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

MGibster said:

I'm thinking maybe character generation can be completely granular. We get rid of classes and species and everyone just builds the type of character they want cafeteria style from a list of abilities. In order to maintain balance, we would assign each of these abilities a number and give each player a certain number of points to build their character with. Perhaps we could also provide a list of negative abilities and taking them would give players more points to spend on abilities?

Did I just reinvent GURPS?

Click to expand...

Any discussion of reduction of options in D&D inevitably ends with someone reinventing GURPs.

At a bare minimum, the core of the game should be as inclusive as possible so that nobody is locked out of the game. If more contentious material is present, it can at least be quarantined to optional supplements so the audience can decide for themselves if they want to include it.

Mirrorrorrim said:

I am an older player. I am not against older players. I am pro-diversity, pro-inclusion, and I believe that the game should evolve to keep up with the moral and ethical standards of language that respect traditionally marginalized folk. Some words have become negatively charged throughout history, and we should recognize and empathize with concerns about that. Every time someone dismisses such concerns, I look to see their reason for doing so. Tradition is not a good enough reason for something offensive or toxic to be kept. Even if a person has "reclaimed" what has become an inappropriate concept for many, it doesn't make it not inappropriate in the eyes of others that it hurts. Have empathy. And no, I don't think demanding "empathy" for a viewpoint that wants to keep offensive content is a valid demand.

Click to expand...

I appreciate where you are coming from. I disagree with some of the assumptions in your post, but I think the rationale for both positions there has been laid out in the thread so I won’t revisit that (since I get that you have seen my arguments and others and not found them persuasive). For the record ‘tradition’ is not my rationale: it has more to fo with balancing out concerns over diversity with other important principles, the importance of clear communication and past efforts to control language on the scale we are now seeing.

But how many people is the minimum threshold for a word to be a problem ? With half this isn’t like Gypsy or the n word. It is deeply contested, often among the groups the term describes (and not simply as a way of reclaiming a slur but deeply contested as in not everyone agrees it is or was—-or that it is automatically connected to the term half breed. At what point do the offended peoples sensibilities outweigh the non-offended. And how do you square that when many people seem to be saying they consider it offensive to even call half an offensive term

I just don’t think this particular issue is about refusal to see revealed moral truth or to be empathetic. It’s a complicated topic do it has more to fo with people evaluating it differently

Scribe said:

Does it recognize that, really?

If it REALLY recognizes that its fanbase is as diverse as some would claim, but DOESNT design that way, whats the answer for that, because if you have 'millions' in your user base, and you 'recognize that its diverse' but you still just cannot seem to bring yourself to design the game that way...?

That makes very little sense.

Or, is it perhaps more likely that there is a vast segment of the player base (indeed a majority?) that is being catered to already, and isnt all that interested in change, because they understand that its an elf game, and nothing more, and that is who Wizards is designing for?

Click to expand...

This "elf game" is about the "found family" of the adventuring party, more than anything. Accepting people from diverse backgrounds to work together towards heroic ends, defeating bullies, tyranny, and evil. It is important and not "just a game." TTRPGs may be one of the most incredible and interactive forms of entertainment that teach the best lessons. From critical thinking, to social empathy, to math rocks. Why trivialize it?

D&D is a cultural phenomenon with a great responsibility due to its influence and reach. And I appreciate that Wizards (and many other game companies) are trying to evolve with the times. But I don't envy their position in trying to juggle those values with an existing market filled with intolerant (or at least uncaring) perspectives that malign them because they hate change and don't see those efforts as worth their empathy. These game companies do have to make money after all, so it can be a hard path to navigate.

Mirrorrorrim said:

This "elf game" is about the "found family" of the adventuring party, more than anything. Accepting people from diverse backgrounds to work together towards heroic ends, defeating bullies, tyranny, and evil. It is important and not "just a game."

Click to expand...

That is fair but plenty of people find this premise dull (at least if it is the only focus or option). It is also often about outcasts and ne’er-do-wells stealing treasure and living a bohemian sword and sorcery life. That’s one of the reasons vampire skyrocketed to popularity in the 90s. It isn’t just based on Tolkien but Moorcock, Howard and others as well

Bedrockgames said:

That’s one of the reasons vampire skyrocketed to popularity in the 90s. It isn’t just based on Tolkien but Moorcock, Howard and others as well

Click to expand...

In that regard, "rogues on the make" strikes me as a much more accurate summary of D&D than "found family."

Mirrorrorrim said:

D&D is a cultural phenomenon with a great responsibility due to its influence and reach. And I appreciate that Wizards (and many other game companies) are trying to evolve with the times. But I don't envy their position in trying to juggle those values with an existing market filled with intolerant (or at least uncaring) perspectives that malign them because they hate change and don't see those efforts as worth their empathy. These game companies do have to make money after all, so it can be a hard path to navigate.

Click to expand...

I would argue this is an attitude that leads to bad art and not very entertaining media. Again having lived through the 80s when this stuff was coming at us from both the left and the right, I just can’t get behind the idea that art has a social responsibility like that. That isn’t to say it ought to be actively bad. But efforts to constrain art and entertainment under a moral framework, never seem to go well for art, artists, writers, designers or the audience because so often the people who are in charge of making those moral judgments don’t see nuance and completely miss the point

Bedrockgames said:

That is fair but plenty of people find this premise dull (at least if it is the only focus or option). It is also often about outcasts and ne’er-do-wells stealing treasure and living a bohemian sword and sorcery life. That’s one of the reasons vampire skyrocketed to popularity in the 90s. It isn’t just based on Tolkien but Moorcock, Howard and others as well

Click to expand...

Bagpuss said:

It’s not a great analogy as you’ve said the room was crowded. These people aren’t doing it on purpose, and in fact can’t avoid it unless the situation changes and they will be standing on each others feet as well.

Click to expand...

A crowded room, in this metaphor, is societal norms. Everyone expects that certain words are OK, when surprise, it turns out they're not.

Bagpuss said:

However you are the only person complaining about a situation everyone finds themselves in. Everyone else is apologetic but getting on with it without blaming the other people.

Click to expand...

But is everyone getting on with it equally well the tenth, fiftieth, or hundredth time it happens?

And no, Hussar is not the only person complaining about this situation. Many, many people have complained about this. There was a note in the Fate System book, from 2013, about how race was a poor word for being both inaccurate and problematic, but they were using it because it was a commonly-understood term in RPGs (and the race examples they gave were elves and orcs, so you know they meant D&D-type RPGs).

Bagpuss said:

Worse it equates words to actual physical pain, they aren’t the same.

Click to expand...

Actually, words do hurt--insults and verbal cruelties have long-lasting affects on the mind. I say this as someone who is still messed up from grade school bullying thirty years ago.

Bagpuss said:

New words don't help if they are trying to convey the same concepts, kind of shown by people getting upset over replacing race with species. And often people just go on to start taking offence at the new words because the sentiment is the same.

Click to expand...

Race has particular connotations that species doesn't, and is also, quite frankly, not a useful word.

And people here aren't so much taking offense with the term species as with the "just one drop" method of half-whatevers that One is trying to do, when there are other, more inclusive ways of letting people play people of mixed ancestry. If they don't want to do what Level Up did, with a heritage/gift divide, they could simply asterisk a trait or two in each species' statblock, and you can swap one species' asterisked trait with another one.

Some of us like both. Morally questionable character with dark backstories who often struggle to stay on the 'good' side of the alignment chart. In a world which is less than perfect where the aim is to fight against these awful people like slavers.

But also the entire 'found family' part makes it for me. This bunch of people who have struggled through life finally finding people who they can trust and care for, going from strangers, to travelling companions, to friends, to family.