Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Yaarel" data-source="post: 8441833" data-attributes="member: 58172">Yeah, the subrace format was inconvenient for players. Also, it was constraining for design space.The designers did announce a clear schematic. Namely, a &quot;race&quot; only refers to player options and wont include &quot;culture&quot;, and the term &quot;lineage&quot; includes both player race and nonplayer character and monster. Since then, the designs havent contradicted this schematic.I noticed the absence of the term &quot;lineage&quot; in Fizbans too. Even so, the references to &quot;races&quot; were precisely in the context of player options, so it still continues the announced schematic.I agree, the absence of lineage suggested hesitancy.So far, the current designs have &quot;settled&quot;. But it might be possible for future designs to include more experimentation or clarification.In any case, there is a need for a technical term like &quot;lineage&quot; (≈ species). For example, a gray ooze isnt a &quot;race&quot;, but it is a lineage. Where a &quot;race&quot; only refers to player character options, there needs to be a term like lineage that includes nonplayer stats as well.(Suppose, an other experimental option that designers could do is to use the term &quot;race&quot; to exactly mean a &quot;species&quot;. So that D&amp;D does refer to a gray ooze as a race. And, a race can include both player stats and nonplayer stats. But the term &quot;race&quot; is problematic because of its relationship to reallife racism, and the term is worth segueing away from.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Yaarel, post: 8441833, member: 58172"] Yeah, the subrace format was inconvenient for players. Also, it was constraining for design space. The designers did announce a clear schematic. Namely, a "race" only refers to player options and wont include "culture", and the term "lineage" includes both player race and nonplayer character and monster. Since then, the designs havent contradicted this schematic. I noticed the absence of the term "lineage" in Fizbans too. Even so, the references to "races" were precisely in the context of player options, so it still continues the announced schematic. I agree, the absence of lineage suggested hesitancy. So far, the current designs have "settled". But it might be possible for future designs to include more experimentation or clarification. In any case, there is a need for a technical term like "lineage" (≈ species). For example, a gray ooze isnt a "race", but it is a lineage. Where a "race" only refers to player character options, there needs to be a term like lineage that includes nonplayer stats as well. (Suppose, an other experimental option that designers could do is to use the term "race" to exactly mean a "species". So that D&D does refer to a gray ooze as a race. And, a race can include both player stats and nonplayer stats. But the term "race" is problematic because of its relationship to reallife racism, and the term is worth segueing away from.) [/QUOTE]

Verification