Pretty terrible block if I can still see and reply to your comments. You still haven't answered any questions. You just keep insulting people and playing victim. Is it really that terrible to accept that what you're suggesting just isn't interesting to many campaigns and that it would be better to post it in the Homebrew section and have the few posters who are interested in it help you?
I'd love to see D&D help educate people that "race" is about cultural brainwashing NOT biology ( and certainly not science ), if anything it's a political distinction, not a biological one.
Orphansmith
This is from the OP's first post.
So they want to inject their pet peeve into the game.
Then they start whining about criticisms like they are above them. "Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted." -Ralph Waldo Emerson.
So I think I'm done with this thread, if this person wants to make that mistake and not explain to me the value of their idea outside of their own pet peeve and possible political agenda, there is nothing here more to be learned.
Maybe stating up front "we're changing D&D to have fantasy species instead of race because politics" is a bad way to go about it, but in general WotC has handled inclusivity in their projects very well in the past few editions. I think if we were to see this, there wouldn't be a big hullabaloo about it. They'd just switch from saying "race" to "species" and have some mechanics rules behind the change.
Not to mention that I don't think race rules in D&D has been keeping people back culturally. Or that D&D is a great place to make a stand on that.
Really I just like the idea of viewing D&D through a hard science lens that isn't deconstructionist or a comedy.
Mule giving birth. And fertile Hinny's have been documented. This is just inter-species hybridization and is fairly common. A completely fertile example would be Grey Wolf + Coyote = American Red Wolf.
I like your criteria and definitions, but just pointing out that while rare, it does happen in the real world too.
Add magic to the mix and it's easy to justify dwarf-orc hybrids, or even Gnome-Dragonborn hybrids. (Esp since DB are egg laying mammals, like the platypus)
Admin note: please avoid insults directed to other posters.
Ok, now to my own comment.
Generally speaking, trying to apply science to a Fantasy Role-play game, whether D&D or other games, is usually not worthwhile.
We're talking about a reality where a powerful fighter can, whilst almost naked, withstand multiple blows from weapons and fully recover with a good overnight sleep.
We're talking about a reality where dragons exist - creatures the size of a whale that can fly!
Science as we understand it just doesn't apply to these fundamentals, so we can't expect it to apply to the rest of the world.
And here's the thing - this is not our real world - it's a fantasy world.
It's made up.
The rules of our world don't apply .... and that's ok.
What is important is that the rules support a great and satisfying story, just like your favourite book or movie.
I don't grok this idea that because there are dragons it isn't worthwhile to apply a scientific lense to those things which aren't specifically magical.
Or the idea that HP is meat, but that is tangential.
I don't grok this idea that because there are dragons it isn't worthwhile to apply a scientific lense to those things which aren't specifically magical.
Or the idea that HP is meat, but that is tangential.
Now, I am with you on that - there is nothing wrong with applying science within a system, to define consistency. The root of all good science is observing phenomena and deducing the reason why they occur, such that they can be predicted & induced.
I just don't think that anyone should ever assume that the known laws of science from our real world should always be applied to a fantasy world. :)
I don't grok this idea that because there are dragons it isn't worthwhile to apply a scientific lense to those things which aren't specifically magical.
Or the idea that HP is meat, but that is tangential.
Now, I am with you on that - there is nothing wrong with applying science within a system, to define consistency. The root of all good science is observing phenomena and deducing the reason why they occur, such that they can be predicted & induced.
I just don't think that anyone should ever assume that the known laws of science from our real world should always be applied to a fantasy world. :)
Ok, but why not? There is no reason to think that there aren't cells and atoms and the rest. Nothing about dragons or how hit points work (an abstraction never meant to actual model the world accurately, anyway) suggests that our bodies don't work like they do on Earth.
I don't grok this idea that because there are dragons it isn't worthwhile to apply a scientific lense to those things which aren't specifically magical.
Or the idea that HP is meat, but that is tangential.
Now, I am with you on that - there is nothing wrong with applying science within a system, to define consistency. The root of all good science is observing phenomena and deducing the reason why they occur, such that they can be predicted & induced.
I just don't think that anyone should ever assume that the known laws of science from our real world should always be applied to a fantasy world. :)
Ok, but why not? There is no reason to think that there aren't cells and atoms and the rest. Nothing about dragons or how hit points work (an abstraction never meant to actual model the world accurately, anyway) suggests that our bodies don't work like they do on Earth.
There is no reason to think that there are though. It is fantasy, so any explanation would be valid depending on the DM/writer. Matter could be made of magic strings, maybe everything is solid at a microscopic level, etc... Thus, cience is not needed (though usually welcome) in a fantasy setting.
I don't grok this idea that because there are dragons it isn't worthwhile to apply a scientific lense to those things which aren't specifically magical.
Or the idea that HP is meat, but that is tangential.
Now, I am with you on that - there is nothing wrong with applying science within a system, to define consistency. The root of all good science is observing phenomena and deducing the reason why they occur, such that they can be predicted & induced.
I just don't think that anyone should ever assume that the known laws of science from our real world should always be applied to a fantasy world. :)
Ok, but why not? There is no reason to think that there aren't cells and atoms and the rest. Nothing about dragons or how hit points work (an abstraction never meant to actual model the world accurately, anyway) suggests that our bodies don't work like they do on Earth.
There is no reason to think that there are though. It is fantasy, so any explanation would be valid depending on the DM/writer. Matter could be made of magic strings, maybe everything is solid at a microscopic level, etc... Thus, cience is not needed (though usually welcome) in a fantasy setting.
I've never heard a convincing argument for this.
Someone wants to think a bit harder on the metaphysics of a fantasy world and all I ever hear is that it isn't worthwhile, but no one ever gives a reason as to why it's not worthwhile. What reason is there that someone shouldn't care to think about the science of a fantasy setting?
I don't grok this idea that because there are dragons it isn't worthwhile to apply a scientific lense to those things which aren't specifically magical.
Or the idea that HP is meat, but that is tangential.
Now, I am with you on that - there is nothing wrong with applying science within a system, to define consistency. The root of all good science is observing phenomena and deducing the reason why they occur, such that they can be predicted & induced.
I just don't think that anyone should ever assume that the known laws of science from our real world should always be applied to a fantasy world. :)
Ok, but why not? There is no reason to think that there aren't cells and atoms and the rest. Nothing about dragons or how hit points work (an abstraction never meant to actual model the world accurately, anyway) suggests that our bodies don't work like they do on Earth.
There is no reason to think that there are though. It is fantasy, so any explanation would be valid depending on the DM/writer. Matter could be made of magic strings, maybe everything is solid at a microscopic level, etc... Thus, cience is not needed (though usually welcome) in a fantasy setting.
I've never heard a convincing argument for this.
Someone wants to think a bit harder on the metaphysics of a fantasy world and all I ever hear is that it isn't worthwhile, but no one ever gives a reason as to why it's not worthwhile. What reason is there that someone shouldn't care to think about the science of a fantasy setting?
Look, each one of us knows only a small portion of what we call science. Trying to apply our own portion of science to justify an entire fantasy world is a bit pretentious. I understand that, in the mind of men, there is always the need to justify everything and we can debate scientifically on fantasy from now to the end of times. But It is my believe that a fantasy world is so fascinating because most if things you just accept it as they are, and, why not, making your own mind on the justifications.
I don't grok this idea that because there are dragons it isn't worthwhile to apply a scientific lense to those things which aren't specifically magical.
Or the idea that HP is meat, but that is tangential.
Now, I am with you on that - there is nothing wrong with applying science within a system, to define consistency. The root of all good science is observing phenomena and deducing the reason why they occur, such that they can be predicted & induced.
I just don't think that anyone should ever assume that the known laws of science from our real world should always be applied to a fantasy world. :)
Ok, but why not? There is no reason to think that there aren't cells and atoms and the rest. Nothing about dragons or how hit points work (an abstraction never meant to actual model the world accurately, anyway) suggests that our bodies don't work like they do on Earth.
There is no reason to think that there are though. It is fantasy, so any explanation would be valid depending on the DM/writer. Matter could be made of magic strings, maybe everything is solid at a microscopic level, etc... Thus, cience is not needed (though usually welcome) in a fantasy setting.
Sure there is. Physics and chemistry are observably the same as the real world unless magic is acting upon the world to create exceptions. Without a specific reason to think things like atoms and cells don't exist, it makes no sense to think they don't.
The existence of magic does negate science, it just adds to it, unless a setting specifies otherwise.
There is no reason to think that there are though. It is fantasy, so any explanation would be valid depending on the DM/writer. Matter could be made of magic strings, maybe everything is solid at a microscopic level, etc... Thus, cience is not needed (though usually welcome) in a fantasy setting.
Sure there is. Physics and chemistry are observably the same as the real world unless magic is acting upon the world to create exceptions. Without a specific reason to think things like atoms and cells don't exist, it makes no sense to think they don't.
The existence of magic does negate science, it just adds to it, unless a setting specifies otherwise.
"Without a specific reason to think things like atoms and cells don't exist, it makes no sense to think they don't. " That is a really non-scientific viewpoint. There is no reason to think something exists until there is reasonable proof. Thus, if a fantasy world doesn't present evidence of physics, chemistry, and biology being similar to the real world, there is no reason to think they can be applied. Magic is not necessarily an exception to nature, it can be the base of nature, or they can be one and the same. There are fantasy settings where magic IS science, and vice-versa.
There is no reason to think that there are though. It is fantasy, so any explanation would be valid depending on the DM/writer. Matter could be made of magic strings, maybe everything is solid at a microscopic level, etc... Thus, cience is not needed (though usually welcome) in a fantasy setting.
I've never heard a convincing argument for this.
Someone wants to think a bit harder on the metaphysics of a fantasy world and all I ever hear is that it isn't worthwhile, but no one ever gives a reason as to why it's not worthwhile. What reason is there that someone shouldn't care to think about the science of a fantasy setting?
I didn't say it isn't worthwhile, just that it doesn't necessarily apply to the common setting (Forgotten Realms) and that it is not needed for a setting to work. I did say it is welcomed even though it isn't needed.
Everything we see, in every major setting, points toward physics and chemistry being the same as our world, except when magic makes it work otherwise. Things don't defy gravity unless they are specifically magical, for instance.
My arguement is quite specific, if you read it in full. The fact that physics and chemistry function like the real world when magic isn't involved, and they definately do, means that, barring a specification otherwise, the laws of physics are the same. Or at least, almost indistinguishably similar. There is no explanation anywhere of how organisms work in Eberron, but we do see that eating, drinking, inherited traits, the physical need for sleep, non magical combustion, gravity, etc all work the same as in our world. It would be silly to ignore that.
Everything we see, in every major setting, points toward physics and chemistry being the same as our world, except when magic makes it work otherwise. Things don't defy gravity unless they are specifically magical, for instance.
My arguement is quite specific, if you read it in full. The fact that physics and chemistry function like the real world when magic isn't involved, and they definately do, means that, barring a specification otherwise, the laws of physics are the same. Or at least, almost indistinguishably similar. There is no explanation anywhere of how organisms work in Eberron, but we do see that eating, drinking, inherited traits, the physical need for sleep, non magical combustion, gravity, etc all work the same as in our world. It would be silly to ignore that.
The problem I have with this idea is the notion that there can be a separate law of physics + magic stuff. The separation between the natural and supernatural world is just nonsense dreamed up by people who are trying to keep a place for magic around as scientists gradually explain more about the universe.
In D&D, the world is generally created by whatever creator god your setting has—its not formed gradually by gravity collecting masses of star dust. Correlon Lareithian or whoever created the elves—they didn't evolve from a common ancestor with pixies. And dragons of monstrous proportions can actually fly using their wings because the physical laws that exist on earth to stop those things from happening don't exist in D&D land.
Everything we see, in every major setting, points toward physics and chemistry being the same as our world, except when magic makes it work otherwise. Things don't defy gravity unless they are specifically magical, for instance.
My arguement is quite specific, if you read it in full. The fact that physics and chemistry function like the real world when magic isn't involved, and they definately do, means that, barring a specification otherwise, the laws of physics are the same. Or at least, almost indistinguishably similar. There is no explanation anywhere of how organisms work in Eberron, but we do see that eating, drinking, inherited traits, the physical need for sleep, non magical combustion, gravity, etc all work the same as in our world. It would be silly to ignore that.
The problem I have with this idea is the notion that there can be a separate law of physics + magic stuff. The separation between the natural and supernatural world is just nonsense dreamed up by people who are trying to keep a place for magic around as scientists gradually explain more about the universe.
In D&D, the world is generally created by whatever creator god your setting has—its not formed gradually by gravity collecting masses of star dust. Correlon Lareithian or whoever created the elves—they didn't evolve from a common ancestor with pixies. And dragons of monstrous proportions can actually fly using their wings because the physical laws that exist on earth to stop those things from happening don't exist in D&D land.
I didn't posit the notion that there are separate laws of physics and magic. I stated that physical things work the same in "DnD Land" and our world, except for the addition of magic. (And some tropey things like giant birds and the like)
Dragons and elves are magic, and nothing you just said even begins to negate anything I said.
Sure there is. Physics and chemistry are observably the same as the real world unless magic is acting upon the world to create exceptions. Without a specific reason to think things like atoms and cells don't exist, it makes no sense to think they don't.
The existence of magic does negate science, it just adds to it, unless a setting specifies otherwise.
Well, for the most part, anyway. Like, I don't know of any chemical compounds or herbs that will automatically heal you like a healing potion will.
I'm curious how people reckon with the Conservation of Mass law in a fantasy world. Like, when a druid shapeshifts, are they pulling mass from a different plane or transforming mass around them in order to gain or lose what they need to become those creatures? Or is it just temporary creation/destruction of mass? And if it is creation/destruction of mass, is that why they have 'timeless' bodies? Because they're constantly recreating younger cells?
I'm coming in a bit late to this party...But I'd like to offer a perspective on the original point.
Regardless of whether or not having a mapping of taxonomical genus/species would be of value to the game (personally I think it would be something that would require greater amount of work and add more clutter to a rulebook than it would bring value to the game, but im not against it.)
The original point was about changing the word "race" to refer to: dwarves, elves, humans, etc. to "species". The thing is... Race is defined as: "a group of people sharing the same culture, history, language, etc.; an ethnic group."
Which the original post more or less say's... But that's the right word for the job. A dwarf is defined by their culture, their history, and their language. if you want to drag science into this, all races in the players hand book, are defined as "humanoid", because they all spring from the same basic ancestry. Dwarves, elves, Humans, Orcs, bugbears, etc etc. All of them are defined as humanoid. What makes them a distinct "race" is where they were born. Who their parents were, what their culture is.
Race is also defined as:
a group or set of people or things with a common feature or features.
a population within a species that is distinct in some way, especially a subspecies.
a group of people descended from a common ancestor.
all of these things fit. A dwarf is a dwarf because they share features with other dwarves. They are distinct from humans, and they are descended from the common ancestor of...the first dwarf.
you can argue for the inclusion of taxonomical breakdowns of all the races in the realms till you are blue in the face. I think NOT including them is a decision that has come to be overtime due to what is deemed used by the community vs not used, but if you want them included that's a great opinion to have. Some people might like it... but from the core argument that the word "race" is wrong. There is no defense. The word race is the correct word for the job, and there is no getting around that.
The problem I have with this idea is the notion that there can be a separate law of physics + magic stuff. The separation between the natural and supernatural world is just nonsense dreamed up by people who are trying to keep a place for magic around as scientists gradually explain more about the universe.
I suppose if you wanted to be technical about it. If magic is part of the world, it's no longer supernatural, it's natural. Supernatural is something out side of nature. The supernatural doesn't adhere to laws of science. So if something like magic exists in any world, it is by definition natural. In the framework of the 5e rules, magic DOES adhere to certain rules that wouldn't be much of a stretch to think of them as laws of nature. I think in that way Science can co-exist with Magic in a fantasy setting.
In the case of a shapeshifting Druid, where does the mass come from? Well, energy and matter are flipsides of the same coin. So one could posit that the Druids use of magic stems from the innate magical energy of creation. Meaning they sample some of that energy, convert it to mass when he/she turns into a giant gorilla, and then returns it after the spell is ended.
I think once you start to look at magic through the lens of it being natural, not supernatural, that you could then start reconciling a lot of these issues.
The real reason why it'll remain "race" and not "species": It's a fantasy game. Just like there was criticism of 3E psionics for sounding too "sciencey" and not fantastic enough, the word "species" conjures images of biology class, while "race" does not.
Right, wrong, or otherwise, this is a core piece of it. You can create your own game that uses different, "correct" terminology, but that won't do it any favors. If you've never heard of the game Aria, this is part of the reason why. Instead of "skills", the author decided to use the term "expertises". It was an interesting system, but fairly complex. The terminology didn't help.
I not a biologist. I studied engineering and political science. I get the point you're trying to make and I'm not unsympathetic to it. I fully support your right to tilt at windmills. Just don't get upset when folks point out that's what you're doing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Pretty terrible block if I can still see and reply to your comments. You still haven't answered any questions. You just keep insulting people and playing victim. Is it really that terrible to accept that what you're suggesting just isn't interesting to many campaigns and that it would be better to post it in the Homebrew section and have the few posters who are interested in it help you?
According to the definition in anthropology race is a group of people of common ancestry, distinguished from others by physical characteristics.
So I would not say that the word "race" is wrong.
Orphansmith
This is from the OP's first post.
So they want to inject their pet peeve into the game.
Then they start whining about criticisms like they are above them. "Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted." -Ralph Waldo Emerson.
So I think I'm done with this thread, if this person wants to make that mistake and not explain to me the value of their idea outside of their own pet peeve and possible political agenda, there is nothing here more to be learned.
Maybe stating up front "we're changing D&D to have fantasy species instead of race because politics" is a bad way to go about it, but in general WotC has handled inclusivity in their projects very well in the past few editions. I think if we were to see this, there wouldn't be a big hullabaloo about it. They'd just switch from saying "race" to "species" and have some mechanics rules behind the change.
Not to mention that I don't think race rules in D&D has been keeping people back culturally. Or that D&D is a great place to make a stand on that.
Really I just like the idea of viewing D&D through a hard science lens that isn't deconstructionist or a comedy.
We do bones, motherf***ker!
We do bones, motherf***ker!
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
D&D Beyond FoundersPun-loving nerd | Faith Elisabeth Lilley | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
We do bones, motherf***ker!
We do bones, motherf***ker!
Everything we see, in every major setting, points toward physics and chemistry being the same as our world, except when magic makes it work otherwise. Things don't defy gravity unless they are specifically magical, for instance.
My arguement is quite specific, if you read it in full. The fact that physics and chemistry function like the real world when magic isn't involved, and they definately do, means that, barring a specification otherwise, the laws of physics are the same. Or at least, almost indistinguishably similar. There is no explanation anywhere of how organisms work in Eberron, but we do see that eating, drinking, inherited traits, the physical need for sleep, non magical combustion, gravity, etc all work the same as in our world. It would be silly to ignore that.
We do bones, motherf***ker!
We do bones, motherf***ker!
I'm coming in a bit late to this party...But I'd like to offer a perspective on the original point.
Regardless of whether or not having a mapping of taxonomical genus/species would be of value to the game (personally I think it would be something that would require greater amount of work and add more clutter to a rulebook than it would bring value to the game, but im not against it.)
The original point was about changing the word "race" to refer to: dwarves, elves, humans, etc. to "species". The thing is...
Race is defined as:
"a group of people sharing the same culture, history, language, etc.; an ethnic group."
Which the original post more or less say's... But that's the right word for the job. A dwarf is defined by their culture, their history, and their language. if you want to drag science into this, all races in the players hand book, are defined as "humanoid", because they all spring from the same basic ancestry. Dwarves, elves, Humans, Orcs, bugbears, etc etc. All of them are defined as humanoid. What makes them a distinct "race" is where they were born. Who their parents were, what their culture is.
Race is also defined as:
all of these things fit. A dwarf is a dwarf because they share features with other dwarves. They are distinct from humans, and they are descended from the common ancestor of...the first dwarf.
you can argue for the inclusion of taxonomical breakdowns of all the races in the realms till you are blue in the face. I think NOT including them is a decision that has come to be overtime due to what is deemed used by the community vs not used, but if you want them included that's a great opinion to have. Some people might like it... but from the core argument that the word "race" is wrong. There is no defense. The word race is the correct word for the job, and there is no getting around that.
I suppose if you wanted to be technical about it. If magic is part of the world, it's no longer supernatural, it's natural. Supernatural is something out side of nature. The supernatural doesn't adhere to laws of science. So if something like magic exists in any world, it is by definition natural. In the framework of the 5e rules, magic DOES adhere to certain rules that wouldn't be much of a stretch to think of them as laws of nature. I think in that way Science can co-exist with Magic in a fantasy setting.
In the case of a shapeshifting Druid, where does the mass come from? Well, energy and matter are flipsides of the same coin. So one could posit that the Druids use of magic stems from the innate magical energy of creation. Meaning they sample some of that energy, convert it to mass when he/she turns into a giant gorilla, and then returns it after the spell is ended.
I think once you start to look at magic through the lens of it being natural, not supernatural, that you could then start reconciling a lot of these issues.
Just my $.02
The real reason why it'll remain "race" and not "species": It's a fantasy game. Just like there was criticism of 3E psionics for sounding too "sciencey" and not fantastic enough, the word "species" conjures images of biology class, while "race" does not.
Right, wrong, or otherwise, this is a core piece of it. You can create your own game that uses different, "correct" terminology, but that won't do it any favors. If you've never heard of the game Aria, this is part of the reason why. Instead of "skills", the author decided to use the term "expertises". It was an interesting system, but fairly complex. The terminology didn't help.
I not a biologist. I studied engineering and political science. I get the point you're trying to make and I'm not unsympathetic to it. I fully support your right to tilt at windmills. Just don't get upset when folks point out that's what you're doing.