You're reading the wrong words in that, and not counting the fact that there's already Nagas, Rocs, Oni (5e dropped Ogre Mage for good) already in the core D&D books. And I don't think there's anything wrong if a traveller from Asia teams up with an Arab and Carribean guy despite being of species loosely based on European folklore end up traveling the world beating up creatures from Europe, South America, Africa and Asia.Is to literally have the creatures from your European mythology, dubbed "heroes" for their activities of going out there and exterminating the creatures of that other cultures mythology. You literally want an Oriental Adventures for the express purpose of having European folklore go out and exterminate the folklore of Asia and be rewarded as heroes and praised for it-- that about sum it up?
What I am taking exception to is that you are saying that we can't have all the fairy folk that people of Japan, Korea, China, Mongolia, Thailand, Vietnam, Laos, Nepal, Indonesia, India, etc. said lived in their forests and mountains and rivers. Or-- as many of them as can fit because these are an awful lot of countries we are trying to cram in here and there are probably just way too many potential player races.You're reading the wrong words in that, and not counting the fact that there's already Nagas, Rocs, Oni (5e dropped Ogre Mage for good) already in the core D&D books. And I don't think there's anything wrong if a traveller from Asia teams up with an Arab and Carribean guy despite being of species loosely based on European folklore end up traveling the world beating up creatures from Europe, South America, Africa and Asia.
Nah, the myths around Korobokuru do not fit dwarves. At all. If they're coming back and need to be peg-holed into an existing race, Halfling or Gnome is where they need to be (though I'd probably go the Okami route and just up their tininess to the point they're pixie size). Dwarf was a poor fit then and is a poor fit now.the Korubokuru really would be another subrace of Dwarf
Hengeyokai could easily be split into at least 3 races, and that's me on a poor day. Kitsune and Tanuki alone are that distinctive I still consider it an absolute miserable failing of OA for pidgeonholing them into a single race. That's like "Dwarves, Gnomes, Halflings and Elves all are the same race and we just mush them all together into one" levelsHengeyokai
I'm guessing that the typical steampunk London game doesn't consider the fact that what makes 19th century London possible is all the wealth of India.I'm not sure if Eberron needs to deal with these things to be honest.
Yes, the World Wars affected the world. But Eberron isn't being unfair to anyone by narrowing it's scope to only explore how they affected this group of nations.
I mean, I wouldn't consider it unfair to Spain to not mention them much while running a game set in Steampunk London. Now, if I want to do Steampunk Europe, and I ignore Spain and Portugal, that is something else, but just narrowing your scope to be manageable isn't a big deal to me.
The original OA classes do two things.having "Yakuza" instead of just having "thieves" is kind of dumb.
Sure, but it is equally likely that a steampunk London game says that London's wealth in this world came from the invention of automaton's and that they sealed their borders and never built an empire at all.I'm guessing that the typical steampunk London game doesn't consider the fact that what makes 19th century London possible is all the wealth of India.
To that extent, RPGIng can reproduce the fantasies and erasures that characterize imperialism. But I'm not sure that's a good thing.
Going to stop this at this point to address a fact. I was not talking about what the original OA did. I was speaking towards a future product. In that respect, it does not matter what the original OA did. That was not my concernThe original OA classes do two things.
I am going to assume all of this only applies to 1e. As such, I am only going to discuss it in terms of why I don't think that is necessary in a 5e product.First, they give some necessary mechanical variations in the context of a system that tends to be very pedantic in its class features. Eg just as illusionists are a difference class from MUs even though all that really differs are spell lists and magic items permitted, so yakuza differ from thieves by having different suites of abilities.
But more important, the OA classes establish a context for each PC. Bushi and samurai have abilities and requirements that reflect a social situation - bushi are (predominantly) commoners, samurai (predominantly) nobles. Yakuza can gather information and make contacts because they are embedded in an urban environment. Wu jen get reaction bonuses when dealing with mysterious magical beings (tengu and oni). A kensai has to fight duels with challengers. Etc
It's this conception of PCs as actually belonging to the world they find themselves in that distinguishes OA classes from (most) PHB ones. The exceptions in the PHB are paladins (which also have a code and a social context), druids and to a lesser extent monks and assassins.