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

Status
Not open for further replies.

log in or register to remove this ad




I also think that some campaign settings are going to have to change with the times. If Eberron and Exandria have non-evil orcs, and Toril still has a majority of evil orcs, I think that may have to change. As has happened before in Forgotten Realms lore, they could do an earth-shaking event. Maybe Lolth and Gruumsh die or are banished, loosing their control of Drow and Orc societies, allowing them to be a more free people.
D&D should be inclusive, and if that comes at the cost of villainous races of people, that's okay for me. If the changes in the game's rules enhance, and not restrict, player options I will most likely be happy with the changes.
I am not a fan of slippery slope arguments, and this is meant to be a possible answer to the question many people have asked, "where does it end?" This thread is meant to be a part of the answer. It ends somewhere, and this is a step in that direction, hopefully.
Obviously, feel free to debate the need for certain changes, argue over possible descriptions, and so on. Do keep it civil. Please do not turn this thread into a debate completely revolving around a small aspect of the changes that may come. I personally want to get something done during this eventful year. Please be openminded in this discussion. This is not us against them, it is us trying to figure something out.

Now, here are the changes that I have compiled from various threads that seem to be wanted:
  • Alignment removed from humanoids at the very least. Possibly removed from dragons and other "monsters" but the extent to this is up for debate here.
  • Possibly remove alignment in its entirety. I personally don't think we should be getting rid of it altogether, but to keep it mainly for fiends, celestials, and the other otherworldly creatures.
  • Setting determining the culture and descriptions of the races, and not the base rules.
  • Ability Scores being detached from races. There have been many suggestions for this, linking it to background or class, but I personally don't like this. I think allowing a player to choose the bonus to ability scores completely detached from race or any other choice would allow for more player freedom, and support creativity.
  • Change descriptions of orcs, depictions of hobgoblins, other evil races, and so on.
  • Cause there to be less of a link between shamanism and the more evil races. This could be mostly solved by either making a shaman class and adding more shamans for more races, or just getting rid of evil races.
  • Possibly changing the word "race" to Ancestry, Species, Heritage, Folk, People, Lineage, etc.
  • Remove ability scores from classes.
  • Possibly rename certain classes (Barbarian, Druid, Paladin, Monk, Warlock)
If I missed anything else that should be included in the bulleted points above, please comment below, and I'll add it.

Any of these possible changes, and more, are allowed topics, as long as they're relevant to a possible 6e's changes. Up for discussion is the lore changes that may come, from a cataclysmic event changing the Forgotten Realms to make way for these changes, no lore change happening at all, or other possible options.

Please discuss below. While there have been many other threads on this topic, this thread is more meant to discuss possible changes for a next edition. How would a DMG in 6e look like? A Monster Manual? What different races should be included in the PHB? Will alignment be included, and should/will it be listed in the monster stat blocks or racial descriptions?
Removing alignments is like removing hit points, enemies, or magic. It's at the core of the gameplay experience.
 

Removing alignments is like removing hit points, enemies, or magic. It's at the core of the gameplay experience.

With no alignment languages, penalties for going against alignments, aligned weapons, or detect alignment on characters and many kinds of monsters anymore... is alignment a key thing for PCs anymore? I think it is certainly still important for any settings with the great wheel cosmology for that part of it.
 

Okay. There has been quite a lot of discussion on this website and through the D&D community in general about what changes should be made to existing products, the current editions, and the next edition to promote inclusivity. A lot of the suggestions have been fought against, and for, by various members of the community. Now, while I agree with a lot of the changes that are being suggested, I think that timing is important here. I agree that we should change problematic descriptions in the current edition's books, like what is happening with Curse of Strahd and Tomb of Annihilation. I also think that most of the more major changes should be made in a 6e of D&D.

Now, this thread is to discuss the possible overall and compiled changes for 6e of D&D, for both lore and rule changes. It would range from ability scores being more open for characters (probably not connected to race) to describing races in a more vague way (which I have described in this thread). I also think that some campaign settings are going to have to change with the times. If Eberron and Exandria have non-evil orcs, and Toril still has a majority of evil orcs, I think that may have to change. As has happened before in Forgotten Realms lore, they could do an earth-shaking event. Maybe Lolth and Gruumsh die or are banished, loosing their control of Drow and Orc societies, allowing them to be a more free people.

D&D should be inclusive, and if that comes at the cost of villainous races of people, that's okay for me. If the changes in the game's rules enhance, and not restrict, player options I will most likely be happy with the changes.

I am not a fan of slippery slope arguments, and this is meant to be a possible answer to the question many people have asked, "where does it end?" This thread is meant to be a part of the answer. It ends somewhere, and this is a step in that direction, hopefully.

Obviously, feel free to debate the need for certain changes, argue over possible descriptions, and so on. Do keep it civil. Please do not turn this thread into a debate completely revolving around a small aspect of the changes that may come. I personally want to get something done during this eventful year. Please be openminded in this discussion. This is not us against them, it is us trying to figure something out.

Now, here are the changes that I have compiled from various threads that seem to be wanted:
  • Alignment removed from humanoids at the very least. Possibly removed from dragons and other "monsters" but the extent to this is up for debate here.
  • Possibly remove alignment in its entirety. I personally don't think we should be getting rid of it altogether, but to keep it mainly for fiends, celestials, and the other otherworldly creatures.
  • Setting determining the culture and descriptions of the races, and not the base rules.
  • Ability Scores being detached from races. There have been many suggestions for this, linking it to background or class, but I personally don't like this. I think allowing a player to choose the bonus to ability scores completely detached from race or any other choice would allow for more player freedom, and support creativity.
  • Change descriptions of orcs, depictions of hobgoblins, other evil races, and so on.
  • Cause there to be less of a link between shamanism and the more evil races. This could be mostly solved by either making a shaman class and adding more shamans for more races, or just getting rid of evil races.
  • Possibly changing the word "race" to Ancestry, Species, Heritage, Folk, People, Lineage, etc.
  • Remove ability scores from classes.
  • Possibly rename certain classes (Barbarian, Druid, Paladin, Monk, Warlock)
If I missed anything else that should be included in the bulleted points above, please comment below, and I'll add it.

Any of these possible changes, and more, are allowed topics, as long as they're relevant to a possible 6e's changes. Up for discussion is the lore changes that may come, from a cataclysmic event changing the Forgotten Realms to make way for these changes, no lore change happening at all, or other possible options.

Please discuss below. While there have been many other threads on this topic, this thread is more meant to discuss possible changes for a next edition. How would a DMG in 6e look like? A Monster Manual? What different races should be included in the PHB? Will alignment be included, and should/will it be listed in the monster stat blocks or racial descriptions?
5e has towed the line with generic, nonsensical style. At the cost of sense it simplifies to "appeal to a wider audience" and a lot of the art has sterile, safe style and blank, expressionless faces. I don't want my games sterile and safe. I want blood, guts, grit, and races that are actually evil. They're orcs, it better not offend anyone.
 

With no alignment languages, penalties for changing alignments, aligned weapons, or detect alignment on characters anymore... is alignment a key thing for PCs anymore? I think it is certainly still important for any settings with the great wheel cosmology for that part of it.
It might not be completely core for the mechanics but how will you know if something is actually evil? Not with the basic single paragraph lore 5e gives a heap of the time, anyway.
 

but more importantly, this discussion went Quite a bit different direction than What I brought up. I wasn’t asking about the religious figures being represented, but the everyday believers.

1. I don't know if it's really possible to represent a religious group with zero reference to their religion. I also don't think it's a really meaningful distinction.

2. There's really no need for it. Inclusivity is about having an open door, not having a door with your name on it.
 


Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top