Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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="Scott Christian" data-source="post: 8118515" data-attributes="member: 6901101"><p>You will have to forgive me. I am a bit confused. The point that I brought up was that the world of Star Trek doesn't seem to be held to the fire like D&D. We are talking about the problem in D&D that arises when one race is declared smarter or stronger on average than another race. Star Trek does this. The fact that it does this without issue seems relevant.</p><p></p><p>You may think I am using an extreme example, but I don't think I am. I feel there are many that would rather see class abilities float as opposed to racial stat bonuses and racial abilities. It's a guess, but I believe an accurate one.</p><p>As for a new edition, again, if you are going to change one of the core rules of a rulebook, you should probably start from scratch (imho). I remember the days of 300 pages of errata for 4e. It was because they did things like this without testing them through.</p><p></p><p>Fair enough on the liars part. I don't really think they are lying as well. I think they are trying to go back and rethink what they did while retconning their original ideas.</p><p></p><p>And I just don't see how everyone on the board, that I know is smart, doesn't understand the premise behind the numbers. Yes, not all dwarves have a high con. There are some that rolled an 6 in con. They get +2, now they have an 8. Or if they were doing point buy, that is their 8 stat, now they have a 10. An elf can place their 14 in con. They end up with a 14. There is a range. There always was. The bonus is exactly that - a bonus. (Whether it's biological, cultural, etc. does not matter for this point to be understood).</p><p></p><p>The only thing the bonus does is allow one group to start with a 16 or 17 in their bonus trait, versus a 15. That's it. There is still range for all races. There is still dexterous dwarf. There is still the clumsy dwarf. There is still the strong elf. And still the weak elf. There is still the charismatic half-orc. There is still the ugly half-orc.</p><p></p><p>And for the record. Here is what it says under every single race in the PHB:</p><p>"Your dwarf character has an assortment of <strong>inborn</strong> abilities, part and parcel of <strong>Dwarven nature</strong> - +2 con."</p><p>"Your elf character has a variety of <strong>natural</strong> abilities, the result of thousands of years of elven refinement - +2 dex."</p><p>"You halfling character has a number of traits <strong>in common with all other halflings</strong> - +2 dex."</p><p>"It's hard to make generalizations about humans, but your human character has these traits - +1 for all abilities."</p><p>"Your draconic <strong>heritage</strong> manifests in a variety of <strong>traits you share with other dragonborn</strong> - +2 str."</p><p>"Your gnome character has certain <strong>characteristics in common with all other gnomes</strong> - +2 int."</p><p>"Your half-elf character has some qualities in <strong>common with elves</strong> and some that are <strong>unique to half-elves</strong> - +2 cha."</p><p>"Your half-orc character has certain <strong>traits deriving from your orc ancestry</strong> - +2 str."</p><p>"Tieflings <strong>share certain racial traits</strong> as a result of their <strong>infernal descent</strong> - +2 cha."</p><p></p><p>I see share, inborn, natural, in common with all, ancestry, and a bunch of implied language that suggests these are biological and shared by all in the race. But, just like all things, this evidence will be read and the reader will gleam what it wants to out of it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Scott Christian, post: 8118515, member: 6901101"] You will have to forgive me. I am a bit confused. The point that I brought up was that the world of Star Trek doesn't seem to be held to the fire like D&D. We are talking about the problem in D&D that arises when one race is declared smarter or stronger on average than another race. Star Trek does this. The fact that it does this without issue seems relevant. You may think I am using an extreme example, but I don't think I am. I feel there are many that would rather see class abilities float as opposed to racial stat bonuses and racial abilities. It's a guess, but I believe an accurate one. As for a new edition, again, if you are going to change one of the core rules of a rulebook, you should probably start from scratch (imho). I remember the days of 300 pages of errata for 4e. It was because they did things like this without testing them through. Fair enough on the liars part. I don't really think they are lying as well. I think they are trying to go back and rethink what they did while retconning their original ideas. And I just don't see how everyone on the board, that I know is smart, doesn't understand the premise behind the numbers. Yes, not all dwarves have a high con. There are some that rolled an 6 in con. They get +2, now they have an 8. Or if they were doing point buy, that is their 8 stat, now they have a 10. An elf can place their 14 in con. They end up with a 14. There is a range. There always was. The bonus is exactly that - a bonus. (Whether it's biological, cultural, etc. does not matter for this point to be understood). The only thing the bonus does is allow one group to start with a 16 or 17 in their bonus trait, versus a 15. That's it. There is still range for all races. There is still dexterous dwarf. There is still the clumsy dwarf. There is still the strong elf. And still the weak elf. There is still the charismatic half-orc. There is still the ugly half-orc. And for the record. Here is what it says under every single race in the PHB: "Your dwarf character has an assortment of [B]inborn[/B] abilities, part and parcel of [B]Dwarven nature[/B] - +2 con." "Your elf character has a variety of [B]natural[/B] abilities, the result of thousands of years of elven refinement - +2 dex." "You halfling character has a number of traits [B]in common with all other halflings[/B] - +2 dex." "It's hard to make generalizations about humans, but your human character has these traits - +1 for all abilities." "Your draconic [B]heritage[/B] manifests in a variety of [B]traits you share with other dragonborn[/B] - +2 str." "Your gnome character has certain [B]characteristics in common with all other gnomes[/B] - +2 int." "Your half-elf character has some qualities in [B]common with elves[/B] and some that are [B]unique to half-elves[/B] - +2 cha." "Your half-orc character has certain [B]traits deriving from your orc ancestry[/B] - +2 str." "Tieflings [B]share certain racial traits[/B] as a result of their [B]infernal descent[/B] - +2 cha." I see share, inborn, natural, in common with all, ancestry, and a bunch of implied language that suggests these are biological and shared by all in the race. But, just like all things, this evidence will be read and the reader will gleam what it wants to out of it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Jeremy Crawford Discusses Details on Custom Origins
Top