D&D 5E WotC On Tasha, Race, Alignment: A Several-Year Plan

WotC spoke to the site Dicebreaker about D&D race and alignment, and their plans for the future.

• On of the motivations of the changes [character customization] in Tasha's Cauldron was to decouple race from class.
• The 'tightrope' between honouring legacy and freedom of character choice has not been effectively walked.
• Alignment is turning into a roleplaying tool, and will not be used to describe entire cultures.
• This work will take several years to fully implement.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

"There are certainly people who would dismiss it as “Ahh, they’re just gnolls, f**k’em.” Those people are called bigots."

That's ... a pretty strong conflation of fantasy game behavior and real world beliefs. I don't think it's as one-to-one as you seem to be implying.

I'm 99% certain that @Charlaquin meant that the people in their fantasy world would be fantasy bigots.

 

[Umbran]

Last I checked, D&D's default assumed objective morality independent of the minds of sentient beings.

Given that in 5e, alignment has no mechanical impact, I'm not sure that's accurate any more. Characters don't actually become Good or Evil due to their actions in 5e, so....

 

[Haffrung]

Gygax also thought Col. John Milton Chivington had the right of it, so I wouldn't trust his moral judgment.

I was wondering when Gygax was going to be cancelled. What are the odds his name is excised from the next edition of D&D?

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Where do you draw the line? Ogres? Trolls? Minotaurs? Or is it bigoted to treat any fantasy creatures in a game as evil monsters to be slain?

Minotaurs are a player race. Ogres (at least half-ogres) have been playable in previous editions. Trolls are a bit different from the others, but I would say that the evil ones are the ones that choose to eat humanoids, while others could be neutral or even good. I certainly wouldn't allow someone to play a troll, but I wouldn't 100% restrict trolls to evilness.

 

[DND_Reborn]

"There are certainly people who would dismiss it as “Ahh, they’re just gnolls, f**k’em.” Those people are called bigots."

That's ... a pretty strong conflation of fantasy game behavior and real world beliefs. I don't think it's as one-to-one as you seem to be implying.

Yeah, I certainly wouldn't use the term "bigot" myself-- as a bigot denotes hatred and intolerance. In this case, it was more the PC viewed the women and children as collateral damage than anything else.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

Where do you draw the line? Ogres? Trolls? Minotaurs? Or is it bigoted to treat any fantasy creatures in a game as evil monsters to be slain?

They’re taller. They don’t count. Or something.

 

[Haffrung]

Minotaurs are a player race. Ogres (at least half-ogres) have been playable in previous editions. Trolls are a bit different from the others, but I would say that the evil ones are the ones that choose to eat humanoids, while others could be neutral or even good. I certainly wouldn't allow someone to play a troll, but I wouldn't 100% restrict trolls to evilness.

That's interesting, because ogres, minotaurs, trolls, orcs, kobolds, and goblins all eat humanoids in my D&D. Always have. Goblins aren't a pesky nuisance who steal the occasional sheep. Goblins are vicious predators who snatch up children in the night and devour them. Their lairs are littered with the bones of humans, dwarves, other goblins, etc. They're monsters.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I was wondering when Gygax was going to be cancelled. What are the odds his name is excised from the next edition of D&D?

If I were a betting man, I would bet that Gygax is never going to be cancelled. He created the hobby. Sure, he had some outdated and controversial opinions, but that doesn't negate the fact that he invented D&D. George Washington owned slaves, but we don't cancel him.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

deleted

 

[DemoMonkey]

I'm curious: What would be the difference between "All trolls are evil" and "Trolls can be any alignment, but you will never see, interact or hear tell of one of one who isn't"?

Or to put it another way, is it a purely philosophical quibble, or does it actually have to intersect with the characters experience to matter?