D&D (2024) How did I miss this about the Half races/ancestries

Status
Not open for further replies.
I would have no problems with that.

Although with orc right there, half-orc becomes rather redundant. But, yeah, take out the whole “if you aren’t pure blooded, you’re a misfit loner that everyone hates” would be a great start.
Why isn't half-elf redundant with elf right there?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Why isn't half-elf redundant with elf right there?
Half-elves have generally always had their various bits and bobs to them to make them stand out between the standard elf and human options so there's been a focus on why they're different to the other options

Whereas half-orcs have just been "This is your option to play as orcs" for years, so not as much effort was put into it.
 

Half-elves have generally always had their various bits and bobs to them to make them stand out between the standard elf and human options so there's been a focus on why they're different to the other options

Whereas half-orcs have just been "This is your option to play as orcs" for years, so not as much effort was put into it.
This would be an excellent opportunity to put some effort in then.
 

Personally, I dislike the "Half" Elf having features that are unlike either parentage.

I strongly prefer choosing features from both parentages. For example, an offspring who is Elf-Human might have the Human skill set and the Elf cantrip, or alternative have entirely Elf features or entirely Human features, whatever makes sense to the character concept.

Note, a Human-Dragon is possible from a Human who grows up within the magical influence of a nearby powerful Dragon. In this case I would select from Dragonborn and Human to build the character.
 

All true, but to be fair, you actually have to have racism in your story to make a case against it. Otherwise you're attacking a paper tiger from an in-universe perspective.
If that's your story, sure. If your setting is currently plunged into a massive segregation scenario like LotR, where everyone hates everyone and this hatred has plunged the world into turmoil. The only official setting I know of that's even close to that is Dark Sun.
 

Both possibilities are valid, and a hundred more besides, and I have nothing against creating a world without slavery or racism. But I also have nothing against creating a world that does have those things.
But, therein lies the rub.

We have fifty years of D&D worlds WITH slavery and racism.

We have zero years of D&D worlds WITHOUT slavery and racism.

That does kinda put paid to the idea that not having restrictions leads to more creativity. Since all the worlds draw from the same well, so to speak, isn't this precisely the pablum and blandness that is being complained about? Since we haven't had restrictions on the material (if restrictions is the word) for the first 50 years, and all that resulted in was the same worlds over and over again, with the same themes and tropes, how does not having restrictions lead to more creativity? Where's the proof?
 

Why isn't half-elf redundant with elf right there?
Why are you ignoring the fact that I said it was fine? You asked, I answered. Again, not really a problem if you include half-orcs with orcs. My issue is the fact that half-blooded races are ALWAYS subjected to racism and bigotry, are ALWAYS misfits and so on. Take out the whole "Well, you're not really a real person unless you have pure blood" from the game and I'm pretty much happy with whatever you put in the books?
 

All true, but to be fair, you actually have to have racism in your story to make a case against it. Otherwise you're attacking a paper tiger from an in-universe perspective.
Again, you're completely ignoring context though.

Let's take a look at REAL examples. One of the best regarded D&D modules of all time are the A 1-4 Against the Slave Lords series. These are VERY highly ranked. Among the top ten modules of all time.

Now, there are something like 40 slaves in A1 Slave Pits of the Undercity. Not a single one has a name, race or gender. Not one. They are listed as "slave" only. You get more information about the treasure that you can find than you get about the slaves. While none of the NPC's in the modules are named, they are all described, given classes (often) and race.

THAT'S how slavery is dealt with in D&D. The slaves are faceless, formless blobs with zero identity or detail.
 

Oh yeah, diversity is fun. And the fact that that line is basically pulled straight out of Jim Crow to describe how mixed race people are a threat to the white people, because they can "pass as people" is just even more fun for people to read I imagine.
Goodness. The point I was trying to make before you decided to enjoy some tea and cake with Jim Crow, was that each fantastical race has different flavours to bring to the table - humans are generic/your standard, while races like orcs bring an additional internal struggle to fight off their inherent nature, gnolls are even far more codified as their alignment is built in thanks to their origins, elves are blessed with longevity so their perspective on others and life could be skewed, halfs such half-orcs, half-elves must decide who they are and where they fit into the world - the struggle for acceptance is as much an outer as it is an inner battle, tieflings are no better as their tainted blood is betrayed in their appearance - mistrust of them is all too common but unlike halfs they dont have a people, dragonborn are seen as alien and out of place - how much of that reptilian mind is the deciding factor within their everyday lives?...etc
Each race brings something different and wonderful to the table. Instead of celebrating that, we're worried that some of them may not be human enough for us to enjoy the game.

If you stopped viewing them as a stand-in for something else you might actually see the opportunities I and many others see.
 
Last edited:


Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top