on.