D&D 5E (2024) Which races would YOU put into the 50th anniversary Players Handbook?

[EzekielRaiden]

But the situation is more off.

There are players who come across as demanding "low magic" and refuse to allow their Fighters to have nice things ... but then try to sabotage the Wizards because they do have nice things.

In the tennis game analogy, it is more like a teammate who refuses to learn how to play tennis, and then makes Serena Williams feel unwelcome precisely because she is good at tennis.

This self-sabotage along with envy is the attitude that his hard to sympathize with.

I have not seen such "self-sabotage" in play. Have you?

 

[Yaarel]

I have not seen such "self-sabotage" in play. Have you?

Who I game with? No, of course, not.

Online complaints? Lots.

It happens often here in ENWorld.

A Fighter fan complains that a Wizard has too many options, especially at high tiers. When the response is, let the Fighter have options too, the Fighter fan says, that is too magical for the Fighter. In other words, self-sabotage.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Who I game with? No, of course, not.

Online complaints? Lots.

It happens often here in ENWorld.

A Fighter fan complains that a Wizard has too many options, especially at high tiers. When the response is, let the Fighter have options too, the Fighter fan says, that is too magical for the Fighter. In other words, self-sabotage.

Ah. Well, I rarely see that specific combination myself. I usually see only one side (Fighter fan who wants Fighters to have nice things) or the other (Fighter fan who doesn't want magic to be that powerful.) Even for folks who look like it, there is a nuance, such as, "I don't want them to be spellcasters but they should still get their own nice things, things that just work by different rules," more or less.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

In theory, "partial ceremorph" is literally the player character in the upcoming new Baldur's Gate game? IIRC you get implanted with the tadpole early and the game is at least partially about getting the damn thing out so it doesn't eat your brain and turn you into a mindflayer.

I was thinking more of a "Gnome Ceremorph" situation, where Ceremorphosis is already complete, but you somehow kept your previous personality (or at least major parts of it).

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

Yeah, I don't think it's the Fighter players complaining that Fighters should be realistic and kept away from the fancy folk's party upstairs...

 

[Mind of tempest]

I was thinking more of a "Gnome Ceremorph" situation, where Ceremorphosis is already complete, but you somehow kept your previous personality (or at least major parts of it).

it still would be god awful to balance

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

it still would be god awful to balance

Not really. Like I said before, just base it off of the Dhampir lineage. Give them a Bite attack that lets them regain hit points, telepathy, and the ability to cast Detect Thoughts once per day at 5th level.

 

[Yaarel]

"I don't want them to be spellcasters but they should still get their own nice things, things that just work by different rules," more or less.

These are the Fighter fans who I do sympathize with.

I feel every class and every character needs to contribute roughly equally to the combat pillar.

By the same ethic, this includes Fighters contributing roughly equally to the social pillar and exploration pillar.

 

[Cadence]

But the situation is more off.

There are players who come across as demanding "low magic" and refuse to allow their Fighters to have nice things ... but then try to sabotage the Wizards because they do have nice things.

In the tennis game analogy, it is more like a teammate who refuses to learn how to play tennis, and then makes Serena Williams feel unwelcome precisely because she is good at tennis.

This self-sabotage along with envy is the attitude that his hard to sympathize with.

Thought A

I thought tennis leagues were sorted by ability in the US. If you're noticably better than everyone you play with you move up. If noticably worse you move down.

 

[Cadence]

But the situation is more off.

There are players who come across as demanding "low magic" and refuse to allow their Fighters to have nice things ... but then try to sabotage the Wizards because they do have nice things.

Thought B

In the multi-player format EDH/Commander in MtG, the self-sorting of players by desired power level is a huge thing. Among groups that get along, the ethos seems to be that a rough consensus power level of the decks is agreed on and the goal is to win your fair share of games with a deck you enjoy. (Ok, win slightly more than your fair share).

So if there are four players in your regular group and you are winning 1/2 or more of the games, you should probably tone it down as you seem to have misread the consensus power level. If there isn't someone dominating, and you hardly win, then you should probably increase your power level a bit so that it actually functions as a 4 player game (some things can get thrown off if one of the players might as well not be there). [The exception here is competitive, where your goal is to stomp everyone else into the ground.]

If the agreed on power level is competitive, then there are certain cards that should probably be banned or the game is degenerate and most people hate it. If the agreed on power level is more casual, then those same cards might not be a problem because they don't have all the things that go with them that break them - but there might be other cards that are too strong and aren't fun at that level. So some different rules are needed depending on the level that is being aimed at.

It wonder if D&D is a bit that way too. There is a bunch of motivating literature/movies/games/shows that might have a sweet spot of tier II and low III. And there is a bunch that might have a sweet spot of upper III or IV. If the DM and all the players but one are aiming for one of those tiers, it feels like the one off person might be the one to readjust if their vision just doesn't fit. And it's possible what the group is aiming at might just need some different options in the rules than what some other group needs.

In MtG, one of the things that happens is new sets of cards come out. And if WotC misjudges the power level of those sets it can warp what everyone was doing. I mean, sure the groups could just self-adjust like they always have, but everyone wants to play with the brand new thing. Especially if it is apparently designed to be for EDH/Commander. I wonder if big changes to D&D core rule books have a similar affect. They can really warp what folks were playing, and sure they could just say no... but who likes to say no to what is in the core rule books?