• 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!

D&D (2024) New UA one D&D play test document Dec 1st.

Polytheism is attempting to apply real world religious views onto a game. Mentioning real life gods by name, like Isis and Zeus, isnt a great idea.

A better idea is to make it clear that the player decides whatever the religion is of their own character concept.

The Cleric class description needs flavor text and focus that helps the player choose whatever sacred tradition the cleric concept officiates.
I don't think that's a road we should be walking down. This is not about inclusivity anymore. There are too many opinions and for some these are deep and personal ideas. I think the best choice here is to say an individual's religious beliefs are that person's choice. Too important to bring that concept into a game.
 

log in or register to remove this ad




Clint_L

Hero
I've been uncomfortable with using real world gods as D&D characters since Deity and Demigods came out (and I've still got my first edition with all the Cthulu stuff in it). The problem is that it sort of implies that some real world gods are fair game because they are just "myth," while others are not. While people should pick and choose whatever religious systems they want at their table, I feel that WotC published material should stay away from real world religions, even largely extinct ones (and I say that as proud person of Scandinavian heritage and a big fan of the Thor films).
 


Burnside

Space Jam Confirmed
Supporter
Of note: starting with One D&D, they are officially dropping the term "Race". This isn't something that's being tested; they're definitely moving on from that term.

The new term they are floating is "Species" which imo is a completely lateral move that offers exactly all of the exact same baggage that the term "Race" carries.

You can however give feedback on "Species". "Race" is definitely out, but "Species" isn't necessarily in.

I'm not sure what the best solution here is really. I do think that "race" is misused when it is applied to dividing humans into different groups. However, I actually do think elves and dwarves, etc., qualify as actual different races, so I have felt the term race is appropriate for them.

I understand that the term is just too fraught for some folks and maybe it's time to move on. I think "Species" solves exactly nothing in that respect. I guess "Heritage" or "Ancestry" might be a bit better.
 


Yaarel

🇮🇱He-Mage
Of note: starting with One D&D, they are officially dropping the term "Race". This isn't something that's being tested; they're definitely moving on from that term.
Love!

The term "race" is a problematic buzzword. It is impossible to use the term neutrally, despite a historical era when one did. Today any term is better than this.

The new term they are floating is "Species" which imo is a completely lateral move that offers exactly all of the exact same baggage that the term "Race" carries.

You can however give feedback on "Species". "Race" is definitely out, but "Species" isn't necessarily in.
I see your point.

Even so, "species" communicates exactly what D&D 5e refers to: the biology, distinct from the culture.

Different species can belong to the same culture.

Whence "species" and "background".



I'm not sure what the best solution here is really. I do think that "race" is misused when it is applied to dividing humans into different groups. However, I actually do think elves and dwarves, etc., qualify as actual different races, so I have felt the term race is appropriate for them.

I understand that the term is just too fraught for some folks and maybe it's time to move on. I think "Species" solves exactly nothing in that respect. I guess "Heritage" or "Ancestry" might be a bit better.
Heritage makes sense, because various factors contribute to it.

I suppose, the Warforge has an "ancestry" in the sense of ancients and adoptive progeny.
 

NotAYakk

Legend
I like the dual-specialization trick they pulled here. It is like the Warlock.

You have your Subclass, and then another specialization.

Scaling of channel divinity is well done. Turn undead is tweaked, with a L 5 auto scaling feature making it possible to turn them to dust.

Life domain is still too healing focused; they could have had at least 1 feature that wasn't "heal more HP". As an example, "when you cast a spell with a spell slot that restores HP to a creature, that creature gains advantage on the next d20 test they do before the end of their next turn". This matches "Life" domain in that it is tied to healing, but instead of being "more faster HP" it actually ends fights faster.

Not sure if the 3 Holy Orders are balanced. And with you getting 2 of them by the end of T2, maybe we need more than 3.
 

Remove ads

Top