D&D (2024) Half Race Appreciation Society: Half Elf most popular race choice in BG3

Do you think Half Elf being most popular BG3 race will cause PHB change?s?

  • Yes, Elf (and possibly other specieses) will get a hybrid option.

    Votes: 10 8.7%
  • Yes, a crunchier hybrid species system will be created

    Votes: 8 7.0%
  • Yes, a fluffier hybrid species system will be created

    Votes: 5 4.3%
  • No, the playtest hybrid rules will move forward

    Votes: 71 61.7%
  • No, hybrids will move to the DMG and setting books.

    Votes: 13 11.3%
  • Other

    Votes: 8 7.0%


log in or register to remove this ad


Well, sure, they were called Magic-Users, back then. They didn't earn the level-title Wizard until 11th.
I am properly chastened - may I have my Grognard card back? 🥺
Since you asked nicely. 😀

And I referring to my belief that TSR mechanics for casters handled the martial caster gap much better than anything WotC has put up (except 4e, but they handled it by making magic less fun IMO).
 

Thank you. :)
I kinda figured, the TSR era restrictions on Magic-Users (and illusionists, and even Druid & Clerics, a bit) were brutal. Absolute armor proscriptions, crap weapons, d4 HD, terrible attack matrix, slow saving throw progression in all categories, random starting spell determination, know spell%, max spells known, spell failure if your INT was lowish, draconian restrictions on casting, concentration automatically interrupted by even a point of damage, and, of course, starting with exactly 1 spell/day as basically your only meaningful contribution to the party.
Brutal.
But it got better quickly. By 4th you had 6 (six) spells/day, and a housecat hasn't been able to theoretically kill you for a while. ;)
Magic-Users had it just fine through the sweet spot of 3-8th level (everyone did, that's why it was the sweet spot), after that, they really pulled ahead of the field.

(Even then, it was contingent on getting the right spells, and the rules were self-contradictory about that. The only clear/obvious way was to scribe from found scrolls, and they were random)
 

Thank you. :)
I kinda figured, the TSR era restrictions on Magic-Users (and illusionists, and even Druid & Clerics, a bit) were brutal. Absolute armor proscriptions, crap weapons, d4 HD, terrible attack matrix, slow saving throw progression in all categories, random starting spell determination, know spell%, max spells known, spell failure if your INT was lowish, draconian restrictions on casting, concentration automatically interrupted by even a point of damage, and, of course, starting with exactly 1 spell/day as basically your only meaningful contribution to the party.
Brutal.
But it got better quickly. By 4th you had 6 (six) spells/day, and a housecat hasn't been able to theoretically kill you for a while. ;)
Magic-Users had it just fine through the sweet spot of 3-8th level (everyone did, that's why it was the sweet spot), after that, they really pulled ahead of the field.

(Even then, it was contingent on getting the right spells, and the rules were self-contradictory about that. The only clear/obvious way was to scribe from found scrolls, and they were random)
Magic-User was like "hazing". Suffer during the low level as an appallingly subpar initiate, in order to become a member of a vastly overpowered group at high level. It was broken at low levels and broken at high levels.
 

Regarding the origin story of Elves, according to Forgotten Realms, I am trying to sort out the planar implications, if any.

Corellon is a literal ancestor of the Elf species. I view them as an actual member of the Elf species, albeit a primordial one, who retains the ability to shapechange at-will. They is gender-fluid in the sense of becoming extremely masculine, extremely feminine, androgynous, or any other gender expression, in addition to an identity of any item or natural feature. The multitude of identities corresponds to the pronoun they. Their interests resonate with the Bard tropes of magic, beauty, art, and war.

They is a Celestial whose will emanates the astral dominion (?) of Avandor, part of the network of dominions (?) that together comprise the alignment plane of Chaotic Good, Arborea. Gates and whirlpools link these dominions together (?).

Corellon is ethically Good, and Chaotic in the sense of heightened individualism − in every way a compassionate free spirit who champions liberty. The elven origin story seems to fall short of this ethical ideal in places.

The Elves came into existence asexually in a process of budding (blastogenesis), taking form and independence, while emerging from the shapechanging blood of Corellon. These primordial Elves are like their parent in every way, and are likewise mercurial shapechangers.

Corellon spilled this blood in a battle with Gruumsh who would go on to construct the Orc species. Both Corellon and Gruumsh have military interests, and their clash was a violent one that both survived. Corellon emanates a part of the Chaotic Good plane, and Gruumsh emanates a part of the Lawful by Lawful Evil plane of Acheron, name his dominion (?) of Nishrek which is there in Avalas. Thus their battle often characterizes as Good versus Evil. However, despite Gruumsh often listing as if Chaotic Evil, his own will emanates a dominion implying he himself is Lawful Neutral with Evil tendencies. The alignments of the battle are asymmetric. It seems less about Good versus Evil and more about something else. If ethics are in play, it seems more a clash between Lawful (group identity) versus Chaotic (individual identity).

The alignments of Corellon and Gruumsh have little if anything to do with the elven children of Corellon or the orcish creations of Gruumsh. Elves and Orcs are independent persons of free will and can choose to do behaviors of any alignment.

Where did this battle happen? Did Gruumsh attack Corellon in Avandor? Was the conflict somewhere in the Astral Sea between their respective dominions? There are many versions of this story despite the participants remaining alive. Because time can flow differently in different planes, along with other kinds of relativity, differing perspectives of the event can be equally legitimate.

Perhaps the battle actually took place in the Feywild, or rather what would eventually become the Feywild? More specifically, perhaps while fighting across various planes of the multiverse, the blood of Corellon spilled in the Feywild. Thus, the parent is Celestial, but the elven children are Fey.

I view the Feywild as the aspect of the Ethereal Plane that Positive Energy perfuses. Fey is Positive Ether while Shadow is Negative Ether. They are frequencies of energy that can pass thru each other unawares, each echoing the same features of the Material Plane.

I also view the primordial Elves as creating the Feywild (similar to how Dragon and Giant create the Material Plane). The Elves dont control the Feywild but they catalyzed it and are part of it. It may be their Celestial Positivity infused the Ethereal Plane causing the Feywild to come into existence. In this way, the Elves are primordially Fey beings as well as Celestial immigrants. In a realm of thought, ethical alignments regulate the Positive Energy of the Astral Plane, thus the absence of Positivity is Evil. But in a realm of forces, lifeforce and vibrant existence regulate the Positive Energy Ethereal Plane, thus the absence of Positivity is death.

The versions of the elven origin story often portray Corellon as if a neglectful parent − and even spiteful. Perhaps the truth is, the Elves would rather be Fey than Celestial, Corellon respects their freedom and their decision.

Now parent and children who deeply love each other are still figuring out how to make this work. There are no "bad guys" here.
 
Last edited:

The rules, the narrative, and the mechanics must be official and explicit, to attend to a character of multiple ethnicities, in order to end decades of problematic D&D traditions and the habitual continuation of them.
As a member of a family with mixed African, East Asian, and European roots, including multiple interracial relationships and various children of mixed ethnicity, I would like to politely request that you stop making absolutist statements about what “must” be done to accommodate people of multicultural backgrounds (and/or multiethnic backgrounds, whichever terminology you prefer to use).

If you happen to be from a multicultural/multiethnic family as I am, I would like to remind you that such families are not a monolithic group. Our family backgrounds do not give either of us the moral authority to tell people what they “must” do to accommodate all multicultural and/or multiethnic individuals. Neither of us is the official spokesperson for that entire demographic.

If you aren’t from a multicultural/multiethnic family as I am, I would like to request that you stop appropriating my real-life cultural and ethnic experiences as a talking point in your arguments. Doing so runs the risk of treating real-life human beings as mere means to an end, thereby dehumanizing them. If someone has explicitly asked you to advocate on their behalf, by all means do so. Otherwise, please stop.
 

As a member of a family with mixed African, East Asian, and European roots, including multiple interracial relationships and various children of mixed ethnicity, I would like to politely request that you stop making absolutist statements about what “must” be done to accommodate people of multicultural backgrounds (and/or multiethnic backgrounds, whichever terminology you prefer to use).

If you happen to be from a multicultural/multiethnic family as I am, I would like to remind you that such families are not a monolithic group. Our family backgrounds do not give either of us the moral authority to tell people what they “must” do to accommodate all multicultural and/or multiethnic individuals. Neither of us is the official spokesperson for that entire demographic.

If you aren’t from a multicultural/multiethnic family as I am, I would like to request that you stop appropriating my real-life cultural and ethnic experiences as a talking point in your arguments. Doing so runs the risk of treating real-life human beings as mere means to an end, thereby dehumanizing them. If someone has explicitly asked you to advocate on their behalf, by all means do so. Otherwise, please stop.
I value my privacy, and avoid reallife references unless they seem to clarify various aspects of the D&D game.

Am Norwegian born in Oslo and raised there and elsewhere along the southern coast of Norway. My dad comes from a historical Norwegian family that includes Sámi family members. My mom is from a Scottish family that includes West Asian family members. As an adult, my academic interests are in the Mideast and I am at home there. I am currently in a Latino-majority region of the United States.

I am reasonably knowledgeable about US history and cultures. America has a history of racial slavery and racial segregation that it is still figuring out how to move on from. The history of D&D often takes racial assumptions for granted, such as race and subraces. I view these fantasy racist traditions as ethical in their day, often helpfully subversive. But the racist premise is outliving its usefulness, WotC needs to discontinue it, for various reasons that are in the interests of the WotC corporation, as well as ethical when young players play the game during their formative years. Overt racism and racial segregation − especially when mechanics enforce it − are better left behind in the dust of D&D history.

D&D continually evolves. Earlier editions already went thru the process of eliminating sexist traditions. We are now in an edition that is eliminating racist traditions.

As you say, no demographic is "monolithic", especially ethnicity. Each of us must be able to speak freely and civilly about any concerns that we have about the D&D game from our perspectives.
 
Last edited:

As you say, no demographic is "monolithic", especially ethnicity. Each of us must be able to speak freely and civilly about any concerns that we have about the D&D game from our perspectives.
By all means, discuss what WotC must do to make you and your community feel included. I just request that you please refrain from absolutist rhetorical statements that advocate on behalf of broad demographic categories, as some of your prior posts seem to be doing. To the limited extent that we fall into the same demographic category, I can conclusively say you aren't speaking on behalf of that entire category, because I disagree with several of your arguments in this thread. Make whatever statements you want, but please don't phrase them in a way that implies you're speaking on behalf of my own similar-but-different segment of the larger multiethnic demographic.
 


Remove ads

Top