• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 5E D&D Celebration Schedule Announced

WotC has posted the schedule for it's D&D Celebration online event taking place from 18th-20th September. The event includes a range of panels and live games, including sessions on Icewind Dale: Rime of the Frostmaiden and Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything, mental health, inclusive dungeon design, and including asian stories in your games. These include people such as Daniel Kwan (Asians...

WotC has posted the schedule for it's D&D Celebration online event taking place from 18th-20th September.

ddc.png


The event includes a range of panels and live games, including sessions on Icewind Dale: Rime of the Frostmaiden and Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything, mental health, inclusive dungeon design, and including asian stories in your games. These include people such as Daniel Kwan (Asians Represent) and Sara Thompson (The Combat Wheelchair), who have both spoken publicly about problematic issues in D&D.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


log in or register to remove this ad

I find myself having a hard time getting my head around making all the D&D races the same. In the real world, I understand the truth that we are all human beings and are all equal with varying talents and abilities. In a D&D setting, however, I always saw it as being purposefully DETACHED from the truths of reality. And in this regard, each race was made purposefully unique. By blending everything together and mellowing out the "viva la difference" there no longer seems to be any special "cool factor" since you can basically get the same traits no matter who you play. Is this just me?

I am all right with them substituting the word "race" for something else (species, folk, etc), but I see what you mean. I am all for diversity, and I do think there is some problematic and stereotypical portrayals of certain "races", even the human ones (such as those who are "Asian"). But this can be rectified with research and descriptions that don't stem from racism.

For non-human "races", I guess it goes back to the ancestry and cultural thing, but I do hope they keep the "flavor" of each race. I'm not saying this means keeping all orcs evil savages, I just mean keeping the culture of that "race". Elves have a culture, dwarves have a culture, etc. Going back to the culture and ancestry, this could mean that a halfling raised in a dwarven community is going to act more "dwarvish", likely worshiping dwarven gods, speaking dwarvish, etc.

We're all people, but we come from different cultures and backgrounds, so I hope they apply this to D&D as well. Make it inclusive, but also highlight what makes each ethnicity or culture (or "species") unique. I don't mean "exotic" or "special", just...how they tick. What they believe, what their cultural practices are, etc. After all, cultures in the real world make the world that much more fascinating!
 

dave2008

Legend
I find myself having a hard time getting my head around making all the D&D races the same. In the real world, I understand the truth that we are all human beings and are all equal with varying talents and abilities. In a D&D setting, however, I always saw it as being purposefully DETACHED from the truths of reality. And in this regard, each race was made purposefully unique. By blending everything together and mellowing out the "viva la difference" there no longer seems to be any special "cool factor" since you can basically get the same traits no matter who you play. Is this just me?
The rules are optional and even if the add them to future printings of the PHB I would hope the remain optional.

PS We have our own rules or racial attributes, so it doesn't affect my games at all.
 

As far as the new 'racial rules', I wouldn't be surprised to see them be what they had either posted on the website or the UA articles.

Basically, your core class determines what you have a +2 in. Fighters will have Str or Con, for example. Maybe even a choice between the three 'recommended' stats in the Quick Builds. And then, whatever background you have gives you the +1 to another stat. I personally like that, but I'm prone to play non-optimal characters - my favorite, and my friends' favorite, was a dwarven sorceror in 3e (so Con bump and Cha penalty). He was a sorceror who thought he was a rat shaman, and that his powers came from worshipping Rat. He was hell on treasures, the party realized, when they found an expensive tapestry that he claimed for his share of loot as a 'cloak'.
 

Reynard

Legend
Supporter
D&D has long since stopped attempting to simulate anything, so racial ability modifiers is actually out of place. Characters are competent, so they need good scores in the core attributes for their class/role, so THAT is what should determine the score. Not all dwarves are strong, but all barbarians are.
 



TarionzCousin

Second Most Angelic Devil Ever
I personally like that, but I'm prone to play non-optimal characters - my favorite, and my friends' favorite, was a dwarven sorceror in 3e (so Con bump and Cha penalty). He was a sorceror who thought he was a rat shaman, and that his powers came from worshipping Rat. He was hell on treasures, the party realized, when they found an expensive tapestry that he claimed for his share of loot as a 'cloak'.
He worshiped "Rat" and he got powers. :unsure: It seems pretty straight-forward to me.
 

Reynard

Legend
Supporter
Cause how your eyeballs work and whether or not you need to sleep isn't dependent on nurture, while your physical strength, intelligence, and other ability scores are.
I suppose there is an argument to be made that giving dwarves darkvision is some form of "simulationism" but it is pretty thin. It's more a legacy feature, and a dwarf would not be any less "dwarf" if you got rid of it. I mean, I can picture in my head a half dozen D&D illustrations with dwarves holding torches, and even Snow White's gang illuminated their halls. I would go so far as to say that pretty much anything that looks like simulation in 5E is a legacy feature that can probably be scrapped, or exists solely to provide some sort of mechanical balance and the "simulation" part is accidental or ancillary. Example: stealth penalties for heavy armor.
 


Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top