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

[Kinematics]

When I say that art reflects reality I mean that it has something to say about the human condition.

To me, that's not reflecting reality. A story reflecting reality would be commenting on Ukraine, or Brexit, or Trump (or veiled references to such). Commenting on the human condition is something much more nebulous, less bound by time or events or reality.

The Iliad and Odyssey, which you mentioned earlier, are not meaningful because they reflects reality, but because they do not. Witches and mermaids and cyclops and endless journeys where all seems lost — these are not reality for most people, but most people can find meaning in the story because people can see analogs in things they do see as reality.

The friendship in The Lord of the Rings is not reflecting reality; it's displaying what friendship could mean, and allowing the readers to think about what friendship could be for them. The dystopia of 1984 is not reflecting reality; it's displaying the possible dangers of a controlling government overseeing every aspect of our lives, and allowing the readers to think about whether to be concerned about what their actual governments are doing.

One type of story might recount the events of the murder of George Floyd. That's a direct representation of reality. Another story might talk about police brutality. That's a layer removed from reality, even though it is also a real thing. Another story might talk about authoritarian injustice, which is yet another layer removed, and could apply its commentary to a large number of topics, many of which would have nothing to do with police (anything from family dynamics to countries' dictators). The further removed from reality, the less topical, and the more meaningful the writing becomes.

It is not about the story reflecting reality. It's about seeing your choice of reality through the lens of the story. Perhaps you like the lens, and perhaps you don't. Perhaps you like the view it provides on one topic, but don't like what it suggests when applied to a different one. Is that because the lens is flawed, or because your own biases are flawed? A well-crafted story will give you lots of ways to look at lots of things, and many people will want a story to be useful for looking at specific things that they are particularly concerned about at that point in time. But one person's view (even the author) does not prevent another person from taking a very different view, and both being valid.

The same story may seem to be indicative of different concepts to different times, places, and peoples (for example, with your X-Men example, that can also be used as a perspective on gun ownership, government regulations, education, etc). But "reflecting reality" serves only for documentaries and topical discussions, not stories.

 

[Remathilis]

Really? Which is what again? Can you point me where in the 5e PHB it says "this is the default setting"?

Technically, the "D&D Multiverse" is the default setting, though much of the examples given in the core books use the Forgotten Realms. And to be honest, I never saw that as a bad thing. It was fine to say this is how you put everything together, if you don't want to do it yourself, use this as your home setting."

People got hung up on it because WotC took its sweet time before releasing other settings.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Rpg's are uniquely different in that WotC, as opposed to the writers of Avatar, can't guarantee that the product any particular player receives is both handled maturely and avoids glorification. Once they include it, it's up to the individual DM how it will be handled.

But why should the game be designed around the worst possible tables? And people who would do that, will probably take the game in that direction anyways

 

[MGibster]

To me, that's not reflecting reality. A story reflecting reality would be commenting on Ukraine, or Brexit, or Trump (or veiled references to such). Commenting on the human condition is something much more nebulous, less bound by time or events or reality.

Fiction is the art of spinnings lies to tell a human truth.

The Iliad and Odyssey, which you mentioned earlier, are not meaningful because they reflects reality, but because they do not. Witches and mermaids and cyclops and endless journeys where all seems lost — these are not reality for most people, but most people can find meaning in the story because people can see analogs in things they do see as reality.

If you're finding meaning in a work of fiction it's because it's reflecting some aspect of reality for you. I think you're getting a little pedantic over the meaning of reality here. If you prefer, think of it as a reflection on some human truth. It reflects on what it means to be human which The Iliad does in spades.

 

[Incenjucar]

WotC has recognized that, at this time, they do not have sufficient staff that is able to comfortably delve into difficult topics while handling the sensitivity of the current times. They literally stated in a recent interview that they needed different people to take over in the future. There may be a future D&D team that can handle these topics, but they are not the current team.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Is the core book a setting book?

Again, you have to put  something in the core book, and that should provide as wide a spectrum of possible characterizations as possible.

 

[Scribe]

Again, you have to put  something in the core book, and that should provide as wide a spectrum of possible characterizations as possible.

They are, "everyone is great, and cosmic hero's of the multiverse".

 

[Micah Sweet]

Rpg's are uniquely different in that WotC, as opposed to the writers of Avatar, can't guarantee that the product any particular player receives is both handled maturely and avoids glorification. Once they include it, it's up to the individual DM how it will be handled.

People have very much handled other forms of media in ways that lack maturity and embrace glorification, as you say. Why should WotC trust their fans less than Hollywood, for example?

 

[Frozen_Heart]

WotC has recognized that, at this time, they do not have sufficient staff that is able to comfortably delve into difficult topics while handling the sensitivity of the current times. They literally stated in a recent interview that they needed different people to take over in the future. There may be a future D&D team that can handle these topics, but they are not the current team.

The sensitivity of the current times makes me quite nervous to even attempt a homebrew setting for dnd. If an entire team of professionals can't manage to handle delicate topics, what chance do randoms with far less knowledge and experience have?

I've got quite a narrow experience of the world, and no matter how much research I do there are always more viewpoints and experiences I'm finding out from people. It feels like literally anything I write could be culturally or racially insensitive to someone.

 

[MoonSong]

The removal of half-elves -because yes, this is a removal- bites a bit hard. I'm fine with them wanting to change the name, or to toolkit everything race species related, or if they decided that everything is fluff now, but this approach feels a bit unfortunate and leaves a sour taste. For context, my ethnic group basically consists on everybody being of mixed heritage, we all are mixed to some degree. Though some of us are a bit more clearly mixed, and get excluded from the whole group solidarity, even demonized for it, because we don't fit on the stereotype, and that somehow makes us less valid members of the group. And it isn't very nice to be told I don't belong to this land, despite my mother's family living in the same area for generations going back to pre-contact times. So I found half-elves very relatable, and their remeoval is doubly a slap in the face.

Also, I'm globally a bit of an outsider/minority in this hobby already, so seeing this attitude of "you are either pure everything or don't exist as a distinct people" detracts from my enjoyment of the game and makes me feel even less welcome.