D&D (2024) How did I miss this about the Half races/ancestries

[Bedrockgames]

No it really isn’t just “all taste”. Good grief that first paragraph reads exactly like “one drop”. That it’s a fictional race really misses the point.

I don't think that is what they are trying to do. But if they were I still wouldn't think it is endorsing that. It more likely be like the Van Richten thing, where they are playing with a real world concept to show how elves are racist against other races or something. That or it is just about how elves are a magical race of beings and if you mix human in they aren't the same. Either way, the point is you can have elven blood and still be human. It doesn't take away from someone's humanity. Now if someone were to take that concept to write up some sort of Aryan fantasy world, sure that would definitely be a problem. But I don't see an issue with the base elements in the text.

And again, this is just the entry that I like. The broader issue is whether Half Elves as a concept are tenable. You can easily have an edition that doesn't include the stuff that was in 2E and it would work fine (that stuff you are pointing to is all elaborations but I wouldn't say it is essential to the idea of half elves in the game)

 

[Hussar]

I would say that it is a fictional race is entirely the point though. There isn't anything in this text that is advocating bigotry. I think you have to squint a bit to get upset about it to be honest

Squint? Really? It’s right there in the first paragraph. Virtually word for word a direct quote of the one drop doctrine.

I’d argue that someone needs to be pretty willfully blind not to see that.

Again too. Please don’t characterize me as “upset”. I’m not at all. I’m being very clear and rational here.

 

[Dausuul]

This is not a hill that I'm willing to fight on but the half-elf was a staple of D&D and of course Tolkien.

This is literally Tolkien-style half-elves. Elrond and his brother Elros were given a choice to be effectively "human" (thus mortal) or "elven" (thus bound to the world forever). Elrond chose the elf rules; Elros chose the human rules, becoming the first King of Numenor.

Personally, I see this as a practical way to handle all the possible combinations. Just pick your mechanics and describe your character how you like. In theory, they could work out rules for mixing and matching traits... but in practice, the multiclass rules are an object lesson in how that tends to play out.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Squint? Really? It’s right there in the first paragraph. Virtually word for word a direct quote of the one drop doctrine.

Yes we are reading the same text but we have vastly different reactions to it. Again I don't think that was the intention there. But even it if it were the case that they were trying to invoke a concept like that, I don't think they were doing it as an endorsement of it (anymore than Van Richten's bigotry towards Vistani in the guidebooks is an endorsement of real world bigotry). And I am not defending this as the way to do half elves. I like it. But I don't think you need the parts you are criticizing in order to retain what makes half elves, half elves in D&D

I’d argue that someone needs to be pretty willfully blind not to see that.

Again too. Please don’t characterize me as “upset”. I’m not at all. I’m being very clear and rational here.

It is difficult to assess tone. Your posts to me are coming across as aggressive and hostile, even angry. If that is because I am misreading the tone I apologize.

 

[Hussar]

Why does intent matter? Who cares what was intended? Intent can’t be proven. It’s just a rather convenient shield to hide behind instead of actually dealing with consequences. “Oh it doesn’t really mean to word for word copy actual real life racist writing. It’s just a countdown that make it okay”.

It’s the same for you every single time @Bedrockgames. This has been pointed out to you over and over and over again. Whether it’s orcs or drow or now half elves. And every time you “just don’t see it”.

What evidence would you actually accept?

 

[SteveC]

This is literally Tolkien-style half-elves. Elrond and his brother Elros were given a choice to be effectively "human" (thus mortal) or "elven" (thus bound to the world forever). Elrond chose the elf rules; Elros chose the human rules, becoming the first King of Numenor.

Exactly. I am also thinking of Tanis half-elven from Dragonlance, which I suppose is also Tolkien inspired.

I'm not opposed to other approaches, but I think doing this in 5E would require more work than they seem willing to put in. Mechanically I think there is quite a bit of interesting design space to work with. On some ethical/moral standard, I think that no one has explained a reason to remove it beyond "there's a vanishingly small number of people who might potentially be offended." I'm not sure that anyone who's offended has even stepped up.

I'd say do the work if you want to redesign how races work (and Pathfinder 2 already did the work). Otherwise, just leave it alone.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Why does intent matter? Who cares what was intended? Intent can’t be proven. It’s just a rather convenient shield to hide behind instead of actually dealing with consequences. “Oh it doesn’t really mean to word for word copy actual real life racist writing. It’s just a countdown that make it okay”.

I think intent is one of the most important considerations. Now intent is cloudy sometimes, which makes it difficult. But I am never going to relinquish the value of intent in evaluating whether something is an issue or not. Intent does matter.

It’s the same for you every single time @Bedrockgames. This has been pointed out to you over and over and over again. Whether it’s orcs or drow or now half elves. And every time you “just don’t see it”.

What evidence would you actually accept?

I accept evidence that persuades me. Right now we have some fundamental disagreements in our assumptions, which is fine, that is part of life, and this isn't something where it is objective. We are talking about a very subjective interpretation of gaming text.

You are acting like the discussion about orcs, drow, and now half elves is settled. I don't think that discussion is settled at all. And I think you can be for things like evil orcs, drow, and half elves and half orcs, and be a perfectly good human being. These are things that can add to the game and I feel like we in passing through a cultural moment where people have prepped themselves to find problems in media content that is either innocent, not the biggest deal in the world, or open to more interpretations than the one they are presenting as fact. If these three things bother you, that is fair. Some movies and books bother me that don't bother other people. We all have our tastes, our sensibilities and our moral lenses through which we evaluate media. But I think what is less okay here is the narrowing of what is possible or permissible as an interoperation. I am not a heretic for looking at this stuff and seeing something different than you are seeing. And it isn't me refusing to see evidence. We are both seeing the same evidence and have reached different conclusions.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Why does intent matter? Who cares what was intended? Intent can’t be proven.

Just a moment ago you asked me not to characterize your posts as upset. That is a question of intent. And since you clarified, I am happy to adjust my interpretation of your posts based on what your stated intent is. And of course, like I said in the other post, intent can be murky so your stated intent isn't everything, but it is pretty darn important.

 

[Hussar]

Just a moment ago you asked me not to characterize your posts as upset. That is a question of intent. And since you clarified, I am happy to adjust my interpretation of your posts based on what your stated intent is. And of course, like I said in the other post, intent can be murky so your stated intent isn't everything, but it is pretty darn important.

It’s only important because you keep assigning intent to other people.

Yeah. We’re done here. Do not reply to me again please.

 

[Remathilis]

Yes we are reading the same text but we have vastly different reactions to it. Again I don't think that was the intention there. But even it if it were the case that they were trying to invoke a concept like that, I don't think they were doing it as an endorsement of it (anymore than Van Richten's bigotry towards Vistani in the guidebooks is an endorsement of real world bigotry). And I am not defending this as the way to do half elves. I like it. But I don't think you need the parts you are criticizing in order to retain what makes half elves, half elves in D&D.

I think that most of this kerfuffle is based on two separate elements that can exist simultaneously and independently of one another.

1. The notion that two different fantasy species can produce offspring is perfectly acceptable, either via nature or magic.
2. The way D&D has presented the half-orc and half-elf invokes some problematic tropes, starting with the name.

Thus, no one is saying humans and elves can't produce offspring. Only that it doesn't create a distinct new species based on outdated notions of blood purity. A player could still play a mixed species of elf and human, but such a thing is not a separate species called a half-elf. It removes the half- nomenclature (though feel free to call yourself that if you wish!) and cleans up some of the icky parts of both (blood percentage, outcast status, the implications of half-orc conception, etc). The downside is that you are stuck with either a human pointed ears or an elf with a shorter lifespan. The bonus upside is you are no longer limited to just humans and elves/orcs, so if you want to be part-elf/part goliath, go nuts).

I think we will end up seeing something closer to the PF2e answer though: a few "species heritage" feats you can pick at level 1 that let you get a feature based on the other heritage you pick. (So elven heritage gives dark vision and fey ancestry. Orc heritage gives relentless endurance. Dragonborn heritage gives you a breath weapon 1/day).