D&D 5E 5th Edition and the "true exotic" races ...

[Ilbranteloth]

The eladrin prior to 4E were "angel elves". There was no lore that outright stated a direct connection to the elves or the Seldarine, but come on, look at the artwork, read the descriptions! Eladrin were most definitely "celestial elves" and were a part of the elvish "too-many subraces" problem.

It states that the eladrin on on good terms with the elven and Greek pantheons, which would indicate that they are separate to me.

Also, WotC DID give their reasoning on the changes to eladrin and elves in 4E, they even published it in a book before the game itself launched, "Wizards Presents: Races & Classes". It's okay if you missed that, or other explanations the designers gave later. But to assume the change had no solid reasoning . . . . .

It's why I hate that complaint, "change for the sake of change", because in almost every instance, it is a complaint born out of ignorance. The complainer assumes the change they did not like is "random" rather than thinking maybe, just maybe, there actually was a reason, one the complainer simply is unaware of.

So I went back to read that reference and I think it's a good example as to where I think they lost that thread of what makes D&D D&D. From a designer's perspective, what they are saying makes some sense. Why do we have all of these races competing for the same space. Except that originally the eladrin were much more powerful extraplanar creatures - monsters if you will. Elves (if related) were the "mortal" prime material races that resembled or perhaps descended from them. Although the written lore already defined the history of elves extensively, if differently from one world to another.

Part of this problem arose with the expanding number of playable races in the game. Of course, Planescape was part of the reason for this, but while it was supposed to be the setting that tied all of the other settings together, it played best if you stayed within the Planescape setting itself. They did have a lot of laws in place that prevented baatezu, tanar'ri, eladrin, and the other more powerful races from being able to simply enter the prime worlds at will and wreak havoc and destruction. But I digress.

What 4e did more than any other was attempt to reconcile all of the rules differences among the various worlds, and also differentiate from rules and lore. So the discussion about the different subraces being largely cultural instead of mechanical, they were correct. But in my opinion, they then went the wrong direction. In 4e the path they chose was to roll them all into a single history, tossing aside the lore and history that already existed not only in the game, but in the game settings. Essentially, they largely ignored the impact on the settings and those that had been playing within them for decades in some cases.

The statement that says that clearly to me is:
"Given the story we'd settled on for the high elves (a race of fey lords who live in castles in Faerie)..."

This highlights very clearly where the 4e approach was very different from earlier and now 5e. They weren't just redesigning the game (that is, the mechanics), they were redesigning the lore of the game itself. In that I mean that they were altering the base concept and history of the game from the start, and at the same time imposing the concept and lore of the core books upon the published settings. On the one hand this makes some sense - you need the lore to play the game right?

However, 5e approaches it from a different (and more traditional) direction. The core races have some basic lore and information on the subraces. Sure, by setting the FR as the default setting, they have imposed some lore into the core books, but the racial and class descriptions (even the cleric) for the most part leave Realms specific lore out.

This isn't an attempt to start an edition war. It's just pointing out that the way they've handled the races in 5e is, in my opinion, much more respectful of the history of the game and its settings. Which also reintroduces the concept of common and exotic races. Being exotic isn't a negative thing, nor does it relegate you to second-class status or invalidate your choice in any way. Instead, it is just a statement that in the generic D&D world (and more specifically, the Forgotten Realms as the default setting), they are actually less common. There are fewer of them, and as such, they are viewed as exotic by the more common races.

But you are right, the "change for the sake of change" comment was laziness on my part. Sometimes people do make changes for that reason, though, and elaborate and justify it after the fact.

The change from devils and demons to baatezu and tanar'ri in 2E was also not an example of a "random" change (your post seems to contradict itself on this point, to my reading). There was a very solid reason for that change too, to avoid the "angry moms". And of course, some hated it, some loved it. I agree with you, the names sound more interesting to me than devil and demon, and I use both interchangeably in my own campaigns.

D&D has gone through many changes, some widely accepted by fans and others widely rejected, but for the life of me, I can't think of any changes that were made just for "change for the sake of change". A phrase I hope never to read again, but sadly, most likely will.

No, I wasn't contradicting myself, I was responding to your approach of using the name eladrin as the one the elves used for themselves. I was pointing out that sometimes a name change was interesting, even if the change was for other reasons (like the baatezu/tanar'ri). However, in the case of the Forgotten Realms, the elves already have names for their own races, so porting in eladrin doesn't work as just a name change either.

I'm sure you will see the phrase again. But I think that a lot of the changes that have occurred over the years started off as, "Wouldn't it be cool if..."

In most cases I'd say the answer was probably "no."

But that's pretty close to change for the sake of change. The status quo, the current state isn't exciting or interesting anymore. So let's change it.

Regardless, I will refrain from using it myself.

Ilbranteloth