Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lazybones" data-source="post: 9747456" data-attributes="member: 143">I was one of those folks who didn't like the shift away from racial stat boosts, at first. I didn't like the optional flexibility rule when it came out in Tasha's, and had to be convinced by my players to allow it in my most recent 2014 game. I felt the same way that others have posted here, that it seemed to rob the races of their distinctiveness. And at most we're talking about a +1/-1 change to a modifier, which hardly breaks the game.But now that I've had a chance to think about it a bit more, I see where they're coming from and endorse the change. I was never the target audience for these kinds of changes; I'm an older (50s) white male, who started D&D when it was an almost 100% white and male game (at least in my area). In recent years I have seen a massive increase in diversity amongst the player base, including a large influx of female players, more ethnic diversity, and a very significant LGBTQ+ component. I followed the pushback threads here where folks were highly critical of how orcs, drow, and other "bad" races were presented in 2024 (apparently the "vaquero"-style orcs pictured in the new PHB offended a lot of folks somehow?), but I have come around to the view that a more inclusive presentation is good for the hobby. And tying innate abilities/traits/behaviors to one's "race," like it or not, is something that holds a very loaded meaning for a lot of people in both history and in contemporary society.</blockquote>

Verification