D&D (2024) Half Race Appreciation Society: Half Elf most popular race choice in BG3

[Yaarel]

As you know, these are not cases where the ability is provided by a spell.

You may not like it, but as presented, these are biological attributes.

Correct?

This is a playtest looking for feedback.

Correct?

The feedback is: Eliminate all racism from D&D. All of it. Everywhere. Here are some ways to do it.

 

[Scribe]

This is a playtest looking for feedback.

Correct?

Correct, so as presented these are biological attributes. In the officially '2024 Ready' product of MotM.

Yes?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Run better = choice of spell.
See better = choice of spell (or possibly choice of Adaption).
Breathe underwater = choice of spell (or possibly choice of Adaption).

Note, a Dwarf character who grows up in a Sea Elf community might magically acquire waterbreathing as a background feature.

In any case, the Elves who breathe water are obscure and wont be in the 2024 core rules. They can even be a separate species or a Triton/Elf multispecies. The waterbreathing Elf might be irrelevant to the Elf species design.

None of the things you're talking about look like that now, and are almost certainly not going to look like you say in the actual books next year. Please accept that this is what you want, not what is.

 

[Yaarel]

Correct, so as presented these are biological attributes. In the officially '2024 Ready' product of MotM.

Yes?

The playtest lists Elf "lineages". They derive from how shapeshifters "bond" with an environment.

You are incorrect when you characterize "lineages" as if biological. The lineages are, in fact, magical.


D&D already went thru the process of eliminating sexism from D&D.

Now it is time to eliminate racism from D&D.

 

[Scribe]

The playtest lists Elf "lineages". They derive from how shapeshifters "bond" with an environment.

You are incorrect when you characterize "lineages" as if biological. The lineages are, in fact, magical.

Does a Sea Elf lose its ability to breath under water in an anti-magic zone, as written, right now, in the officially 2024 ready product?

Its very simple. Its biological.

Now you can certainly rewrite the rules to change it, but thats something you will have to do for your own table or 5e-compatible work.

The various attributes of other types of elves, are biological.

 

[Yaarel]

Does a Sea Elf lose its ability to breath under water in an anti-magic zone, as written, right now, in the officially 2024 ready product?

Its very simple. Its biological.

Now you can certainly rewrite the rules to change it, but thats something you will have to do for your own table or 5e-compatible work.

The various attributes of other types of elves, are biological.

According to the playtest, the lineage is a "supernatural" feature. It seems negatable by antimagic. Since the lineages include "spells", a "lineage" probably is vulnerable to antimagic. Certainly the spells of a lineage are vulnerable to antimagic, and the supernatural darkvision and the supernatural waterbreathing are arguably vulnerable to antimagic too.

In any case, the 2024 core rules need to present the Elf and to characterize its features in a way that is 100% free from any trace of racism.

 

[Scribe]

According to the playtest, the lineage is a "supernatural" feature. It might be negated by antimagic. Since the lineages include "spells", a "lineage" probably is vulnerable to antimagic.

So magical beings, are now vulnerable to anti-magic at a biological level? Not an interpretation I think that would get much mileage, but you are free to have it.

Since you seem passionate about this, I would encourage you to write up a complete example of your "Elf" which covers

High, Drow, Wood, and creates a system of Culture (capital C) which we know doesn't exist today in 5e, as we only have Species, Class, and Background and Feats.

I would anticipate it would be the following rules objects, but maybe you think to combine Culture and Background?

Species
Class
Culture
Background
Feats

I'm not sure Wizards is interested in sticking their hands in the fire of assigning rules to 'culture' (lower case c) but who knows, they have changed gears a number of times in the edition already.

 

[TwoSix]

Does a Sea Elf lose its ability to breath under water in an anti-magic zone, as written, right now, in the officially 2024 ready product?

Its very simple. Its biological.

Now you can certainly rewrite the rules to change it, but thats something you will have to do for your own table or 5e-compatible work.

The various attributes of other types of elves, are biological.

Questions of heredity (which is really what you're asking if you're making determinations of whether any trait is "biological" or "inherently magical") don't have any real answers provided in the PHB or other supporting books, as far as I know.

Would the orphaned child of two wood elves raised among sea elves since infancy gain the sea elf abilities, including water breathing? I think that's up to the setting definitions to decide, although the "elven mutability" sidebar in the sea elf description in MotM would provide some textual support for elven children being fairly mutable in terms of their "racial" abilities.

 

[Remathilis]

Leaning super hard into one setting is part of the reason I didn't like one of the editions. (Granted it might have only been the third or fourth thing on my list).

The issue, of course, is how you support multiple settings when there are finite resources (time, page count, etc) to do it. Elves (to use the go-to example) are present in every world and each world does something a little (or a lot) different with them. That makes it hard to inform a generic "elf" culture, society, religion, even appearance.So,o you get what 5e has done; elven information is a mile-wide and an inch deep. Contrast that to Pathfinder, who has developed elves as Golarion sees them, and you can use that information to inform design choices. (As a second good example, Golarion goblins undertook a radical shift from 1e to 2e, which was partially explained away in canon, something they could do since they only had to worry about Golarion. In D&D, the change to orcs from villain to hero is a confusing jumble of mismatched lore, retcons, and don't-think-about-it. If they only had to deal with one setting, they could move forward with a moment where orcs are elevated to the status of PC race (they overthrow Gruumsh, prove their valor fighting side-by-side against a demon, army, form the Kingdom of Many-Arrows 2, etc). But instead we're getting a "orcs are strong" sort of generic filler any if we're lucky they will explain how the changes to orcs work in the next Faerun or Oerth or whatever guide...

 

[Yaarel]

So magical beings, are now vulnerable to anti-magic at a biological level? Not an interpretation I think that would get much mileage, but you are free to have it.

Since you seem passionate about this, I would encourage you to write up a complete example of your "Elf" which covers

High, Drow, Wood, and creates a system of Culture (capital C) which we know doesn't exist today in 5e, as we only have Species, Class, and Background and Feats.

I would anticipate it would be the following rules objects, but maybe you think to combine Culture and Background?

Species
Class
Culture
Background
Feats

I'm not sure Wizards is interested in sticking their hands in the fire of assigning rules to 'culture' (lower case c) but who knows, they have changed gears a number of times in the edition already.

If a species feature mentions that it is "magical", then by definition antimagic can negate it. The ambiguous term "supernatural" seems to mean "magical". The presence of supernatural "spells" corroborates that a lineage is negatable by antimagic. It is in need of rules clarification, namely a clearer updated description that removes any ambiguity for the gaming mechanics.