D&D (2024) What new jargon do you want to replace "Race"?

[codo]

Forgive me if this was just public consensus, and not explicit text, but wasn't part of the goal of a book with multiverse in the title to not foreground setting specific detail, to make the entries more widely usable for DMs?

D&D has always tried to walk a really narrow, shaky, tightrope. It's trying to be a complete set rules and background information that can cover every situation, while also letting you play in any world or campaign setting you want. This is an almost impossible needle to tread.

 

[Xamnam]

I think so. Which makes sense to carry over to the PHB as well because that too (and the MM/DMG) should all be as generic as possible to fit into as many games as possible right?

There's a lot of daylight between generic as possible and overly prescriptive.

 

[Scribe]

There's a lot of daylight between generic as possible and overly prescriptive.

There is, but its hard to convince me we are not trending into 'generic but positive to a fault'.

 

[Xamnam]

There is, but its hard to convince me we are not trending into 'generic but positive to a fault'.

That's fair. Personally, I find slippery slopes generally a hard sell.

 

[Scribe]

That's fair. Personally, I find slippery slopes generally a hard sell.

Thats fine. I've been watching it since Tasha's if not earlier. To me the direction is clear. Call it a slope, call it an arrow, call it whatever, there is a general direction to me.

 

[Xamnam]

Thats fine. I've been watching it since Tasha's if not earlier. To me the direction is clear. Call it a slope, call it an arrow, call it whatever, there is a general direction to me.

My issues with slopes is the assertion that they'll never stop.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Lets not look at the Drizzt books as a positive example. The Drizzt books, and to a greater extent, the drow race itself, are just dripping with racism and fetishized misogamy.

Do you really think "All Drow are inherently evil and have no free will, and we kill them on sight, except for our buddy Drizzt, he's one of the good ones." is really a good look for D&D.

You know how you can tell Drow are evil? It’s not the dark skin; it’s the matriarchy.

Obviously Kill On Sight.

That’s the lesson for today, kids. Quiz on Monday.

 

[Scribe]

My issues with slopes is the assertion that they'll never stop.

Well, they do. Once they hit the bottom.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

Well, they do. Once they hit the bottom.

You mean, this is a species to the bottom?

(Not to make another post, I am a little more satisfied with the tiefling description from the playtest. Since at least they have a non-human ancestor, they could be something other than human or demon, both clearly separate species. but I am not sure it is enough to warrant being a different species in the D&D universe: a child can take (and mix and match) appearance traits from either of his parents, and get powers (traits as they are called in the rules) as a block from either of them. So the tiefling specific traits, should a tiefling mate with a human, can be carried by a human. Basically, they are just humans with a few peculiar physical features... that are not even unified (ranging from unearthly beauty to horns and furs depending on your ancestor). They are the species of "humans with a striking appearance".

 

[Scribe]

You mean, this is a species to the bottom?

There is a <player being type formerly called a race> at the bottom of this hypothetical slope, yes.

It has no meaningful name: Type.
It has no meaningful size: Small or Medium
It has no meaningful culture.
It has no meaningful language.
It has no fixed biological attributes (ASI).
It has no default special rules, you select them.
It has no default physical appearance, the player defines it.

And if they are later bored, these things can be changed at the whim of the player.

Thats whats at the bottom of this hypothetical slope. We can call it Schmorp.