D&D (2024) (+) New Edition Changes for Inclusivity (discuss possibilities)

[Aldarc]

I see no reason why that metaphor doesn't fit. There is a very clear line that divides the two categories: "things what end up in the PHB" and "things that don't end up in the PHB."

I see no reason to ask a redundant question about what to include in the book.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

I see no reason to ask a redundant question about what to include in the book.

OK.

In your opinion, what items should go into the category, "thing that end up in the PHB?", so that the PHB would satisfy standards of inclusivity (defined however you define those standards)?

 

[Aldarc]

OK.

In your opinion, what items should go into the category, "thing that end up in the PHB?", so that the PHB would satisfy standards of inclusivity (defined however you define those standards)?

If I knew all that, then the 6e PHB would already be written and published.

 

[Maxperson]

I suspect that a beach without a line drawn in the sand would look like a beach without a line drawn in the sand. And when asked what organizing a 6e PHB without a line drawn in the sand would look like, I likewise say that I suspect that it would look a Nine Hells of lot like organizing a 6e PHB.

At about 8 billion grains of sand per square meter of beach, that's a lot of PHB pages. @WayOfTheFourElements is right. Page count will by necessity exclude people, since you cannot possibly include anywhere remotely close to everything they would want. If you add in Orcs and Shaman, what race and class are you going to cut out(line drawn in the sand) to make room for them?

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

If I knew all that, then the 6e PHB would already be written and published.

According to your standards. Certainly you have some suggestions so that we can all approach a satisfactory solution.

 

[Remathilis]

And as I have been saying, you can do all of that without asking silly questions like “where do you draw the line?”

It be really cool of you to answer his question rather than beg it.

6e PHB: what goes in it.

Species: human, elf, drow, dwarf, halfling, orc, gnome, dragonborn, planetouched, goblin. Each race is built out of component parts using point buy so you can make your own.

Classes: warrior (builds for fighter, ranger, paladin/champion, barbarian/berserker and marshal/warlord), mage (builds for wizard, bard, warlock/pactbound, sorcerer), cleric (druid/shape changer, most domains), and rogue (thief, scout, assassin, monk/martial artist, and swashbuckler) classes are broad and allow you to buy class abilities to customize.

Alignment is gone.

Replace Intelligence and Wisdom with Knowledge and Will. Other scores maybe need review as well..

That's a start. You?

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

It be really cool of you to answer his question rather than beg it.

6e PHB: what goes in it.

Species: human, elf, drow, dwarf, halfling, orc, gnome, dragonborn, planetouched, goblin. Each race is built out of component parts using point buy so you can make your own.

Classes: warrior (builds for fighter, ranger, paladin/champion, barbarian/berserker and marshal/warlord), mage (builds for wizard, bard, warlock/pactbound, sorcerer), cleric (druid/shape changer, most domains), and rogue (thief, scout, assassin, monk/martial artist, and swashbuckler) classes are broad and allow you to buy class abilities to customize.

Alignment is gone.

Replace Intelligence and Wisdom with Knowledge and Will. Other scores maybe need review as well..

That's a start. You?

Thanks for engaging with the question. You rock!

 

[MGibster]

I really don’t think it’s fair to argue against inclusivity on the basis of literally not being able to include everything in a book. And to be fair, nobody has made an argument that you must throw everything and the kitchen sink into the PHB.

 

[FrogReaver]

If I knew all that, then the 6e PHB would already be written and published.

What’s so hard about answering the question about what you believe should be included in the PHB?

 

[FrogReaver]

I really don’t think it’s fair to argue against inclusivity on the basis of literally not being able to include everything in a book. And to be fair, nobody has made an argument that you must throw everything and the kitchen sink into the PHB.

IMO. No one is doing that. What is being argued against is trying to fit infinite inclusivity into a finite book.

What that argument is pushing for is for others to take a stance about what inclusivity matters enough to fit into a finite book.