D&D (2024) Do you think they will add more races to PHB2024 to make up for dropping other stuff?

[Ruin Explorer]

Tieflings also used to have way less choice of how they were depicted.

When is "used to have"? The original Tieflings had more choice than literally any other Tieflings since. Technically that continued in 3.XE, it just lost all the charts and completely changed Tiefling personalities, saying they were all super creepy and almost-certain to be evil, and giving them a penalty to CHA (!?!??), and depicted all Tieflings as basically Cambions without wings. Then 4E changed things again and that's when they got limited most appearance-wise, because it gave them a unified appearance. 5E followed on from 4E where, but SCAG technically opened the doors to varied Tieflings again.

On the grand scale of things, 5E is in the middle in terms of how much choice you have over Tiefling depictions.

The problem with Aasimars goes back to 2E, I note. Unlike Tieflings, they weren't designed by Zeb Cook, so have much more of a basic conceptualization and visualization, and unfortunately that has followed them around. Daevas were a much better conceptualization and more like something that would actually have fit in Zeb Cook's Planescape, I'd suggest.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Minotaurs and Devas became playable races in 4e.

Minotaurs were a playable race in 2E. Multiple sources, but the earliest one was the Taladas boxed set, Time of the Dragon, which came out in 1989 - so right alongside the initial second edition release, which it was part of. It's an absolutely overlooked and forgotten setting, despite being incredibly brilliant and ahead of its time in many ways (albeit not the art lol).

They may have been playable in Dragonlance in 1E too, I forget.

You will be entirely unsurprised to learn it was also by Zeb "Planescape" Cook.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

What is it? When I asked before why human/elf and human/orc hybrids deserved special treatment over other hybrid species, you said “legacy.” If there are other reasons, please enumerate them.

LOL this is a hilarious perspective when many of the classes and races in D&D exist solely because of "legacy".

Absolutely the only reason Monks and Sorcerers and Rangers exist in the forms they do in 5E is "legacy". There is no other reason. No accident they're some of the worse-designed classes though, I suspect. WotC don't have a vision for them, they just have to include them because "legacy", rather than because they fill an actual niche (Monk kinda does, but rather in occupies a real niche in a totally inadequate and stupid way, blocking a proper class from doing it, and why? Because of Orientalism in the 1970s!).

 

[Corinnguard]

The problem with Aasimars goes back to 2E, I note. Unlike Tieflings, they weren't designed by Zeb Cook

How do you think he would have designed the Aasimars? A more varied appearance similar to the Tiefling's?

 

[Ruin Explorer]

How do you think he would have designed the Aasimars? A more varied appearance similar to the Tiefling's?

At a minimum, yes. He definitely wouldn't have called them Aasimars, which is one of the worst names in D&D history!

I suspect he'd have avoided making them a simplistic mirror to Tieflings, too, and instead gone for a different angle, like whoever designed the Devas in 4E did.

Obviously this is just my thoughts on the basis of being a keen follower of Zeb Cook's work.

 

[mamba]

He definitely wouldn't have called them Aasimars, which is one of the worst names in D&D history!

what is so bad about that name? Is it purely esthetic? I don’t think Tiefling is any better

 

[Ruin Explorer]

what is so bad about that name? Is it purely esthetic? I don’t think Tiefling is any better

Yeah it's largely aesthetic, but it also derives from Aasimon in a very crude way, limiting the conceptual origins of Aasimar.

Tiefling is obviously far better both aesthetically and in terms of how it conveys the beings involved and the test of time confirms this, not really worth debating that, it's like trying to debate whether the Beatles were popular or something.

 

[mamba]

Yeah it's largely aesthetic, but it also derives from Aasimon in a very crude way, limiting the conceptual origins of Aasimar.

Tiefling is obviously far better both aesthetically and in terms of how it conveys the beings involved and the test of time confirms this, not really worth debating that, it's like trying to debate whether the Beatles were popular or something.

you can argue it fits better, but saying it is aesthetically better is something I disagree with but then you cannot argue taste…

That is not all like the Beatle being popular, it is a lot more like whether Beatles is a stupid name or not

 

[Ruin Explorer]

you can argue it fits better, but saying it is aesthetically better is something I disagree with but then you cannot argue taste…

I mean, if nothing else, Tiefling doesn't have an English pronunciation that tends to make people start it with the word "ass"... that's pretty much objectively superior lol.

 

[mamba]

I mean, if nothing else, Tiefling doesn't have an English pronunciation that tends to make people start it with the word "ass"... that's pretty much objectively superior lol.

maybe it’s my German background