D&D (2024) No Dwarf, Halfling, and Orc suborgins, lineages, and legacies

[Yaarel]

all vertebrates are fish

The 1800s speculation that "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny", is today considered nonscientific.

 

[Epic Meepo]

The 1800s speculation that "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny", is today considered nonscientific.

So are spellcasting elves.

For the love of all that's lawful and good, please take this elf cantrip discussion back to it's own dedicated thread.

 

[Yaarel]

So I was (mostly) joking about elves being winked out of existence in an anti-magic zone, but it would create a really interesting relationship between that species and magic, if things like "dispell" or anti-magic had mortal consequences.

Even tho the soul is "natural", it can cause magical effects. Magic itself is a mysterious property of existence and is psychosensitive. Something like the observer effect.

A Fey being is a kind of soul, a disembodied spirit.

Antimagic cant harm a Fey creature. But it can disrupt magical effects if any.

Relating to the Elf, magic − actual magic − is its identity. Thematically, antimagic should affect elven magic.

As a rule of thumb, the way a Ghost can be affected by antimagic is analogous to how a Fey can be affected.

 

[Gammadoodler]

Even tho the soul is "natural", it can cause magical effects. Magic itself is psychosensitive.

A Fey being is a kind of soul, a disembodied spirit.

Antimagic cant harm a Fey creature. But it can disrupt magical effects if any.

Relating to the Elf, magic − actual magic − is its identity. Thematically, antimagic effects should effect elven magic.

As a rule of thumb, the way a Ghost can be affected by antimagic is analogous to how a Fey can be affected.

Maybe I agree with your conclusion, maybe I don't..

But your premises are all opinions presented as facts.

 

[Yaarel]

Maybe I agree with your conclusion, maybe I don't..

But your premises are all opinions presented as facts.

I am spelling out a complex idea.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Here is a list of the top thirty species-class combinations. Out of over 680 possible combinations, these thirty combinations account for over half of all D&D characters ever created in DnDBeyond. Meanwhile there are numerous combinations that dont even have a character sheet for them. In this list we are looking at the pervasive tropes that define D&D experience.

No, we aren't. We are looking at what people create in D&D Beyond. We don't know if any of these characters were ever played, we don't know how many of these characters were created by the same handful of people and we don't know what characters those people making experimental characters do play, and how that factors into what their tinkerings on D&D Beyond look like.

This information is interesting, but it is in no way proof of anything.

 

[Gammadoodler]

I am spelling out a complex idea.

Fair enough. I suspect it'd be clearer if some of your opinions were described as such.

Then you won't have to respond to things like..

'who says a soul is natural??' or
'who says magic is psychosensitive??'

..since your statements will be more easily identified as your individual perspectives rather than objective truths we should all be aligned with already.

 

[Yaarel]

No, we aren't. We are looking at what people create in D&D Beyond. We don't know if any of these characters were ever played, we don't know how many of these characters were created by the same handful of people and we don't know what characters those people making experimental characters do play, and how that factors into what their tinkerings on D&D Beyond look like.

This information is interesting, but it is in no way proof of anything.

If I recall correctly, the datascrape does say which accounts are responsible for which character sheets. The inhouse analysis by DnDBeyond knows, of course. The sheets have indications of actual use during a game, such as plausible equipment and incremental changes. Oppositely, many are duplicates or unfinished.

The analysis of the datascrape corresponds to the official statements by DnDBeyond, such as the popularity ranking of species and classes, and proves reliable. At least good enough.

 

[Yaarel]

Fair enough. I suspect it'd be clearer if some of your opinions were described as such.

Then you won't have to respond to things like..

'who says a soul is natural??' or
'who says magic is psychosensitive??'

..since your statements will be more easily identified as your individual perspectives rather than objective truths we should all be aligned with already.

Earlier editions avoided a theory of magic. But 5e has been cautiously leaning into it, such as how to describe the psionic source, what the weave is, where sorcery comes from, how divine magic is actually Astral aligned planes, and so on. Baby steps.

A theory of magic is setting specific. It can help to think some things thru clearly.

 

[Scribe]

What? They're the same thing. What was retconned?

The Draconians were corrupted Dragons, thats not what a Dragonborn is.