D&D (2024) Bonus languages in One D&D backgrounds goes contrary to their other goals

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Do D&D language choices match the way a lot of students in the US experience them? Pick whichever off the list of what's offered, kind of at random, because you have to pick one. Maybe use it once on a trip somewhere or briefly with a pen-pal.

"I picked Halfling because a really cute girl said she was going to take that class. Now I know 47 words for 'tobacco.'"

 

[Charlaquin]

You can do that with any racial trait though: why are halflings lucky? Why are elves resistant to charm? Why do gnomes have innate magic? Why are humans automatically inspired?

None of those things are cultural.

Biology can only explain so much, unless you want all racial traits to be size, movement, sensory and natural attacks.

I’m fine with traits being divinely granted, just not cultural ones.

 

[Remathilis]

None of those things are cultural.

I’m fine with traits being divinely granted, just not cultural ones.

So you're cool sea elves being able to innately talk with creatures with a swim speed or forest gnome innately talking with animals, but a dragonborn innately speaking with dragons is a bridge too far?

 

[Micah Sweet]

So you're cool sea elves being able to innately talk with creatures with a swim speed or forest gnome innately talking with animals, but a dragonborn innately speaking with dragons is a bridge too far?

Giff getting firearm prowess from a literally unnamed God they don't even worship is a bridge too far.

 

[Charlaquin]

So you're cool sea elves being able to innately talk with creatures with a swim speed

I don’t particularly like sea elves in the first place. But talking to creatures with a swim speed is an inherently magical ability because not all creatures with a swim speed are even capable of speech let alone share a language.

or forest gnome innately talking with animals,

See above. Also, it’s a spell in the packet.

but a dragonborn innately speaking with dragons is a bridge too far?

If dragons were beasts incapable of speech and dragonborn had an innate ability to communicate with them, that would be one thing. But draconic is a language, with grammar and syntax and a writing system, that dragons invented and speak, and other peoples can learn, like any other language.

 

[Charlaquin]

Giff getting firearm prowess from a literally unnamed God they don't even worship is a bridge too far.

Yes. Yes it is.

 

[Lanefan]

This is the kind of feedback a playtest can offer: the realization your target audience is going to misinterpret your ideas and that it isn't worth it.

For anyone who is arguing that 5e was "too dumbed down", I will point to this thread as proof it isn't dumb enough yet.

But does that really mean it should shoot for the lowest common denominator? I sure hope not!

I mean, in the early 80s 1e was pretty complicated and lots of people still figured it out enough to play it.

 

[Remathilis]

Giff getting firearm prowess from a literally unnamed God they don't even worship is a bridge too far.

That's where we run into the limits of biology being the only justification for racial traits. Firearm use has been a major part of the Giff story since their inception. Ask any D&D player who has heard of Giff prior to 5e and they will say they are "hippo people with guns". Remove the latter and they just are "hippo people" and they can be tossed on the furry pile with cat people, bird people, elephant people, etc.

The alternative, of course, is that races NEVER grant proficiency in anything and only ever influence size, movement, senses, and natural attacks/defenses. But I think that design space isn't going to support a lot of options.

 

[Remathilis]

But does that really mean it should shoot for the lowest common denominator? I sure hope not!

I mean, in the early 80s 1e was pretty complicated and lots of people still figured it out enough to play it.

One could certainly argue that every edition of D&D since has attempted to dumb down initiative into something usable.

 

[Charlaquin]

That's where we run into the limits of biology being the only justification for racial traits. Firearm use has been a major part of the Giff story since their inception. Ask any D&D player who has heard of Giff prior to 5e and they will say they are "hippo people with guns". Remove the latter and they just are "hippo people" and they can be tossed on the furry pile with cat people, bird people, elephant people, etc.

So make a “gun-loving people” background/culture and associate the Giff with it in the lore.

The alternative, of course, is that races NEVER grant proficiency in anything and only ever influence size, movement, senses, and natural attacks/defenses. But I think that design space isn't going to support a lot of options.

There’s also room for unique race features like the new version of Stonecunning, inherent spellcasting, the halflings’ lucky, the Tabaxi’s cool dash move, orcs’ adrenaline rush, humans’ new inspiration feature, etc, etc, etc.