Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 8691649" data-attributes="member: 22779">That's a fair question.&nbsp; And, I think there are two things to be gained here.1.&nbsp; Cleaning out the cruft.&nbsp; I'm sorry, but, Halflings and Gnomes are as relevant to the game as pages of descriptions of polearms.&nbsp; They are barely played, have virtually no impact on any of the settings and, despite having every possible advantage - being one of the 4 races in the SRD is a BIG advantage - they still scrape the bottom of the barrel.&nbsp; For fifty years.&nbsp; It's time to let them go.&nbsp; I doubt that they are going to make the PHB much bigger than it is - and I also doubt they are going to add many new races to the PHB - the 10 (ish) there seems to be a solid number.2.&nbsp; It means that going forward, the game designers do not have to assume that every group has a halfling (or a gnome) and include halfling and gnome options in every single supplement.&nbsp;&nbsp; Because, let's be honest, you can't have a supplement that excludes anything from the PHB.&nbsp; They've demonstrated that pretty clearly.&nbsp; All the player facing books for 5e had to include halfling and gnome material.&nbsp; Bumping the halflings and the gnomes to the DMG (or, IMO, a player section in the MM along with all the other possible player races) means that WotC isn't forced to include halflings and gnomes in every single book.&nbsp; It frees up so much design space and cuts away the dead weight that's been dragging in the game for decades.I honestly can't see any benefit of including two races in the PHB that virtually no one actually plays.&nbsp; I'm sorry, but, that's really the bottom line.&nbsp; Despite being a Core 4 race, halflings are (and always have been) the &quot;also ran&quot; race in the game and gnomes may as well not exist at all.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 8691649, member: 22779"] That's a fair question. And, I think there are two things to be gained here. 1. Cleaning out the cruft. I'm sorry, but, Halflings and Gnomes are as relevant to the game as pages of descriptions of polearms. They are barely played, have virtually no impact on any of the settings and, despite having every possible advantage - being one of the 4 races in the SRD is a BIG advantage - they still scrape the bottom of the barrel. For fifty years. It's time to let them go. I doubt that they are going to make the PHB much bigger than it is - and I also doubt they are going to add many new races to the PHB - the 10 (ish) there seems to be a solid number. 2. It means that going forward, the game designers do not have to assume that every group has a halfling (or a gnome) and include halfling and gnome options in every single supplement. Because, let's be honest, you can't have a supplement that excludes anything from the PHB. They've demonstrated that pretty clearly. All the player facing books for 5e had to include halfling and gnome material. Bumping the halflings and the gnomes to the DMG (or, IMO, a player section in the MM along with all the other possible player races) means that WotC isn't forced to include halflings and gnomes in every single book. It frees up so much design space and cuts away the dead weight that's been dragging in the game for decades. I honestly can't see any benefit of including two races in the PHB that virtually no one actually plays. I'm sorry, but, that's really the bottom line. Despite being a Core 4 race, halflings are (and always have been) the "also ran" race in the game and gnomes may as well not exist at all. [/QUOTE]

Verification