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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
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="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8122615" data-attributes="member: 6801228"><p>This ignores a few things. </p><p></p><p>First, and perhaps the most troubling, is that this takes the position that some people are just born more intelligent than others. And, you'll notice, that those who are born stronger and tougher (more suited for physical work) are rarely born smarter. In fact, one of the more common combos is Intelligence and Charisma, which makes for a good leader. </p><p></p><p>So, some people are born to be leaders and others are born to do manual labor, and if you are starting to hear a sound, that might be a dog whistle for some really destructive and dangerous rhetoric that a lot of us do not want in our games. </p><p></p><p>Additionally, let us not forget that DnD characters start out as adults, not babies or small children. Why is this important? Because if a guy has been lifting weights and strength training from age 10 to age 25, then I'd expect him to be incredibly strong. The culture angle would explain this, and yes, you run into weird cases with elves and dwarves and other long lived races, because logically someone who is trains from 10 to 200 would be even stronger. But this is not a problem only for this, this is a problem for all elves and dwarves for the entire game. Why do they barely have any more skills or weapons training than a human who likely has been doing it for no more than 6 years? This has always been an issue and whatever solution you've been using probably could work here too.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>If I accept the PHB defintion, then the only possible way to play against type is to have a poor stat match up. It reduces a narrative choice down to numbers. Like you said, do I have a 15 or a 16. </p><p></p><p>And, I'm sorry, but that is not what that term means in the broader context of storytelling, acting, roleplaying, ect. And additionally... how boring is that? Not to attack anyone here, purely looking at the PHB, but I could play the most stereotypical dwarf ever, and since he is a monk with a 15 Dex he is against type? And if I am playing a technology loving High Elf who hates the forest, but I have a 16 in Int... I'm playing fully into my archetype as an elf? </p><p></p><p>And, I've covered your quotes from the PHB, and pointed out that they cover the entire section. Your assertion that those quotes are meant to apply to racial ASIs is akin to going to the Bakery section at a store and saying that everything inside is made from Bread. While, yes, the bakery sells bread, they also sell many products that are not bread, and simply being in a bakery does not make something bread. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>But I think my biggest problem with your suggestion here, is that you want me to assume the other side is right. And I have two issues with that. </p><p></p><p>First, if I responded by saying "Yes you are right about your assertion, but..." then their response will natural be, "That doesn't matter, because [repeat assertion]." Oofta has actually done this already. He has said that the things this rule adds to the game are overshadowed by the things it loses. So, your advice would be for me to say "Yes, this rule is a net loss for the game." and at that point, I'm just conceding my entire position. </p><p></p><p>And secondly, I am freeing the other side from the burden of proof. I don't know why I see this time and time again, but it makes no sense. If you want to convince me of something, don't tell me to go convince myself that you are right. By approaching this from the position that my opposition must be correct, then I lose all ability to counter-claim, all ability to provide opposing evidence, all ability to say that my points alter the scales to lean in my favor. And meanwhile, all the other side has to do is make a claim. They need to put in zero effort to defend that claim, zero effort to support that claim, they just get to say something and I'll tell them they are right. </p><p></p><p>Well, I'm sorry. I don't do that. I do not just assume that the person I'm arguing with is 100% correct in their assertions. At that point, there is no need to argue at all.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You wink as though that is an obvious answer. But, this misses two points. </p><p></p><p>The first? You get more than one character trait as your ASI. Orcs got Strength and Con, but in the same book Tritons got Con, Charisma and Strength. So, I have no need to limit myself to a single answer anyways. </p><p></p><p>Secondly, Wisdom does make sense. A lot of sense. Wisdom is the stat associated with Clerical and Druidic magic. As a race that heavily favors the worship of gods, wisdom makes sense. In Eberron Orcs are the source of Druidic magic in the setting, tying into the imagery of orc shamans which is very common for the tribal people tropes that orcs play into. </p><p></p><p>Also, what is one of the big things about their relationship with the gods? Signs, omens and portents. Orcs are constantly observing the natural world, looking for signs. They are... perceptive, seeking insight into the meaning of these signs. I'm sure you are seeing what I did there. Any other skills they should be good at? Yes. Survival is a by word for the orcs, who being a tribal people would by necessity be good at tracking, hunting, gathering food, finding water. Their life style fully supports this idea. Anything else, actually, again, yeah. Animal Handling may seem strange, but Volo's did give us two examples. Red Fangs of Shargaas raise and ride Giant Bats and one of only 4 beasts the book added were Aurochs. Sacred oxen that the Orcs who revere Bahgtru raise and ride into battle. </p><p></p><p>And, to support this even further. The "Eberron" Orc is the one everyone is saying is canon now (mostly because it is the version of the Orc without the Int penalty) is also a version that gets the ability "Primal Intuition" which allows them proficiency in two of the following, Animal Handling, Insight, Intimidation, Medicine, Nature, Perception, Survival. And, if you break that list down you see 1 charisma skill, 1 Intelligence skill and 5 wisdom skills, showing a clear predominance towards wisdom. </p><p></p><p>So, sure, many people want to pigeon hole orcs into "Orc Strong" and leave it there. But, since I'm not required to be limited to one choice, and there is a lot stacked up over here in wisdom.... Why not pick wisdom?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Chaosmancer, post: 8122615, member: 6801228"] This ignores a few things. First, and perhaps the most troubling, is that this takes the position that some people are just born more intelligent than others. And, you'll notice, that those who are born stronger and tougher (more suited for physical work) are rarely born smarter. In fact, one of the more common combos is Intelligence and Charisma, which makes for a good leader. So, some people are born to be leaders and others are born to do manual labor, and if you are starting to hear a sound, that might be a dog whistle for some really destructive and dangerous rhetoric that a lot of us do not want in our games. Additionally, let us not forget that DnD characters start out as adults, not babies or small children. Why is this important? Because if a guy has been lifting weights and strength training from age 10 to age 25, then I'd expect him to be incredibly strong. The culture angle would explain this, and yes, you run into weird cases with elves and dwarves and other long lived races, because logically someone who is trains from 10 to 200 would be even stronger. But this is not a problem only for this, this is a problem for all elves and dwarves for the entire game. Why do they barely have any more skills or weapons training than a human who likely has been doing it for no more than 6 years? This has always been an issue and whatever solution you've been using probably could work here too. If I accept the PHB defintion, then the only possible way to play against type is to have a poor stat match up. It reduces a narrative choice down to numbers. Like you said, do I have a 15 or a 16. And, I'm sorry, but that is not what that term means in the broader context of storytelling, acting, roleplaying, ect. And additionally... how boring is that? Not to attack anyone here, purely looking at the PHB, but I could play the most stereotypical dwarf ever, and since he is a monk with a 15 Dex he is against type? And if I am playing a technology loving High Elf who hates the forest, but I have a 16 in Int... I'm playing fully into my archetype as an elf? And, I've covered your quotes from the PHB, and pointed out that they cover the entire section. Your assertion that those quotes are meant to apply to racial ASIs is akin to going to the Bakery section at a store and saying that everything inside is made from Bread. While, yes, the bakery sells bread, they also sell many products that are not bread, and simply being in a bakery does not make something bread. But I think my biggest problem with your suggestion here, is that you want me to assume the other side is right. And I have two issues with that. First, if I responded by saying "Yes you are right about your assertion, but..." then their response will natural be, "That doesn't matter, because [repeat assertion]." Oofta has actually done this already. He has said that the things this rule adds to the game are overshadowed by the things it loses. So, your advice would be for me to say "Yes, this rule is a net loss for the game." and at that point, I'm just conceding my entire position. And secondly, I am freeing the other side from the burden of proof. I don't know why I see this time and time again, but it makes no sense. If you want to convince me of something, don't tell me to go convince myself that you are right. By approaching this from the position that my opposition must be correct, then I lose all ability to counter-claim, all ability to provide opposing evidence, all ability to say that my points alter the scales to lean in my favor. And meanwhile, all the other side has to do is make a claim. They need to put in zero effort to defend that claim, zero effort to support that claim, they just get to say something and I'll tell them they are right. Well, I'm sorry. I don't do that. I do not just assume that the person I'm arguing with is 100% correct in their assertions. At that point, there is no need to argue at all. You wink as though that is an obvious answer. But, this misses two points. The first? You get more than one character trait as your ASI. Orcs got Strength and Con, but in the same book Tritons got Con, Charisma and Strength. So, I have no need to limit myself to a single answer anyways. Secondly, Wisdom does make sense. A lot of sense. Wisdom is the stat associated with Clerical and Druidic magic. As a race that heavily favors the worship of gods, wisdom makes sense. In Eberron Orcs are the source of Druidic magic in the setting, tying into the imagery of orc shamans which is very common for the tribal people tropes that orcs play into. Also, what is one of the big things about their relationship with the gods? Signs, omens and portents. Orcs are constantly observing the natural world, looking for signs. They are... perceptive, seeking insight into the meaning of these signs. I'm sure you are seeing what I did there. Any other skills they should be good at? Yes. Survival is a by word for the orcs, who being a tribal people would by necessity be good at tracking, hunting, gathering food, finding water. Their life style fully supports this idea. Anything else, actually, again, yeah. Animal Handling may seem strange, but Volo's did give us two examples. Red Fangs of Shargaas raise and ride Giant Bats and one of only 4 beasts the book added were Aurochs. Sacred oxen that the Orcs who revere Bahgtru raise and ride into battle. And, to support this even further. The "Eberron" Orc is the one everyone is saying is canon now (mostly because it is the version of the Orc without the Int penalty) is also a version that gets the ability "Primal Intuition" which allows them proficiency in two of the following, Animal Handling, Insight, Intimidation, Medicine, Nature, Perception, Survival. And, if you break that list down you see 1 charisma skill, 1 Intelligence skill and 5 wisdom skills, showing a clear predominance towards wisdom. So, sure, many people want to pigeon hole orcs into "Orc Strong" and leave it there. But, since I'm not required to be limited to one choice, and there is a lot stacked up over here in wisdom.... Why not pick wisdom? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Jeremy Crawford Discusses Details on Custom Origins
Top