D&D (2024) Fey Video Critique & Alternate Perspective

[Kobold Stew]

1:46 “This was a migration in the case of the goblinoids (to fey) that we began in MotM. This has actually been going on in the game for a number of years now. And now we finally had a chance to basically have the MM to catch up with where the game had already gone.

To me, this feels disingenuous.

MotM gave a number of species (not just goblinoids) "Fey Ancestry" which was an advantage against saves vs. Charm. In most games, that comes into play more often than creature type -- whether you are vulnerable to hold person or not. But they've gone "all the way" with goblinoids, but (apparently) not with all the fey-ancestry species.

And, in MotM, goblinoids were still humanoids and were not fey.

At the same time, there were playable species that were fey: Centaur, Satyr, Fairy, etc. Claiming that the game had already migrated to goblins=fey simply does not seem true, and it seems like they are trying to ret-con something they clearly hadn't done beforem in order to justify it now.

Again, this is a top-down designer-originating decision. This is not a player-originating shift.

This seems self-evidently true, and it is not the first time designers have imposed top-down decisions about species.

I can understand why the promotional videos are incentivized not to present it this way, and (not yet having seen the new MM) I haven't yet formed an opinion of the change. But that it is a top-down imposition (what I take to be the main point of the OP) seems absolutely correct.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

To me, this feels disingenuous.

MotM gave a number of species (not just goblinoids) "Fey Ancestry" which was an advantage against saves vs. Charm. In most games, that comes into play more often than creature type -- whether you are vulnerable to hold person or not. But they've gone "all the way" with goblinoids, but (apparently) not with all the fey-ancestry species.

And, in MotM, goblinoids were still humanoids and were not fey.

At the same time, there were playable species that were fey: Centaur, Satyr, Fairy, etc. Claiming that the game had already migrated to goblins=fey simply does not seem true, and it seems like they are trying to ret-con something they clearly hadn't done beforem in order to justify it now.

They said they started the migration, now they are finishing it.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

And, in MotM, goblinoids were still humanoids and were not fey.

The player options were humanoids. The two Hobgoblin monster stat blocks were Fey.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

The player options were humanoids. The two Hobgoblin monster stat blocks were Fey.

As was the Nilbog.

 

[Kobold Stew]

They said they started the migration, now they are finishing it.

I don't think we are disagreeing.

The player options were humanoids. The two Hobgoblin monster stat blocks were Fey.

Yup. The next sentence keeps the framing on the player-facing material.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I can understand why the promotional videos are incentivized not to present it this way, and (not yet having seen the new MM) I haven't yet formed an opinion of the change. But that it is a top-down imposition (what I take to be the main point of the OP) seems absolutely correct.

I know this sounds hopelessly naive, but I really feel if a company is incentivised to present decisions it made on its own in such a way so one could imagine that they are instead player-driven, that is a problem.

 

[Chaltab]

I know this sounds hopelessly naive, but I really feel if a company is incentivised to present decisions it made on its own in such a way so one could imagine that are instead player-driven, that is a problem.

What exactly makes you say they're presenting it as player-driven? Nothing I saw in the video gave me that impression.

 

[Micah Sweet]

What exactly makes you say they're presenting it as player-driven? Nothing I saw in the video gave me that impression.

When you suggest something has been happening in your game while not saying you are the ones who made and are making it happen, because simple persuasion tells us people are less likely to balk at something they don't feel is being imposed on them.

 

[QuentinGeorge]

WOTC released a adventure called Dragon Heist without any actual heist yet marketed it to all of us like we were getting the Oceans 11 campaign.

Stop putting any stock in there marketing department.

Remember the Mad Max war machines that dominated marketing for Descent into Avernus, yet were remarkably absent in the actual adventure?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

When you suggest something has been happening in your game while not saying you are the ones who made and are making it happen, because simple persuasion tells us people are less likely to balk at something they don't feel is being imposed on them.

They talk about what has been happening in their game - i.e. in the published adventures. They make no claims about anyone else's adventures.

Since you don't play WotC adventures, you would not have noticed that goblins have been fey for four years now.