Level Up (A5E) Changes to race (species?)

[doctorbadwolf]

They were magical beings, who innately could shapechange. They took on shapes that they liked.

Being a shapeshifter is a biological trait. As @Micah Sweet pointed out, their wings and gills are very much inherited biological traits now, regardless of their origin. DnD includes different sapient species who inherit their parents' biological traits.

As is their proficiency in perception, their lack of a need to sleep and resistence to charm effects, their darkvision, and their size and speed. As is the Wood Elf's increased speed, and the Drow's magic and increased Darkvision.

Very little of most races' benefits are described in ways that could possibly be non-biological.

I, at least, wouldn't want a product like this to retcon the lore of the game.

 

[Haldrik]

Actually, I think either can work . . . .

Did sea elves evolve over time, magically or genetically, to breathe water? Or perhaps they were changed instantaneously in the ancient past due to some magical event (wizard, god) to adapt to life under the sea, but then passed down that trait genetically/magically? This idea works fine, and kinda-sorta matches our modern scientific ideas about biological evolution . . . .

Or maybe it's a mutant ability activating, X-Men (X-Person?) style (for an entire population) . . . throw a group of elves into the sea without a boat, and the trauma might activate a situation-dependent mutation to allow them to survive . . . . and then that ability is passed down generation after generation . . .

But . . . perhaps all elves have an innate ability to adapt to extreme environments, but must be trained to adapt to a specific environment. Perhaps sea elves are born in air-filled caves under the sea, and must be taught to adapt to underwater breathing. Or, perhaps elf babies can be taught when still in the womb . . . If you have a wood elf raised by sea elves, perhaps they too can learn to adapt to water-breathing! Perhaps even adult elves can learn to adapt to new environments, although it would be difficult and thought near impossible (much like language acquisition by adults IRL).

Even more extreme adaptations, like growing fins for sea elves and wings for avariel . . . could be described as learned adaptations, using the elven magical adaptability to grow fins or wings when young . . .

According to Mordenkainans, "the primal elves were changeable" and "adopted forms". The sea elves shapechanged instantly by magic and personal preference.



As a culture becomes more magically powerful, physical forms become more cultural preferences.

 

[Haldrik]

Elves are so different from each other.

Their "subspecies" seem more equivalent to a "species".

For taxonomy, I would rather treat elves as a family of related species, rather than a single species.

4e actually did this, by splitting the elf into eladrin, elf, and drow, each was quite different from the other.

The problem with 4e was, the drow lost its "elfhood" sotospeak.

It would be better if all the diverse kinds of elf are, in fact, "elf".

Thus "elf" is a creature type, not a species.

Compare "giant" and "dragon", that are also creature types, not species.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Actually, I think either can work . . . .

Did sea elves evolve over time, magically or genetically, to breathe water? Or perhaps they were changed instantaneously in the ancient past due to some magical event (wizard, god) to adapt to life under the sea, but then passed down that trait genetically/magically? This idea works fine, and kinda-sorta matches our modern scientific ideas about biological evolution . . . .

Or maybe it's a mutant ability activating, X-Men (X-Person?) style (for an entire population) . . . throw a group of elves into the sea without a boat, and the trauma might activate a situation-dependent mutation to allow them to survive . . . . and then that ability is passed down generation after generation . . .

But . . . perhaps all elves have an innate ability to adapt to extreme environments, but must be trained to adapt to a specific environment. Perhaps sea elves are born in air-filled caves under the sea, and must be taught to adapt to underwater breathing. Or, perhaps elf babies can be taught when still in the womb . . . If you have a wood elf raised by sea elves, perhaps they too can learn to adapt to water-breathing! Perhaps even adult elves can learn to adapt to new environments, although it would be difficult and thought near impossible (much like language acquisition by adults IRL).

Even more extreme adaptations, like growing fins for sea elves and wings for avariel . . . could be described as learned adaptations, using the elven magical adaptability to grow fins or wings when young . . .

EDIT: Forgot to address @doctorbadwolf and his pushback against mortal elves casting spells to adapt to their environments . . . why not? Elves are described as being very magical beings, both innate magic and the ability to use high levels of wizardry. In D&D fiction, elven high mages cast powerful spells to adapt their environments to the elves' needs, why not powerful spells to adapt their own bodies? Once the high magic has been cast and an elven population now has fins and can breathe underwater, or has wings and can fly through the air . . . these traits are passed down to the generations. Or maybe the spells need to be cast for each new generation! Maybe the high magic is lost, and the elves are now dependent on powerful magical items to accomplish the adaptation (mythals?).

Something to keep in mind . . . we are talking about changing the mechanics of race in D&D, but we can also change the story behind those mechanics . . . how much we change the story depends on our own personal preferences, but there isn't anything stopping us!

That would require extreme retconning, way beyond even what MToF did, and I hope that isn't the plan, here.

Now, adding a lore-based species feature that actually does something with the nature of elves described in MToF, where an elf can learn magic to adapt as their ancient ancestors did, unlocking feats that give a subrace specific benefit to any elf.

 

[Dire Bare]

Maybe so (although it's not an idea I care for, its plausible), but the issue I have was that @Haldrik is claiming that all racial features are just cultural, as if it were inarguable. That just not how they've ever been presented or intended.

That's what I thought as well, but now I don't think that is what they are arguing. @Haldrik, correct me if I'm wrong . . .

If I understand @Haldrik correctly, they feel that in the D&D game right now, the game does not distinguish between inherited traits (species) and learned traits (culture). Some folks are fine with that, but would like more choice and granularity in selecting racial traits for their character.

I agree the game does not make that distinction currently, and for those of us who would like to separate inherited traits from learned traits, deciding which traits are which is something we can argue about, as I did in my above post about elven adaptations potentially being described as inherited or learned, that either could work.

Personally, I see the current D&D racial traits as a mix of inherited traits and learned traits. I would like to see a system that separates them and makes that distinction. I've seen some good designs towards this, I really like Arcanist Press' Ancestry and Culture.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

According to Mordenkainans, "the primal elves were changeable" and "adopted forms". The sea elves shapechanged instantly by magic and personal preference.



As a culture becomes more magically powerful, physical forms become more cultural preferences.

No. That is incorrect.

The sea elves didn't shapechange, their ancestors did. The modern elf (used in the same way as modern human irl) cannot shapechance in that way, and a sea elf always gives birth to a sea elf. Full stop. It's objectively and inarguably biological.

 

[Dire Bare]

Elves are so different from each other.

Their "subspecies" seem more equivalent to a "species".

For taxonomy, I would rather treat elves as a family of related species, rather than a single species.

4e actually did this, by splitting the elf into eladrin, elf, and drow, each was quite different from the other.

The problem with 4e was, the drow lost its "elfhood" sotospeak.

It would be better if all the diverse kinds of elf are, in fact, "elf".

Thus "elf" is a creature type, not a species.

Compare "giant" and "dragon", that are also creature types, not species.

Heh. In real life science, when it comes to classifying things (organisms, rocks, what-have-you) we have lumpers and we have splitters.

Lumpers tend to lump or group things into broad categories that account for relatively minor differences. A D&D lumper would group all elves as one species, despite their differences like gills and wings. Maybe even some other closely related fey races like eladrin and le shay.

Splitters like to split out things into numerous, more specific categories. A D&D splitter would classify most D&D elves as entirely different, if closely related, species. Sea elves are a species, avariel are a species, drow are a species . . . etc.

Even within each classification tendency, there are plenty of arguments about which things belong in which categories and why. It's part of what's fun about science!

So, no surprise that folks have different ideas about what exactly is meant by species or race in D&D.

I'm not sure if I'd go back, but I did really like how 4E treated the elves, eladrin, and drow . . . D&D certainly has a LOT of various racial "families" that make classification something we can endlessly argue about!

 

[Undrave]

Sea Elves and Winged Elves are dumb anyway we should replaced Sea Elves by more interesting water breathing races.

Like Tritons or Water Genasi or Horseshoecrabfolks.

 

[Haldrik]

That's what I thought as well, but now I don't think that is what they are arguing. @Haldrik, correct me if I'm wrong . . .

If I understand @Haldrik correctly, they feel that in the D&D game right now, the game does not distinguish between inherited traits (species) and learned traits (culture). Some folks are fine with that, but would like more choice and granularity in selecting racial traits for their character.

I agree the game does not make that distinction currently, and for those of us who would like to separate inherited traits from learned traits, deciding which traits are which is something we can argue about, as I did in my above post about elven adaptations potentially being described as inherited or learned, that either could work.

Personally, I see the current D&D racial traits as a mix of inherited traits and learned traits. I would like to see a system that separates them and makes that distinction. I've seen some good designs towards this, I really like Arcanist Press' Ancestry and Culture.

(Haldrik is "he". )



Several concerns are going on at the same time.

• Reallife concerns to avoid systemic racism. Coming from an earlier era, D&D intentionally used racist terminology and concepts, including the word "race". Note, D&D has always defined "human" as a single race. Other races were strictly nonhuman. At least dejure, if not defacto.

• There is strong desire for D&D to abandon the term "race", to distance the game from reallife racism.

• To replace the word "race", there is debate about what the new term should be: "species", "heritage", "ethnicity", "folk", "ancestry", etcetera.

• The possibility of "species", motivates some to distinguish between "species" (nature) versus "culture" (nurture). Thus there is a new effort to distinguish between traits that are obviously learned from "culture", such as Elf with longsword weapon proficiency, versus traits that seem more biological that seem to come from being a "species", such as, Darkvision.

• Since D&D "races" are racist (essentialist thus quasi-biological), D&D never distinguished between nature versus nurture when describing a race.

• But now with a hypothetical "species" contrasting "culture", can the traits of the former race be reorganized into these two hypothetical categories? And the answer is, no.

• Even Darkvision is magical − not biological. Its ability to see in total darkness, is magic. There is a spell, called Darkvision. Someone learns the spell, and casts it. A spell like Permanency, or Wish, can make this magical ability permanent, and even inheritable. Thus the origin of Darkvision is strictly "culture", and cant be biological.

• What is true for Darkvision is true for any biological trait: Size, gills, wings. Officially, elven cultures shapeshifted magically to adapt to new environments. The biological changes are by means of cultural choices.

• So, it seems, D&D was right all along to just lump everything together into one pot.

• Which now, ironically, turns out to be a good thing! Originally D&D did it because everything is biological ( = racism!). But, because magic, everything is actually cultural. In other words, everything is because of learning magic and exercising ones own freewill personal choice ( ≠ racism!).

• So maybe "species" is a less useful term in D&D, to describe any Humanoid who can learn to wield magic to transform magically, by choice.

• Perhaps a word like "heritage" is more accurate − in the context of magic. Because an individual "inherits" their current form that they were born into. However, the person can freely choose to cherry-pick what parts of this "heritage" are useful, and what parts are less useful, now, today. Today, a person can choose to shapeshift the less useful parts, to update the heritage for future generations.

 

[Dire Bare]

• But now with a hypothetical "species" contrasting "culture", can the traits of the former race be reorganized into these two hypothetical categories? And the answer is, no.

• Even Darkvision is magical − not biological. Its ability to see in total darkness, is magic. There is a spell, called Darkvision. Someone learns the spell, and casts it. A spell like Permanency, or Wish, can make this magical ability permanent, and even inheritable. Thus the origin of Darkvision is strictly "culture", and cant be biological.

• What is true for Darkvision is true for any biological trait: Size, gills, wings. Officially, elven cultures shapeshifted magically to adapt to new environments. The biological changes are by means of cultural choices.

• So, it seems, D&D was right all along to just lump everything together into one pot.

• Which now, ironically, turns out to be a good thing! Originally D&D did it because everything is biological ( = racism!). But, because magic, everything is actually cultural. In other words, everything is because of learning magic and exercising ones own freewill personal choice ( ≠ racism!).

• So maybe "species" is a less useful term in D&D, to describe any Humanoid who can learn to wield magic to transform magically, by choice.

• Perhaps a word like "heritage" is more accurate − in the context of magic. Because an individual "inherits" their current form that they were born into. However, the person can freely choose to cherry-pick what parts of this "heritage" are useful, and what parts are less useful, now, today. Today, a person can choose to shapeshift the less useful parts, to update the heritage for future generations.

Okay, I'm getting a better picture of your position, and I think I see where @Micah Sweet is coming from in response.

I'm not a fan of making all D&D racial traits learned, or cultural traits. I don't think it's a wrong position to take, heck, I just spitballed above about elven environmental adaptation as being a learned trait, at least in regards to specific environments . . . but I do think that there are some racial traits that flow better if thought of as inherited, or species traits.

But it's all a matter of perspective and preference. Elves, dwarves, orcs and all the rest are, of course, not real species but fictional creations based on mythic and literary tropes. They are a way to explore humanity through stereotypes, a way to focus your character concept. So, to view the fantasy races as NOT being distinct biological species . . . that's okay, it's just not my preference.

Sure, you can cast a spell to shapechange or gain darkvision temporarily, and it's not a stretch to say that powerful magic can make those changes permanent. In old-school D&D, there was even a high-level spell called permanence that did just that. So for a group of elves to have a cultural practice of adapting their bodies via magic to their environment . . . yeah, that can work.

Part of the challenge is that fantasy isn't based on scientific understanding, but mythic tropes. The word species is a scientific word and sounds off to some of us when describing fantasy races. And why should fantasy races be limited to our current understanding (or even misunderstanding) of the science of biology and evolution, and of culture and ethnicity? But, we view the game through our modern lens, and basic ideas about species, evolution, culture, and ethnicity play into that. That's why many of us come into this discussion from an almost science fictional perspective. Positing, "What if elves were a biological species on a world a lot like our Earth . . . what would they be like?"