D&D (2024) One D&D Permanently Removes The Term 'Race'

In line with many other tabletop roleplaying games, such as Pathfinder or Level Up, One D&D is removing the term 'race'. Where Pathfinder uses 'Ancestry' and Level Up uses 'Heritage', One D&D will be using 'Species'.

Moving On From 'Race' in the 2024 Core Rulebooks

We understand "race" is a problematic term that has had prejudiced links between real world people and the fantasy peoples of D&D worlds.

www.dndbeyond.com

In a blog post, WotC announced that "We have made the decision to move on from using the term "race" everywhere in One D&D, and we do not intend to return to that term."

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

Nope.
Location wise, Californian.

So, you're a Mexican deprived of his heritage by the 1846-1850 war.

 

[Jiggawatts]

I wish Gygax had done this 50 years ago, would have saved us all from a number of issues, very possibly preventing the orc/drow business of the past few years from even occurring.

 

[Scribe]

I wish Gygax had done this 50 years ago, would have saved us all from a number of issues, very possibly preventing the orc/drow business of the past few years from even occurring.

How? The 'issues' are the result of people conflating things which are already distinct. Changing race to species would not help, as what is being compared leading to any perceived issues, are functionally neither of these things in the first place.

 

[Shades of Eternity]

They used R.C.C, Racial Character Class right?

Ha, I forgot about that.

However they refer to species that can take a O.C.C.

So 50/50?

 

[Yaarel]

How? The 'issues' are the result of people conflating things which are already distinct. Changing race to species would not help, as what is being compared leading to any perceived issues, are functionally neither of these things in the first place.

Switching from a concept of race to a concept of species, while removing cultural features, can help.

Then a species can serve as a silo for instinctive inborn capabilities − and can be a member of any culture.



Of course, to use the term species, but then say the god created this species to exhibit certain cultural traits, is the problem of racism all over again.

 

[Alzrius]

Of course, to use the term species, but then say the god created this species to exhibit certain cultural traits, is the problem of racism all over again.

I'm not sure if I'm understanding you correctly; are you suggesting that there's no room for a god creating a race/species with hard-coded "cultural" traits in fantasy fiction/gaming (i.e. the concept of a god making a people in their own image) without it being "the problem of racism"?

 

[Scribe]

I'm not sure if I'm understanding you correctly; are you suggesting that there's no room for a god creating a race/species with hard-coded "cultural" traits in fantasy fiction/gaming (i.e. the concept of a god making a people in their own image) without it being "the problem of racism"?

That is an argument that has been put forward many times before, yes.

 

[Yaarel]

I'm not sure if I'm understanding you correctly; are you suggesting that there's no room for a god creating a race/species with hard-coded "cultural" traits in fantasy fiction/gaming (i.e. the concept of a god making a people in their own image) without it being "the problem of racism"?

To say God created the descendants of Kham to be slaves, is racist.

To say Moradin created the descendants of Dwarf to speak Dwarfish and be miners, is the same ethical problem of reallife racism.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

And what is it to say that humans were created to grow and multiply, with a strong inborn drive to reproduce, leading them to have in their cultures a strong emphasis on regulation/celebration of this drive (often called marriage)? Does the answer change if the breeding drive is implanted into the species Homo sapiens or into the Race of Men?

 

[Yaarel]

And what is it to say that humans were created to grow and multiply, with a strong inborn drive to reproduce, leading them to have in their cultures a strong emphasis on regulation/celebration of this drive (often called marriage)?

Birds and fish also have the blessing to be fruitful and multiply, to become a numerous species.

The species of humanity is numerous, especially in modern times.

With regard to humans, there is a "commandment" and learning, rather than an instinct. To be fruitful and multiply, includes teaching and adopting, and helping the next generation survive and be well. It doesnt necessarily mean having children oneself.

Moreover, human sexuality evolves to foster social bonds, much more than mere reproduction. The cooperation helps ensure survival.

Humans evolve to live long lives well beyond the age of sexual reproduction, because these infertile elders are sages whose teaching the next generation ensures the survival of the species.

The "commandment" to multiply is more about assisting the survival of humanity. It isnt about how to get laid.