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

[Micah Sweet]

Again, this isn't an actual rational argument you're presenting, it's just whataboutism.

I don't know what that book does - I've never read it - have you? Maybe it defines culture in a way that is less problematic than claiming all Lantanese people have +1 INT or something. Or maybe it is problematic but people simply haven't examined that much yet.

I feel like you're playing devil's advocate here, in which case we're done, because you've already stated you don't believe using ASIs like this is a good idea.



You didn't "challenge" the notion with any kind of actual argument, so it wouldn't really be possible to "counter" what you've said other than to point out that what was originally suggested remains true. This is to be expected, no?



That's a patently ludicrous position, and means you aren't engaging in rational argument. Which is fine, and I can just not engage with, but you literally just demanded rational argument from others.



But why would it give +1 INT, when education is at most a small part of INT? Education in D&D 5E is basically skills and languages - it's just that most of the potentially "trained in a sit-down classroom" skills are INT-based skills.

You could certainly suggest that people educated by that system get a Jack of All Trades-type bonus to INT-based skills for example. But to the actual INT stat? That seems less reasonable.

Why wouldn't it give +1 Int? There are many ways to demonstrate ability, and ASIs do with in a game-friendly, general way that doesn't get bogged down in specific areas of knowledge (like skills) and remains meaningful as you advance. Class is no better a place to put them thematically than background or culture.

 

[EscherEnigma]

Backgrounds already exist. They basically represent the sort of thing you're talking about. Now one could of give more crunch to the backgrounds to make them more significant.

My #1 point was don't assume racial or national monocultures, so no. My main point had nothing to do with crunch.

That said, the entire idea of splitting race into "ancestry" and "culture" is basically off-loading some crunch onto a "backgrounds, but earlier in life", so it shouldn't be surprising if that's what it sounds like.

 

[Micah Sweet]

This falls apart the moment you actually build a fantasy setting and assign these bonuses to cultures therein. Parallels to real cultures are nigh impossible to avoid, and in many existing setting completely intentional parallels exist. People are already making a connection with the Orcs and the POC, and that is way weaker connection than seeing Chult to represent Africa etc.

People made that connection with orcs because they are disparaged using specific racial charged language. That's what caused this problem to escalate.

 

[Wishbone]

I think it might be ok if you're describing nonhuman cultures in a positive way. This all came to a head because orcs and drow were being described negatively with specific racially charged language. Very few people complain about dwarves and halfling. And by splitting ancestry and culture, you can basically give your character whatever ASI's you want.

IMO the issue with dwarves and halflings vs. orcs and drow is that the former are subject to more positive racial stereotyping as opposed to negative stereotyping and we are generally more willing to overlook that (model minorities vs. cultural boogeymen). I think there's nothing necessarily wrong with wearing the real-world inputs on your sleeve when presenting a fantasy race, but it has to be done with a lot more care and nuance than it has in the past. Basically, I think reinforcing a real-world racial, ethnic, or cultural stereotype by itself is bad regardless of the direction and doesn't count as adequate representation.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

People made that connection with orcs because they are disparaged using specific racial charged language. That's what caused this problem to escalate.

Jesus Christ! It cannot be that hard to realise that giving the fantasy French and fantasy Chinese different ASIs is incredibly racist! This whole discussion is bloody bizarre!

 

[Haldrik]

They might. If they're generated like a PC is and assigned maxed-out Charisma they only have to be level 4 to get Cha of 20.

More to the point, you don't need a stat of 20 to be a believable character.

To be a charismatic chieftain, all you need is better than average Charisma. Assign a stat higher than 11 there and hey, the character is charismatic.
Given that the standard NPC stat bell curve is rather flatter than even the PC one, just sticking a 16 in Charisma won't just make you the most charismatic orc in several tribes, you'll probably be the most charismatic person in the region, including a couple of human cities.

No, but after after learning a little more and more real-life experience, they can.
With the exception of those games where the DM allows the optional variant human rules, even humans can't get a stat of 20 at level 1.
Is it a real-life racist assumption that a human can't start out with a stat of 20? Really?

The reallife racist assumptions are the connection formed by the descriptive language used for specific D&D species mirroring racist language used to describe realife ethnicities. That language will be removed, at which point there should be no links between D&D species and realife ethnicities.

Unless a culture doesn't have boats or the equivalent method of transportation across distances like caravans, that the Ship's Passage feature could be applied to, it does. The exceptions are why I said almost all. At which point, maybe just don't pick the sailor background if the Ship's Passage feature is not appropriate for your character?

Those are likely to be few and far between. At which point homebrewing a feature may be appropriate.
I'm coming up with a blank though: Could you give some examples?

Backgrounds are already eminently customisable. A character concept that you just cannot apply one of the existing class features to would be pretty rare I believe.

You realize, its not about the 20. Its about removing racism from D&D.

WotC will scrutinize every humanoid to remove reallife racist tropes.

 

[Undrave]

Jesus Christ! It cannot be that hard to realise that giving the fantasy French and fantasy Chinese different ASIs is incredibly racist! This whole discussion is bloody bizarre!

Maybe we should just move ASI to the class itself.

Everybody likes to have a +2 to their main stat anyway so why not?

+2 to your main stat and +1 to a stat for which you have saving throw proficiency in. Give humans a bonus Saving Throw proficiency (worth a feat) and there ya go.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Maybe we should just move ASI to the class itself.

Everybody likes to have a +2 to their main stat anyway so why not?

+2 to your main stat and +1 to a stat for which you have saving throw proficiency in. Give humans a bonus Saving Throw proficiency (worth a feat) and there ya go.

At which point it is probably better to simply use higher numbers for stat point buy and standard array/a more fruitful random generation.

 

[Haldrik]

See, I've always used the Tolkien idea that elves are basically immortal, but after a while most of them chuffed off to the Feywild or something and aren't really around in the material world anymore. 2nd ed also used this idea.

Me too.

Elves in my campaigns are immortal.

They are born and reach age 20 at the same rate as humans. They remain eternally youthful.

There exist elves who appear as if older, but it is by means of shapeshift magic, and by choice or by curse.

When an elf reaches age 100, the elf becomes an "adult" and relocates to the otherworld to do ones duty to safeguard and govern fates.

There are individual exceptions who do their own thing, for various reasons. But generally the culture views adulthood as a sacred responsibility.



These tropes come from reallife ethnic folklore. Albeit the specific year 100 is a D&Dism. In the folklore, they yearn nostalgically to return to their immortal nature, even when they leave human loved ones behind. Yet they remain guardians of these humans and often their descendents after them.

 

[Undrave]

At which point it is probably better to simply use higher numbers for stat point buy and standard array/a more fruitful random generation.

Fair enough...

Or a mix of Background and Class? What your occupation was before adventuring made you better at certain things, which reflects in a better score, and your class boosts another stat?

Just spitballing here.