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

[Remathilis]

I wonder though. Do people take races based on the race abilities or because those races appeal to them. I have a sneaking suspicion that racial mechanics are not very high up on people's list of priorities when creating a character. I might be wrong, but, it would explain why WotC is going the route they are. If people's choices of race are largely for aesthetic reasons, then, well, why bother creating a whole system for mix and match race abilties? It just makes creating a character that bit more complicated. Which, in turn makes these races less appealing.

I can make an Orc character and I have X, Y and Z abilities. Or, I can make a half-orc, half-whatever character, have to take an additional step of going through a list of abilities and make choices. I'm thinking that the added complexity isn't all that appealing.

They aren't, until they are. For example, people who want to play an aarakroca or triton are probably doing it for flight and swimming speeds . Goliaths were put in to have another "strong" species. The whole ardling thing was about people wanting animal races to be more animalistic. While I agree that most people pick for aesthetic/concept first, mechanics play a role.

 

[Bedrockgames]

How is Paizo handling this? Kobold Press? Critical Role? WotC IMHO was late to this party. Much like changing the term "race", WotC is playing catch up to what the larger community is already discussing.

I don’t know much about pathfinder, so so can’t say. But just because companies are being responsive to Twitter and some posts on forum threads, that doesn’t mean they are doing what the audience wants (I think they are misjudging the atmosphere the way a lot of people and media used to give undo weight to posts on Twitter). I also don’t think them going this direction means it’s a good creative or design choice

And no. This isn't a "passing fad" any more than removing race/class restrictions were. Everyone gasped in horror at dwarven wizards and halfling barbarians, but now those concepts are wildly accepted. The smoke don't go back into the bottle.

Only time will tell, but I think we are going to look back on this as a period where creative choices were very constrained but well intentioned but misplaced moral concerns. I think you are already starting to see a shift actually

Nothing moves in a straight line for all time in creative media. I think at the moment we are living through a very big over correction.

 

[Remathilis]

I think the third option is the best choice and not as difficult as presented there. You'd have to be careful, but I suspect you could generally designate some abilities that can relatively safely be swapped between species to a level of balance that's good enough for 5e.

That's still not ideal, because then (for example) all mixed goliaths that favor their elven side only have powerful build and never their intrinsic spells and no mixed character with elven heritage has Trance & Keen senses, but at least you could model any mixed species and have some mechanical heft to represent it.

Or heck, they could just give an extra free choice of weakened first level feat to all characters. Then you still have your background element represented by the background feat choice, and it's less important if your extra abilities come from your dwarf ancestor or your tough body, or that time you climbed trees as a kid.

What I think WotC wanted to do was provide a sidebar in the PHB for people to make gnome/tieflings with minimal fuss, then have a more robust set of guidelines in the DMG or in a later supplement. This is probably going to force their hand.

Another option I just thought of is a more thorough version of the custom lineage from Tasha that always you to pick from a list of common benefits and build your own heritage. They could pick a skill or darkvision, and then either a feat or an ability or two like resistance, fey ancestry, powerful build, relentless endurance, etc. Then you can build whatever you like and justify it.

 

[Remathilis]

I don’t know much about pathfinder, so so can’t say. But just because companies are being responsive to Twitter and some posts on forum threads, that doesn’t mean they are doing what the audience wants (I think they are misjudging the atmosphere the way a lot of people and media used to give undo weight to posts on Twitter). I also don’t think them going this direction means it’s a good creative or design choice .

I think you are fooling yourself into thinking the tide isn't turning when it already has.

 

[Bedrockgames]

To whit; Paizo already removed the half-races (and planetouched ones like aasimar and tieflings) and made them specific ancestry feats humans can take. Nobody accused them of being racist. (In fact, their social media is nothing but people saying how Paizo did it right and WotC pooped the bed again).

I don’t know enough about this to weigh in on it specifically. All I can do is respond to what happened in the cases I have followed or seen. I am not accusing anyone of being racist but I do have lots of issues with some of the arguments being put forward about things like the term half.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I think you are fooling yourself into thinking the tide isn't turning when it already has.

I am generally a very cautious person in this regard. And obviously this is subjective. But two years ago I saw far fewer people feeling comfortable enough to disagree with the types of arguments being made in this thread. Now you are seeing a lot more people weigh in. And more broadly in the culture I think you are seeing a general fatigue with his things like problematic tropes have been prioritized

I could be wrong. All I can do is give my sense based on what I see, hear and read.

 

[MGibster]

I wonder though. Do people take races based on the race abilities or because those races appeal to them. I have a sneaking suspicion that racial mechanics are not very high up on people's list of priorities when creating a character. I might be wrong, but, it would explain why WotC is going the route they are.

It's an unpopular opinion I hold, but I don't believe playing a dwarf, elf, or tiefling is very different from playing a human. Doric and Simon could have been humans in the D&D movie and nothing about their characterization would have to change. I don't see this as a flaw mind you, I think it's one of the things that makes D&D popular.

I believe most people picked a race that provided synergies with their chosen class. i.e. You weren't likely to see a halfling fighter in 2nd edition beacuse the numbers didn't work well whereas tieflings in 3rd edition made great warlocks and sorcerers because of their Charisma bonus. But then tieflings are cool and it's hard to imagine that wouldn't influence a player's choice. Not me though. I pretty much just play humans almost every single time.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That kinda puts them in a no-win situation. They can either use level 1 feats to emulate mixed heritages, create 511 unique species to emulate every parent combo in the PHB, or completely redesign every species to be modular. Or do what they were going to do.

My vote is species re-design.

 

[Umbran]

I think you have to squint a bit to get upset about it to be honest

Mod Note:
Do you really want to take the position of Arbiter of Offense? Do you feel that's going to turn out well?

That's a rhetorical question, of course. It won't (and didn't) turn out well. You get to speak for yourself, but not others.

It’s the same for you every single time @Bedrockgames.

Making it personal will also turn out badly.


@Hussar and @Bedrockgames It looks about time that you two disengage from each other before things get worse. Thanks.

 

[Umbran]

Again, this is a fictional race...

That they are fictions does not make them devoid of real-world references, meanings, or implications.

Fictions are full of symbolism. Fictions have meaning. Fictions are a large part of how we communicate our culture and values to each other.

Frodo Baggins isn't "just a fiction," with no relation to anything in the real world! He and Samwise Gamgee are stand-ins for Tolkien's ideal of the English country folk. Unassuming, not terribly sophisticated, but with an unmatched strength in the cores of their being that make them the overall heroes of the story!

Harper Lee's, To Kill a Mockingbird is fiction, with some very direct things to say about racial inequality. Do you wish to deny its power?

Given how we use fiction, and what we take from fiction, you cannot just assert "it is a fiction" to deflect criticism.