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

[SehanineMoonbow]

I actually just read an article about what word fans think "race" should be replaced with. Species is one, along with words like folk or kin. I kind of like the sound "folk" has to it. Elf folk (they're often called the Fair Folk, anyway), dwarven folk, halfling folk, etc. This gets rid of "race", but, to me anyway, still invokes a sense of uniqueness and culture for each, well, folk.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

good analogy. However...

I’m waiting for someone to come in and speak with some righteous indignation about how you just compared humans to dogs.

Well, 1: I'm pretty sure literally nobody was thinking that except for you. and 2: Dogs are factually better than humans, so I don't know why someone wouldn't want to be compared to them.

 

[Chaosmancer]

The analogy I'd use (and have used) is comparing the different races in D&D to breeds of dog. They are all the same basic thing (dogs/humanoids) and can generally interbreed and produce new things, but they still are profoundly different in many ways. Enough to reasonably separate them and have it not feel arbitrary and bigoted.

What I keep coming back to is that the bonuses in the book are for Player Characters, and that those are meant to be exceptional people anyways. So being more exceptional by being a strong elf doesn't really mean anything.

I mean, I spent a good week debating with someone whose position was that the +2 mod was meant to shift the distribution curve of the 3d6 rolled stats, giving a slightly higher average to those races, which was picked before the person rolled their stats in order.

Well, that isn't how DnD is generally played anymore, so since we have options to pick and choose our numbers instead of 3d6 in order, why don't we extend that to the racial ASI's? It will open up more concepts and potential characters, removing a barrier from people by expressing that it really is more important what someone has done than how they were born.

 

[FrogReaver]

How does the historical evidence DannyAlcatraz cited not support the position he is taking?

As umbran previously stated. That assertion can not be further debated under the rules.

I would appreciate it if you stopped asking me questions that by answering would cause me to break the rules.

 

[Wishbone]

And... isn't the job of third parties not actually involved in the content creation.

We, as consumers, get to look at the final result, and decide if we like what we see. However, we don't generally get to dictate the detailed production process, any more than a player of Overwatch gets to dictate the details of the software development process.

Sure, I'm not literally saying hand the reigns of product development over to the fandom. I think that's a bad idea, but the premise of this thread is feedback and suggestion from those of us who aren't decision makers.

Hence why the organization of the physical product in the DMG was something I brought up, because if we don't articulate the things that get in the way of us enjoying the game it becomes harder for the content creators to shape a product to anticipate the needs of the consumer base or even expand it.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

As umbran previously stated. That assertion can not be further debated under the rules.

I would appreciate it if you stopped asking me questions that by answering would cause me to break the rules.

You made it an issue.

 

[FrogReaver]

You made it an issue.

i disagree but I don’t think we can really debate that either.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

What I keep coming back to is that the bonuses in the book are for Player Characters, and that those are meant to be exceptional people anyways. So being more exceptional by being a strong elf doesn't really mean anything.

I mean, I spent a good week debating with someone whose position was that the +2 mod was meant to shift the distribution curve of the 3d6 rolled stats, giving a slightly higher average to those races, which was picked before the person rolled their stats in order.

Well, that isn't how DnD is generally played anymore, so since we have options to pick and choose our numbers instead of 3d6 in order, why don't we extend that to the racial ASI's? It will open up more concepts and potential characters, removing a barrier from people by expressing that it really is more important what someone has done than how they were born.

I mean, there's also that one table in the DMG about modifying NPC's to be certain races, and all of those have pluses to their stats (in addition to the normal racial features) so I don't think, in this case, the PC's being special is why they get those pluses.

 

[Aldarc]

i disagree but I don’t think we can really debate that either.

If you truly believe this, then I would strongly advise that in the future that you refrain from making drive-by “unsupported assertions” of your own regarding bigotry and then retreating behind mod comments when people actually challenge your assertions.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Impressed by the chutzpah of someone who, in a thread about making D&D more inclusive, and marked positive comments only, decides that this is the perfect moment to defend homophobia.