Mainstream News Discovers D&D's Species Terminology Change

orcs dnd.jpg


Several mainstream news sites have discovered that Dungeons & Dragons now refers to a character's species instead of race. The New York Times ended 2024 with a profile on Dungeons & Dragons, with a specific focus on the 2024 Player's Handbook's changes on character creation, the in-game terminology change from race to species, and the removal of Ability Score Increases tied to a character's species. The article included quotes by Robert J. Kuntz and John Stavropoulos and also referenced Elon Musk's outrage over Jason Tondro's forward in The Making of Original Dungeons & Dragons.

The piece sparked additional commentary on a variety of sites, including Fox News and The Telegraph, most of which focused on how the changes were "woke." Around the same time, Wargamer.com published a more nuanced piece about the presentation of orcs in the 2024 Player's Handbook, although its headline noted that the changes were "doomed" because players would inevitably replace the orc's traditional role as aggressor against civilization with some other monstrous group whose motivations and sentience would need to be ignored in order for adventurers to properly bash their heads in.

[Update--the Guardian has joined in also, now.]

Generally speaking, the mainstream news pieces failed to address the non-"culture war" reasons for many of these changes - namely that Dungeons & Dragons has gradually evolved from a game that promoted a specific traditional fantasy story to a more generalized system meant to capture any kind of fantasy story. Although some campaign settings and stories certainly have and still do lean into traditional fantasy roles, the kinds that work well with Ability Score Increases tied to a character's species/race, many other D&D campaigns lean away from these aspects or ignore them entirely. From a pragmatic standpoint, uncoupling Ability Score Increases from species not only removes the problematic bioessentialism from the game, it also makes the game more marketable to a wider variety of players.

Of course, the timing of many of these pieces is a bit odd, given that the 2024 Player's Handbook came out months ago and Wizards of the Coast announced plans to make these changes back in 2022. It's likely that mainstream news is slow to pick up on these types of stories. However, it's a bit surprising that some intrepid reporter didn't discover these changes for four months given the increased pervasiveness of Dungeons & Dragons in mainstream culture.

We'll add that EN World has covered the D&D species/race terminology changes as they developed and looks forward to covering new developments and news about Dungeons & Dragons in 2025 and beyond.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Christian Hoffer

Christian Hoffer


log in or register to remove this ad

So basically, Homo Sapiens gets -1 to INT, -1 to STR, +1 to CON and +1 to CHA compared to the baseline Homo Neanderthalensis?

I wonder if a lot of the problem with linking ASIs to species was on part because Human were thought to be the default and back then, species were called race, and it could sound like some 19th century racist depiction of people (grouped by continent because subtlety was lost) like "group X is intelligent and hard-working, group Y is strong and stupid, group Z is intelligent, strong, pretty" (generally written by people who identified with group Z).

Once you speak of difference among species, I think it doesn't evoke the same baggage, when one say that Neanderthal was stronger, they don't tend to get grilled for that... (or when they say that cheetahs are faster).
Except both the name change and the ASI removal were functionally implemented at the same time. But I agree, species certainly sounds better if you want to use ASI. So much of this is about optics IMO.
 

If a bit of extra complexity is the cost for removing ASI then I’m willing to pay that price, as it has been shown over and over ASI are simply too important for character building, sure they’re simple but i think they’re too simple and have no nuance, the cost of that simplicity is disproportionate and far reaching impact across character build
I prefer species/race/heritage/whatever minimums and maximums personally, like old D&D and many OSR games handle it. But ASI work just fine for me too.
 



no, but IMO a rabbit is far far better modeled with +10ft speed, +bonus action dash, +50% jump distance, +advantage on perception checks that rely on hearing, +30ft tremmorsense and no species ASI than anything +2 DEX +1 WIS can provide, ASI aren't necessary to model how certain species are meant to excell compared to each other,
True. The Haregon. ;)
 

Assuming this is a rabbit humanoid species and not just literally a real rabbit as a PC, no i would not want STR penalties to it, everybody can exist on the same 3-20 stat scale and nobody needs any additional species ASI modifiers as their traits should be doing all the work differentiating them already, then ASI exist purely as an internal species scaling, 11 STR is average strength equally amongst halflings humans and goliaths but goliaths are still ‘stronger’ due to having traits that play into representing that strength like outsized might and bend bars, break crates.

I was going off the comparison of a giraffe and rabbit so I assumed neither were especially comparable to humans, but if they are humanoid, why take attribute modifiers off the table? Not only do those have a substantial impact on make the differences mechanically clear, but players actually feel modifiers (both the pain and the joy of them)
 



What I am saying, if I am saying anything at all, is that. Back when I was playing/running BECMI and then AD&D the ppl who played or Dm'd never brought up such when at college. Didn't really matter cos back then it was Dark Sun setting or Renegade Underdark denizens on the run from those pesky dragons in the Council of Wyrms setting...

The fact that this seems to be an issue of the current times and more overt. Really haven't seen anything like this outside of a Vampire: the Masquerade session, chaps.
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top