D&D (2024) Should 2014 Half Elves and Half Orcs be added to the 2025 SRD?

[pemerton]

For clarity's sake, the examples I provided were
(a) To arrive at a better understanding of how DEFCON 1 viewed racial mechanics;
(b) Those examples would not necessarily be fixed to race, but would very much be determined on the culture, background and class of the character. So how I'm envisioning it at play at the table, the DM would provide that perk on the spur of the moment or the player would petition for it.

What I liked about your examples is that show, pretty straightforwardly, how descriptors can feed into mechanical resolution without using a "modelling"/stat bonus approach.

As I think I may have mentioned, there are intermediate approaches too (Torchbearer and Burning Wheel use them).

Obviously D&D is not, and doesn't seem like its going to become, a descriptor-based game. But there is some scope for using descriptor approach for secondary aspects of a PC's build (race/species, and probably background/family as well).

 

[pemerton]

fantasy and sci-fy really aren't that dissimilar under the hood, like, starwars is the classic example with luke being the young 'Knight' aided by obi wan the 'Wizard' going on a quest to rescue leia the 'Princess'

Sure, Star Wars and Flash Gordon are fantasy with some sci-fi tropes laid over the top.

But something like 2001 or even Arrival is going for a different sort of aesthetic.

the species they encounter in space or classic fantasy should bring different perspectives influenced by what they are, because encountering these wildly different creatures who ALL somehow manage to have the exact same perspectives as humans is rediculously far fetched and the least interesting choice possible to me.

I don't think Star Wars really shows us any interestingly different aliens.

And I don't look to different fantasy races to provide me with an imaginary study in non-human ways of being. I look to them to either provide colour (this is what, say, lizard-folk or frog-folk/bullywugs are for) or to provide ways of thinking about human capacities and foibles (this is, at least traditionally, how I see Elves and Dwarves and Orcs).

But those affinities and perspectives must be somehow different than those of humans for that difference to be more than cosmetic compared to them.

<snip>

Elves also have immortality, superior senses and health, powerful fëa etc, and the affinities and perspectives of the elves are shaped by these.

But JRRT doesn't try to show us how immortal, super-healthy beings would act.

Rather, the immortality and health of Elves creates a fictional, almost metaphorical, context, for thinking about how higher ideals might be dealt with, if those mundane and worldly concerns could be set aside. When joined with other beliefs JRRT has about humans and their fate vis-a-vis mortality, it also provides a way for thinking about those matters.

I don't agree with this at all, nor I think there even is such a stark difference between scifi and fantasy. Granted, for gaming deep xenofiction might be hard to do, but more moderate take on the level of, say, better Star Trek species is pretty feasible. And there still could be some options for more alien perspectives for those who find exploring such appealing.

My Star Trek-fu is not that strong, but Vulcans and Klingons (the Star Trek aliens I have some familiarity with) don't seem all that non-human to me.

 

[CreamCloud0]

But JRRT doesn't try to show us how immortal, super-healthy beings would act.

Rather, the immortality and health of Elves creates a fictional, almost metaphorical, context, for thinking about how higher ideals might be dealt with, if those mundane and worldly concerns could be set aside. When joined with other beliefs JRRT has about humans and their fate vis-a-vis mortality, it also provides a way for thinking about those matters.

no, tolkien didn't try to explore elves for being the nigh-immortal, reincarnating, magical beings they are, nor similarly for any of the other species in his works, he used them as a metaphor for an upper class, but just because he was the biggest original influences on the fantasy genre that doesn't mean he should be the ONLY influence we are ever allowed to use.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Obviously D&D is not, and doesn't seem like its going to become, a descriptor-based game. But there is some scope for using descriptor approach for secondary aspects of a PC's build (race/species, and probably background/family as well).

So true!
In your opinion is the descriptor-mechanic a tool more towards a Narrative-style or a nod towards Gamist?

 

[Mind of tempest]

My favorite part about this whole thing is that the outrage over these two is a fraction of what apparated into existence for gnomes when they weren't in the initial core.

why did people love gnomes so much? what do they even do?

 

[Maxperson]

To me it seems to be a way of recognising the significance of being an Elf in certain situations: you know more about Elvish lore, other Elves respond to you more favourably, etc.

All of the racial abilities are ways to recognize being (insert race here) in certain situations.

The 5e elf:

Recognizes the significance of being an elf in situations requires dexterity or agility by getting a +2 dex bonus.
Recognizes the significance of being an elf in in the dark by getting 60 feet of darkvision.
Recognizes the significance of being an elf in situations where senses are used by getting keen senses(proficiency with perception).
Recognizes the significance of being an elf in situations where the elf is being charmed or put to sleep by gaining advantage on saves vs. charm and immunity to sleep.
Recognizes the significance of being an elf in situations where rest is needed by getting the ability to trance for 4 hours instead of sleeping for 8.

And then they recognize the significance of being certain subraces of elf in other ways.

Significance of being an elf is just another way of saying modelling being an elf. The only difference is that the way we are discussing is informal through the DM, rather than being formalized in the books.

 

[Mecheon]

why did people love gnomes so much? what do they even do?

Whimsy

Also will drag a setting kicking and screaming into "Yeah we have robots now (the gnomes accidentally figured out how to make souls and the robots now have souls)"

 

[Maxperson]

No. It’s part of DnD. Full stop.

The whole 5.5 thing is just edition warring.

There is no such thing as 5.5.

No. Recognizing the significance of the changes is not edition warring. I like things about 5e and dislike other things about 5e. I like some of the 5.5e changes and dislike other 5.5e changes. Nobody is warring about the two editions here. We're just recognizing the significance of the changes, because both can be D&D, both cannot be the same edition.

 

[Mind of tempest]

Whimsy

Also will drag a setting kicking and screaming into "Yeah we have robots now (the gnomes accidentally figured out how to make souls and the robots now have souls)"

define whimsy?

do you mean like golems? I do not think those are a short arcane guy thing.
no robots have sparks or spirts everyone knows that.

 

[Maxperson]

why did people love gnomes so much? what do they even do?

Gnomebody gnows.