Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Jeremy Crawford Discusses Details on Custom Origins
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Alzrius" data-source="post: 8110750" data-attributes="member: 8461"><p>Again, I'm not sure about the "nearly impossible" part (though at least this time you didn't use quotation marks), since I recall that I expressed the sentiment that the difference between two different classes of the same level was much larger than that of two characters of different races but the same class and level.</p><p></p><p></p><p>How about noticing that I didn't say "so small not to be noticeable" nor imply it. Rather, the difference is comparative in nature. Compare a 20th-level human wizard to a 20th-level elven wizard to a 20th-level human fighter (obviously in 3E or later); do the two humans really seem more alike than the two wizards?</p><p></p><p>Again, I don't recall expressing the sentiment that the difference was completely undetectable (and if I did, I hope this makes it clear that it was hyperbole).</p><p></p><p>It's important to reiterate that "Tolkien-style demihumans" includes, as we have them now, elves, dwarves, halflings, half-elves, and half-orcs. (As I noted in a previous post, this is overlooking what <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/q-a-with-gary-gygax.22566/page-90#post-1332107" target="_blank">Gary said before</a> wherein he admitted that the halflings were Tolkien's, but rebutted that claim with regards to elves and dwarves.) The gnome, for one, was never from there.</p><p></p><p>We're getting into issues of "how much" that can't really be measured. That said, I don't think that having only humans as playable races would have mattered very much (which is an extension of the discussion regarding Tolkien's influence; that is, a tangent). D&D's influence was such that it was basically able to largely define the niche it set for itself, even as it drew on a byzantine array of sources. To that end, I think that it's ability to set a standard is being underestimated; had it not featured demihumans as PC races, I'm of the opinion that it would still have occupied a place of prominence in the space it created.</p><p></p><p>As noted, the issue of "no demihumans whatsoever" is largely a tangent (again, note the poor, oft-overlooked gnome). That said, I don't see them being "tied" deeply to the game, simply because "the game" was what D&D said it was back in the beginning. While plenty of proto-RPGs were being bandied about in the Twin Cities area at the time, D&D swept over the gaming scene like a wildfire when it came out. I think that had less to do with available races than it did with simply offering a cohesive framework of play. Not having the option to play as a halfling doesn't strike me as impacting that much at all.</p><p></p><p>Watching a movie isn't the same as playing the game, sure. But that particular movie captures the <em>idea</em> of the game (in humorous terms, largely by playing up areas of dysfunction between the players), at least in terms of how actual sessions go. In that regard, it's certainly more appreciated as being represented of the pastime that it depicts than many fully in-character films...such as <em>Dungeons & Dragons</em> (2000).</p><p></p><p></p><p>I feel the need to point out again that we're slipping between the main debate (the degree of influence Tolkien had) and a tangent (does D&D need non-human playable races to be D&D?). Likewise, we're also bouncing back and forth between examining the game when it emerged versus the contemporary depiction. That's worth keeping in mind.</p><p></p><p>As for "an expected norm of the culture," that scene wasn't about the culture. It was about Cass being a stickler for what's in the "Core Rules," as he'd previously argued about playing a monk in an Occidental setting, and before that the feasibility of cutting a divine spellcaster off from their god. It set up the conflict between a "rules lawyer" and the story-oriented DM.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Again, that's a response to a related, but not identical, tangent. It shoots down the idea that more races as a whole are some sort of selling point, since a game that came out hot on the metaphorical heels of D&D had more in that area (along with other selling points, such as ease of access with regards to understanding the rules) and yet didn't do as well.</p><p></p><p></p><p>That's sort of what I was implying though. A generic thrust of "D&D couldn't have worked with just one races" is a position that can be blunted in terms of its underlying argument (that more is better) by pointing to T&T. That shifts the focus back to it needing those <em>particular</em> demihuman races, which implies Tolkien, circling the discussion back around to that.</p><p></p><p></p><p>How significant is that "better" martial ability? There's no particular increase of their to-hit bonus, and any enchantments could just as easily be applied to a dagger or crossbow (for a human wizard). The best you can get is increasing the damage die from a dagger (d4) to a longbow (d8), which increases the average damage from 2.5 to 4.5. Not much at all at 20th level!</p><p></p><p>I haven't suggested that it's not a factor, just that it's not very much of one compared to other aspects of your character, such as class. The two choices aren't equivalent in their overall weight (for lack of a better term).</p><p></p><p></p><p>Phrasing it as a "problem" strikes me as a rather unfair way of putting it. My overall point is that the people saying "there is no D&D without Tolkien" are wrong, self-evidently so. His works are a single, modest part of a much larger tapestry of influences on what made D&D the way it was when it came out, and that if there hadn't been any there then it wouldn't have made much of a difference. His footprint simply <em>seems</em> larger because, for one reason, the demihuman races are mostly his, and the player-facing nature of those options come across as being a large part of the game. They're not, and notwithstanding the race-as-class aspects of B/X and BECMI, choice of race overall isn't the major factor that a lot of people seem to think it is.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Alzrius, post: 8110750, member: 8461"] Again, I'm not sure about the "nearly impossible" part (though at least this time you didn't use quotation marks), since I recall that I expressed the sentiment that the difference between two different classes of the same level was much larger than that of two characters of different races but the same class and level. How about noticing that I didn't say "so small not to be noticeable" nor imply it. Rather, the difference is comparative in nature. Compare a 20th-level human wizard to a 20th-level elven wizard to a 20th-level human fighter (obviously in 3E or later); do the two humans really seem more alike than the two wizards? Again, I don't recall expressing the sentiment that the difference was completely undetectable (and if I did, I hope this makes it clear that it was hyperbole). It's important to reiterate that "Tolkien-style demihumans" includes, as we have them now, elves, dwarves, halflings, half-elves, and half-orcs. (As I noted in a previous post, this is overlooking what [url=https://www.enworld.org/threads/q-a-with-gary-gygax.22566/page-90#post-1332107]Gary said before[/url] wherein he admitted that the halflings were Tolkien's, but rebutted that claim with regards to elves and dwarves.) The gnome, for one, was never from there. We're getting into issues of "how much" that can't really be measured. That said, I don't think that having only humans as playable races would have mattered very much (which is an extension of the discussion regarding Tolkien's influence; that is, a tangent). D&D's influence was such that it was basically able to largely define the niche it set for itself, even as it drew on a byzantine array of sources. To that end, I think that it's ability to set a standard is being underestimated; had it not featured demihumans as PC races, I'm of the opinion that it would still have occupied a place of prominence in the space it created. As noted, the issue of "no demihumans whatsoever" is largely a tangent (again, note the poor, oft-overlooked gnome). That said, I don't see them being "tied" deeply to the game, simply because "the game" was what D&D said it was back in the beginning. While plenty of proto-RPGs were being bandied about in the Twin Cities area at the time, D&D swept over the gaming scene like a wildfire when it came out. I think that had less to do with available races than it did with simply offering a cohesive framework of play. Not having the option to play as a halfling doesn't strike me as impacting that much at all. Watching a movie isn't the same as playing the game, sure. But that particular movie captures the [i]idea[/i] of the game (in humorous terms, largely by playing up areas of dysfunction between the players), at least in terms of how actual sessions go. In that regard, it's certainly more appreciated as being represented of the pastime that it depicts than many fully in-character films...such as [i]Dungeons & Dragons[/i] (2000). I feel the need to point out again that we're slipping between the main debate (the degree of influence Tolkien had) and a tangent (does D&D need non-human playable races to be D&D?). Likewise, we're also bouncing back and forth between examining the game when it emerged versus the contemporary depiction. That's worth keeping in mind. As for "an expected norm of the culture," that scene wasn't about the culture. It was about Cass being a stickler for what's in the "Core Rules," as he'd previously argued about playing a monk in an Occidental setting, and before that the feasibility of cutting a divine spellcaster off from their god. It set up the conflict between a "rules lawyer" and the story-oriented DM. Again, that's a response to a related, but not identical, tangent. It shoots down the idea that more races as a whole are some sort of selling point, since a game that came out hot on the metaphorical heels of D&D had more in that area (along with other selling points, such as ease of access with regards to understanding the rules) and yet didn't do as well. That's sort of what I was implying though. A generic thrust of "D&D couldn't have worked with just one races" is a position that can be blunted in terms of its underlying argument (that more is better) by pointing to T&T. That shifts the focus back to it needing those [i]particular[/i] demihuman races, which implies Tolkien, circling the discussion back around to that. How significant is that "better" martial ability? There's no particular increase of their to-hit bonus, and any enchantments could just as easily be applied to a dagger or crossbow (for a human wizard). The best you can get is increasing the damage die from a dagger (d4) to a longbow (d8), which increases the average damage from 2.5 to 4.5. Not much at all at 20th level! I haven't suggested that it's not a factor, just that it's not very much of one compared to other aspects of your character, such as class. The two choices aren't equivalent in their overall weight (for lack of a better term). Phrasing it as a "problem" strikes me as a rather unfair way of putting it. My overall point is that the people saying "there is no D&D without Tolkien" are wrong, self-evidently so. His works are a single, modest part of a much larger tapestry of influences on what made D&D the way it was when it came out, and that if there hadn't been any there then it wouldn't have made much of a difference. His footprint simply [i]seems[/i] larger because, for one reason, the demihuman races are mostly his, and the player-facing nature of those options come across as being a large part of the game. They're not, and notwithstanding the race-as-class aspects of B/X and BECMI, choice of race overall isn't the major factor that a lot of people seem to think it is. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Jeremy Crawford Discusses Details on Custom Origins
Top