D&D (2024) (+) New Edition Changes for Inclusivity (discuss possibilities)

[Deset Gled]

I'm not suggesting removing alignment completely. I'm suggesting treating the 9 point alignment the same as other D&D style alignment system. The LG-CE model doesn't work for every setting and D&D is a game with multiple settings.

As a standalone change, it's a reasonable suggestion. Definitely worth considering. I'm looking at the larger picture, and definitely didn't want to imply that your idea was inherently bad. But there are a plethora of suggestions about how to make D+D inclusive by making <insert feature here> optional. At a certain point, "optional" slides from being a feature to being a problem.

To paraphrase E. F. Schumaker for RPG design: "Any fool can make a game more inclusive by removing anything that could be seen as marginally distasteful. It takes a touch of genius to include years of history and game mechanics in a way that is both fun and inoffensive."

 

[FrogReaver]

Inclusive to whom?

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Just out of interest, what is a (+) thread?

If my knowledge of internet language serves me correctly, it means a positive discussion.

(Can anyone who is more fluent in internet jargon than I verify this? I'm not great at describing this kind of thing.)

 

[jmartkdr2]

So, should it stay the same as it is now? If we're describing the races, how are we describing them? It has to be setting specific, so what setting? Are we keeping the sections of how the races think of the other races stereotypically, do we continue describing their gods?

If you keep them, that raises a lot of questions as well.

I've given my solution (put the cultural descriptions only in the DMG and setting books), what's yours?

What I said above - include a default but make it clear in the text that's only one version of the idea.

Not including a default will only make the game more confusing. Too much freedom in character creation is a thing, because it pushes the job of 'making the campaign coherent' on the players, when it's been on the writers before. I don't think the game is well served by making it harder to play by pushing meta-responsibilities on people who've never dealt with those kinds of issues before.

Raising the barrier for entry is the opposite of "inclusive."

 

[FrogReaver]

If my knowledge of internet language serves me correctly, it means a positive discussion.

(Can anyone who is more fluent in internet jargon than I verify this? I'm not great at describing this kind of thing.)

Yea. Basically don’t trash the premise of the thread.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

What I said above - include a default but make it clear in the text that's only one version of the idea.

Okay. So, keep it in the PHB just where it is.

Not including a default will only make the game more confusing. Too much freedom in character creation is a thing, because it pushes the job of 'making the campaign coherent' on the players, when it's been on the writers before. I don't think the game is well served by making it harder to play by pushing meta-responsibilities on people who've never dealt with those kinds of issues before.

I think that they could have a default, but not having it in the PHB would make it more clear that it is not the "rule" of D&D races. They could also put it in the free rules that they put online, and in the Starter Sets.

Raising the barrier for entry is the opposite of "inclusive."

The barrier of entry is already basically the 3 core rulebooks, it wouldn't raise the barrier, just move it around a bit.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Inclusive to whom?

Players, and how they want to play their characters, in the simplest sense.

Edit: There's also the factor of making material inoffensive and not echo stereotypes of real people, like the Vistani and descriptions of Orcs.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Okay. So, keep it in the PHB just where it is.

I think that they could have a default, but not having it in the PHB would make it more clear that it is not the "rule" of D&D races. They could also put it in the free rules that they put online, and in the Starter Sets.

The barrier of entry is already basically the 3 core rulebooks, it wouldn't raise the barrier, just move it around a bit.

You seem to be assuming that most player have read through the Dungeon Master's Guide before playing, which IME pretty much never happens, largely because they're either told they don't need to or specifically instructed not to. Anything in the DMG is not something player's are likely to know. The same could be said for the Monster Manual - players reading the MM i usually called metagaming and frowned upon.

The barrier for entry for player is the PHB alone, so anything the player needs to know needs to be there.

So yeah, don't move the info. The writing needs some adjustment, but that kinda flows from the premise anyways.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

You seem to be assuming that most player have read through the Dungeon Master's Guide before playing, which IME pretty much never happens, largely because they're either told they don't need to or specifically instructed not to. Anything in the DMG is not something player's are likely to know. The same could be said for the Monster Manual - players reading the MM i usually called metagaming and frowned upon.

The barrier for entry for player is the PHB alone, so anything the player needs to know needs to be there.

So yeah, don't move the info. The writing needs some adjustment, but that kinda flows from the premise anyways.

Isn't a part of the barrier of entry for players to have a group of people to play with? If they need that, they need a DM, and the DM will need the DMG. Any character creation should be done with a discussion with the DM, and then they can describe what the Dwarves and Elves are like in the world.

I don't think moving it to the DMG would be a barrier for players. If it has to be in the PHB, I would designate a section for the base setting and how the races are there.

 

[FrogReaver]

Players, and how they want to play their characters, in the simplest sense.

Edit: There's also the factor of making material inoffensive and not echo stereotypes of real people, like the Vistani and descriptions of Orcs.

Yes. But you can’t be inclusive to every player. Ideologies and opinions do and will clash.

Edit: btw I don’t want to crap on your thread. So if you feel any comments aren’t constructive here then feel free to ask me to leave and I will.