Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 9410114" data-attributes="member: 18">Yeah maybe. I mean, it is very weird to watch a game company fix a major and common complaint with the game, fix it from multiple angles, that fix gains broad acceptance, and then... they reverse the fix into something that's going to annoy people a lot lol! It annoys the by-species people, and it annoys the free-choice people, and together that's probably the vast majority of D&D players. And it wasn't playtested!Honestly they could so easily have just said "Your DM will have picked X, Y or Z" (or "Your group including the DM should together decide on...) where X is free choice, Y is background-limited, and Z is fixed by species) and pleased pretty much everyone. But they think they know better!Also do we know anything about 2024's report to non-single-species characters? Because the deleting half-races thing was a mixed bag social-justice-wise (erase biracial people to please people concerned about racist implications, like great lol very borrowing from Peter to pay Paul) and the replacement approach WotC had in the very early 2024 playtest was absolutely ghastly and had much stronger "racist implications" than half-races did - you could look like whatever, but you had to only have the specific abilities from one race, which you were mechanically. If that's what they've stuck with, WotC haven't been listening to social media even, they've just been designing in a vacuum and ignoring input (very much fitting the crude stereotype of the "well-meaning white liberal designer who thinks he knows exactly how to fix all this stuff" but who actually is pretty ignorant, which was proven to be somewhat true by a number of videogame companies in the '00s and '10s - like whoever decided Jacob's backstory, behaviour and plot development in ME2/3, good god).</blockquote>

Verification