Try to come up with rules that allow for the mixing of any two (or more!) species in the PHB and beyond in a way that consistently and systematically leads to at least roughly balanced character blocks.
Now give those rules to ten million players, who will use them on every species ever created in D&D for the last thirty years and which will be created in the next ten and who have a vested interest in exploiting your rules against their intent to create munchkin nonsense and DM headaches.
You're not allowed to explain or change the rules at all once you give them to the players. You can't correct any mistakes you didn't know you made, you can't explain anything that ends up being more confusing than you thought it was. The rules have to be usable exactly as written for both the content you've already made and the content you'll potentially make for the rest of the edition and beyond.
Your rules must be 100% wholly acceptable to every single one of those ten million players as well, or they will go online and scream about how horrible you are and tell everyone they can not to buy your product because it's awful and racist and disgusting and/or it's A Betrayal Of The Very Soul of D&D(TM). They will raise a giant stink and it'll be your job to manage that stink even if it is for all practical purposes groundless.
There's a reason I say the solution to this issue has to be homebrew. What you're asking for is a point builder system in which every species trait in D&D is assigned a point value that fairly weighs it against every other species trait, and players are allowed to build their lineage from [X] points' worth of features. That is a system that works very well in other games, but it's anathema to The Soul of D&D(TM) and will provoke instant and widespread nerdrage if Wizards even sniffs at it. Given that they cannot do that, and given that Wizards fundamentally cannot make house rules, the only real answer is for them to offer real, actual suggestions in the Species section of the new book for how a player and a DM might work together to homebrew a combination of species traits that fits both the player's vision and desires and the DM's game and world. There's no other way they can pull this off even remotely fairly.
So it's OK for Wizards to cause real-world harm because it's just "too difficult" for them to come up with something that probably exists in other game systems?
I feel like the any two species mixing while being mechanically supported needs to be a new edition. Doing it while also remaining 'backwards compatible' doesn't work, as every previous player species won't function with the mix and match rules.
Ok again I see that and yes it would be galling, but do you maybe see my point that this is not what is happening? That the Character Origins playtest included ways to represent mixed heritage more holistically with things like Background, Language, Feats, etc? Have you .. read the Character Origins playtest?
Let me see if I can get through.
You're saying that it's ok that a character with diverse ancestry can't be represented mechanically via race/species selection because there are other ways, right? Let's look at an example.
Let's say I have a character who has elf ancestry who is a blacksmith-cum-assassin-cum-adventurer. If I choose an orc, I can use my background, language, feat (and so forth) choices to reflect that, right?
If I want to the same character but half-elf half human, do I get to have the same depth? No, I don't, not if I want both ancestries represented. I have to sacrifice my feat, or my language, or something that would otherwise represent my backstory in order to get my human ancestry represented.
Why should having mixed ancestry mean having to have a blander background than someone who is completely from one ancestry?
You seem to think the concern is with the playtest as a whole. It isn't. The system as a whole may well be better than 5e. However, that specific mechanic is problematic - and the solution that "yeah, you can just accept a blander background in trade for having diverse parents" is hurtful to some as well.
And that's the point. 5e ain't perfect, but the solution... isn't any better. Well, it might for some, but for many it's just as bad and for more than a few it's worse.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I feel like the any two species mixing while being mechanically supported needs to be a new edition. Doing it while also remaining 'backwards compatible' doesn't work, as every previous player species won't function with the mix and match rules.
There are multiple ways of introducing a system for mixing species without a new edition. Sure, it may not be fully integrated with 5e species but so long as they're balanced with them it's fine (like how you can have a 5e Evocation Wizard alongside a 1D&D Moon Devotion Paladin - it's not really viable to mix subclass of one to the of the other - but you can certainly have them alongside each other).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
It's unbelievable how we are told we must accept change after change to the game so as not to cause offense—because this does lead to real-world harm—but when a single change offends others that no longer matters because then balance and options is suddenly of much greater importance.
The decision is grotesque and so is the zeal with which people are defending it.
So it's OK for Wizards to cause real-world harm because it's just "too difficult" for them to come up with something that probably exists in other game systems?
This argument has been ongoing since the Origins playtest dropped last August, and in a way it's been ongoing since Tasha's Cauldron was announced threeish years ago. People screamed. They ranted and yowled and hurled flaming pitchforks at the idea that species wasn't etched in titanium and there could be some flex in the system. We still get people shrieking and hollering about something as easy and harmless as floating ASIs.
Do you honestly think keeping the half-person stat blocks from R5e is the solution? Telling people "you can either be the child of orcish **** or a pointish-eared person everybody hates for no actual reason, but any other combination is not allowed"? Do you think keeping the "half-person" language is the way to go, constantly insinuating that these characters don't count as full, real people?
I'm not saying "do nothing and keep the Origins playtest blurb". I'm saying "Actively push people towards homebrew and figuring out the bespoke solution that works for them, with guidelines on how to do so and hopefully what to avoid." Wizards cannot make a point-builder system for lineage without provoking widespread outrage and rejection - Fourth Edition was pretty close to a point-builder system and it still catches flak for being Literally The Worst Thing Ever Invented Since Mustard Gas. It constantly gets shit on for being too complicated, too game-y, too Not D&D, and just a terrible horrible no good very bad idea in every way.
People don't want it. They want to be able to say "I'm an elf ranger" and be done with it, without having to put any more thought or effort into their character. The people who do want to put more thought and effort into it have to homebrew. That's the price we pay for this edition being as successful as it is and getting us all that juicy third-party aftermarket support and mainstream acceptance - the game is designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator* and anyone who gives more of a shit than Suzie Fire the teenage Twitter influencer has to put in extra work over and above the system.
I feel like the any two species mixing while being mechanically supported needs to be a new edition. Doing it while also remaining 'backwards compatible' doesn't work, as every previous player species won't function with the mix and match rules.
There are multiple ways of introducing a system for mixing species without a new edition. Sure, it may not be fully integrated with 5e species but so long as they're balanced with them it's fine (like how you can have a 5e Evocation Wizard alongside a 1D&D Moon Devotion Paladin - it's not really viable to mix subclass of one to the of the other - but you can certainly have them alongside each other).
True. Though it sadly wouldn't work with the motm player species as they're already released, and they're kind of meant to be up to new edition standards. But if you accept that everything before the 2024 PHB won't work with the hybrid-species rules, it could be done. And honestly I think that's the best option.
In fact the reason I think nothing like that is being considered is that WotC wants to advertise things like MotM as up to date with onednd.
This argument has been ongoing since the Origins playtest dropped last August, and in a way it's been ongoing since Tasha's Cauldron was announced threeish years ago. People screamed. They ranted and yowled and hurled flaming pitchforks at the idea that species wasn't etched in titanium and there could be some flex in the system. We still get people shrieking and hollering about something as easy and harmless as floating ASIs.
Do you honestly think keeping the half-person stat blocks from R5e is the solution? Telling people "you can either be the child of orcish **** or a pointish-eared person everybody hates for no actual reason, but any other combination is not allowed"? Do you think keeping the "half-person" language is the way to go, constantly insinuating that these characters don't count as full, real people?
I'm not saying "do nothing and keep the Origins playtest blurb". I'm saying "Actively push people towards homebrew and figuring out the bespoke solution that works for them, with guidelines on how to do so and hopefully what to avoid." Wizards cannot make a point-builder system for lineage without provoking widespread outrage and rejection - Fourth Edition was pretty close to a point-builder system and it still catches flak for being Literally The Worst Thing Ever Invented Since Mustard Gas. It constantly gets shit on for being too complicated, too game-y, too Not D&D, and just a terrible horrible no good very bad idea in every way.
People don't want it. They want to be able to say "I'm an elf ranger" and be done with it, without having to put any more thought or effort into their character. The people who do want to put more thought and effort into it have to homebrew. That's the price we pay for this edition being as successful as it is and getting us all that juicy third-party aftermarket support and mainstream acceptance - the game is designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator* and anyone who gives more of a shit than Suzie Fire the teenage Twitter influencer has to put in extra work over and above the system.
It's unbelievable how we are told we must accept change after change to the game so as not to cause offense—because this does lead to real-world harm—but when a single change offends others that no longer matters because then balance and options is suddenly of much greater importance.
The decision is grotesque and so is the zeal with which people are defending it.
So it's OK for Wizards to cause real-world harm because it's just "too difficult" for them to come up with something that probably exists in other game systems?
This argument has been ongoing since the Origins playtest dropped last August, and in a way it's been ongoing since Tasha's Cauldron was announced threeish years ago. People screamed. They ranted and yowled and hurled flaming pitchforks at the idea that species wasn't etched in titanium and there could be some flex in the system. We still get people shrieking and hollering about something as easy and harmless as floating ASIs.
Do you honestly think keeping the half-person stat blocks from R5e is the solution? Telling people "you can either be the child of orcish **** or a pointish-eared person everybody hates for no actual reason, but any other combination is not allowed"? Do you think keeping the "half-person" language is the way to go, constantly insinuating that these characters don't count as full, real people?
I'm not saying "do nothing and keep the Origins playtest blurb". I'm saying "Actively push people towards homebrew and figuring out the bespoke solution that works for them, with guidelines on how to do so and hopefully what to avoid." Wizards cannot make a point-builder system for lineage without provoking widespread outrage and rejection - Fourth Edition was pretty close to a point-builder system and it still catches flak for being Literally The Worst Thing Ever Invented Since Mustard Gas. It constantly gets shit on for being too complicated, too game-y, too Not D&D, and just a terrible horrible no good very bad idea in every way.
People don't want it. They want to be able to say "I'm an elf ranger" and be done with it, without having to put any more thought or effort into their character. The people who do want to put more thought and effort into it have to homebrew. That's the price we pay for this edition being as successful as it is and getting us all that juicy third-party aftermarket support and mainstream acceptance - the game is designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator* and anyone who gives more of a shit than Suzie Fire the teenage Twitter influencer has to put in extra work over and above the system.
Is it ideal? No. But it is reality.
This is an absolutely insane false dichotomy. WotC absolutely have the resources to balance something as simple as “split each race’s features into an A and a B category, mixed race characters pick one parent’s A traits and the other parent’s B traits.”
"Please understand that taking a character who's supposed to be mixed or multiracial and telling them to "pick" which one of their parent's heritages they "count" as is a trauma that many mixed people are subjected to constantly. Don't replicate that in game."
"People of mixed race have long faced racial discrimination either being forced to choose one heritage, or having society choose one for them. Codifying the same thing in your game by having PCs of mixed race choose one side for stats is the same thing and is very racist."
I perfectly understand your point about people wanting to be seen as human.
Who doesn't?
We all deserve to be afforded human dignity.
Thank you for understanding this. I hope I have been as understanding to your point.
Forcing a mixed-raced player who wants to play a half-elf to pick the species of just one parent isn't it.
Ok again I see that and yes it would be galling, but do you maybe see my point that this is not what is happening? That the Character Origins playtest included ways to represent mixed heritage more holistically with things like Background, Language, Feats, etc? Have you .. read the Character Origins playtest?
As someone else pointed out in this very thread:
"It’s not more inclusive to erase the unique experiences of mixed-race people and instead treat them as just one of whatever one of their parents is. If the revised rules actually allow for mixed-race characters to be expressed in a more diverse way, that’s fantastic, and they’ve said they’re still revising, so I’m hopeful that they will. But the rules for mixed-race characters in the current Character Origins UA are more disrespectful than the currently published half-elves and half-orcs."
Okay, that is one person's perspective, but not the perspective I share. Nor is it the perspective of a few multiracial people I've spoken to, some on these forums.
You can repeat that point about Background and Language a million times.
I could, but this is the first time you've addressed it. All I was asking was if you could see that point.
A player wanting to play a half-elf using the revised rules is still forced to choose the species of a single parent to determine some features.
One. Everything after that is either free to choose or, in the case of lifespan, suggested to be the average.
Stop saying "this is not what is happening" because it is.
What you are posting is just misinformation.
I just think that Background, Feat, Language, etc are supposed to be just as important parts of the character origins process and part and parcel of making a holistic character, rather than focusing on how their parentage somehow makes them better at sports, just as an example. That kind of stereotyping is what makes me and others I've talked to uncomfortable and this new system makes us more comfortable.
I acknowledge that you feel differently, perhaps because the existence of Half Elves or Half Orcs made you feel seen. If that is the case I think that's a beautiful thing and I resonate with that, that's why I was always drawn to Half Elves. But I'd like you to try and open your mind to the the possibility that that experience is still available and now just opened up to a wider diversity of mixed heritage characters that were not available before.
My defense of this playtest option is not because of balance factors. It's because it does make me feel more welcome and it does so for other people I've talked to as well.
Again, I acknowledge that you feel differently. There can be conflicting feelings about the same thing.
I perfectly understand your point about people wanting to be seen as human.
Who doesn't?
We all deserve to be afforded human dignity.
Thank you for understanding this. I hope I have been as understanding to your point.
Forcing a mixed-raced player who wants to play a half-elf to pick the species of just one parent isn't it.
Ok again I see that and yes it would be galling, but do you maybe see my point that this is not what is happening? That the Character Origins playtest included ways to represent mixed heritage more holistically with things like Background, Language, Feats, etc? Have you .. read the Character Origins playtest?
As someone else pointed out in this very thread:
"It’s not more inclusive to erase the unique experiences of mixed-race people and instead treat them as just one of whatever one of their parents is. If the revised rules actually allow for mixed-race characters to be expressed in a more diverse way, that’s fantastic, and they’ve said they’re still revising, so I’m hopeful that they will. But the rules for mixed-race characters in the current Character Origins UA are more disrespectful than the currently published half-elves and half-orcs."
Okay, that is one person's perspective, but not the perspective I share. Nor is it the perspective of a few multiracial people I've spoken to, some on these forums.
You can repeat that point about Background and Language a million times.
I could, but this is the first time you've addressed it. All I was asking was if you could see that point.
A player wanting to play a half-elf using the revised rules is still forced to choose the species of a single parent to determine some features.
One. Everything after that is either free to choose or, in the case of lifespan, suggested to be the average.
Stop saying "this is not what is happening" because it is.
What you are posting is just misinformation.
I just think that Background, Feat, Language, etc are supposed to be just as important parts of the character origins process and part and parcel of making a holistic character, rather than focusing on how their parentage somehow makes them better at sports, just as an example. That kind of stereotyping is what makes me and others I've talked to uncomfortable and this new system makes us more comfortable.
I acknowledge that you feel differently, perhaps because the existence of Half Elves or Half Orcs made you feel seen. If that is the case I think that's a beautiful thing and I resonate with that, that's why I was always drawn to Half Elves. But I'd like you to try and open your mind to the the possibility that that experience is still available and now just opened up to a wider diversity of mixed heritage characters that were not available before.
So you don't care if it is deeply hurtful for many of us of mixed-race to be told we must now elevate the race of one parent over another when rolling up half-elves or any half- character because that is our lived experience?
No matter how many times you repeat your point about Background and Language it goes nowhere towards addressing that. You've made pretty clear by now you just don't care.
It's unbelievable how we are told we must accept change after change to the game so as not to cause offense—because this does lead to real-world harm—but when a single change offends others that no longer matters because then balance and options is suddenly of much greater importance.
The decision is grotesque and so is the zeal with which people are defending it.
Step outside of these forums and go and read the comments from many a mixed-race player about this decision.
Despite the accusations you keep slinging at me, I don't like the Origins heritage blurb. I didn't like it when it was fresh and new. I ignored it when making new characters in the 1DD system. I am not advocating for "no solution", I am advocating for the best solution. I will bet you a spare spleen that Wizards will not implement the system you desire, i.e. hard and fast etched-in-steel hard-coded Official Rules for mixing up species traits. They won't do that because they did not design their species system for it and they cannot redesign species around the whole "Major/Minor" traits thing everybody keeps pushing for because some species having nothing but a giant array of minor traits (PHB half-elves) and some species are literally nothing except their one major gigantic species-defining trait (aarakocra).
They would have to design the different species systematically in order for there to be a systematic way to split and mix them up, and if they tried to rebuild every species in D&D in a systematic way that allowed for easy and intuitive mixing of traits according to Official Rules, and Wizards hasn't made a single systematic design decision for D&D since 4e exploded in their faces. Everything they do - everything - is based on tradition, gut feeling, and "ehh, close enough", which means modifying those systems also has to be gut feeling and close-enough. That is the domain of homebrew, and I would love if Wizards did the same thing the Tal'Dorei Campaign Guide Reborn did and include a lovely little guide on best practices for doing so, while encouraging DMs to be flexible and allow for uncommon combinations and cautioning players against gaming the system for More Pluses.
if it were just the new PHB species? They could probably work something out. Have an index with recommended trait combinations somewhere in the book. But they introduce two or three new species with every single book these days, and the rules would also have to coincide with every single species ever printed for 5e, every species that will ever be printed for 5e, and also most every species ever printed in 4e or 3/3.5e because people keep cramming those in 5e with a backhoe. I can't foresee a situation where Wizards can provide Recommended Trait Mixes for every single combination of people in all of D&D, especially once you get beyond dual lineages and start getting into mixing characters from already-mixed parentage.
Homebrew is how you get what you want and tailor your character to exactly the vision you have for it, and DMs need to unclench their sphincters and allow players to make tweaks like that. I would love for Wizards to explicitly encourage this in the Species section of the new book, tell DMs to relax and let their players monkey with the controls a little bit while telling players that creating an aarakocra tortle drow tiefling aasimar with Flight, Shell, Super Darkvision, Trance, Infernal Heritage, and Celestial Heritage is an abuse of the DM's trust and should be avoided. There's no good way they can write hard-coded rules for this; guidance on how to do it ourselves is the best we can get.
Despite the accusations you keep slinging at me, I don't like the Origins heritage blurb. I didn't like it when it was fresh and new. I ignored it when making new characters in the 1DD system. I am not advocating for "no solution", I am advocating for the best solution. I will bet you a spare spleen that Wizards will not implement the system you desire, i.e. hard and fast etched-in-steel hard-coded Official Rules for mixing up species traits. They won't do that because they did not design their species system for it and they cannot redesign species around the whole "Major/Minor" traits thing everybody keeps pushing for because some species having nothing but a giant array of minor traits (PHB half-elves) and some species are literally nothing except their one major gigantic species-defining trait (aarakocra).
They would have to design the different species systematically in order for there to be a systematic way to split and mix them up, and if they tried to rebuild every species in D&D in a systematic way that allowed for easy and intuitive mixing of traits according to Official Rules, and Wizards hasn't made a single systematic design decision for D&D since 4e exploded in their faces. Everything they do - everything - is based on tradition, gut feeling, and "ehh, close enough", which means modifying those systems also has to be gut feeling and close-enough. That is the domain of homebrew, and I would love if Wizards did the same thing the Tal'Dorei Campaign Guide Reborn did and include a lovely little guide on best practices for doing so, while encouraging DMs to be flexible and allow for uncommon combinations and cautioning players against gaming the system for More Pluses.
if it were just the new PHB species? They could probably work something out. Have an index with recommended trait combinations somewhere in the book. But they introduce two or three new species with every single book these days, and the rules would also have to coincide with every single species ever printed for 5e, every species that will ever be printed for 5e, and also most every species ever printed in 4e or 3/3.5e because people keep cramming those in 5e with a backhoe. I can't foresee a situation where Wizards can provide Recommended Trait Mixes for every single combination of people in all of D&D, especially once you get beyond dual lineages and start getting into mixing characters from already-mixed parentage.
Homebrew is how you get what you want and tailor your character to exactly the vision you have for it, and DMs need to unclench their sphincters and allow players to make tweaks like that. I would love for Wizards to explicitly encourage this in the Species section of the new book, tell DMs to relax and let their players monkey with the controls a little bit while telling players that creating an aarakocra tortle drow tiefling aasimar with Flight, Shell, Super Darkvision, Trance, Infernal Heritage, and Celestial Heritage is an abuse of the DM's trust and should be avoided. There's no good way they can write hard-coded rules for this; guidance on how to do it ourselves is the best we can get.
It's unbelievable how we are told we must accept change after change to the game so as not to cause offense—because this does lead to real-world harm—but when a single change offends others that no longer matters because then balance and options is suddenly of much greater importance.
The decision is grotesque and so is the zeal with which people are defending it.
So you don't care if it is deeply hurtful for many of us of mixed-race to be told we must now elevate the race of one parent over another when rolling up half-elves or any half- character because that is our lived experience?
I do care, very much. But I can care about that and at the same time tell you that I feel differently. I'm not even going so far as to say that how they are handling it is how it should eventually be published, I'm just saying that the change was a welcome one that made me, personally, feel more included and less left out.
I don't really think of it as elevating one parentage over the other because I honestly think that all the other parts of Character Origins are just as important and significant ways in representing one's history and origins. I'm not repeating it because I think I will convince you, I'm just saying that's how I actually feel.
I can care and acknowledge how something makes you feel, while also telling you that I feel differently. I'm not sure exactly how to resolve this seeming conflict other than to say that there is a possible perspective to see this in a way that is acknowledging the multiracial character's history, albeit imperfectly, while also not singling out one particular community in an othering way. And that way would be to look at the character origins process holistically, and regarding all the parts of it as a way to represent a character's history and heritage.
But I understand if you don't see it that way and I do care that this is hurtful to you.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
It's unbelievable how we are told we must accept change after change to the game so as not to cause offense—because this does lead to real-world harm—but when a single change offends others that no longer matters because then balance and options is suddenly of much greater importance.
The decision is grotesque and so is the zeal with which people are defending it.
What would you prefer? Clearly the answer is "keep the half-person stat blocks". Okay. Again - how does that allow for any diversity beyond half-elves and half-orcs? Half-orcs have always been a squicky, awful, nasty idea crammed into the book because in 2014 Wizards wasn't allowed to say "you can just play an orc". That leaves half-elves and half-elves alone, which means your heritage will always consist of 1x full-blooded human and 1x full-blooded elf, no matter what you might actually want your character to be.
Perfect example: Gwendolyn de Rolo. Gwen's father is human, her mother is a half-elf, and yet she herself is a tiefling because Percival did an oopsie during the Vox Machina campaign. How do you systematically, fairly, and without resorting to homebrew mingle the traits of Human, Half-Elf, and Tiefling in a single character? Humans don't have any species traits; their traits are "get expanded access to feats". Half-elves have a fat pile of minor traits that's vaguely-sorta-not-really tangentially related to something that might be "Human+Elf" but generally does a very poor job of being Human+Elf. And tieflings have two major traits - a highly beneficial damage resistance and innate spellcasting, mated to nothing else but Galactic Standard Darkvision.
You may not be, but Ophidimancer has said that he prefers "just pick one parent's race to be" to "your mixed heritage has a unique mechanical place," so I dunno about "nobody."
Despite the accusations you keep slinging at me, I don't like the Origins heritage blurb. I didn't like it when it was fresh and new. I ignored it when making new characters in the 1DD system. I am not advocating for "no solution", I am advocating for the best solution.
You're advocating for "offload the work onto DMs," which is definitely not the best solution. It may be the most realistic solution, but the benefit of not being on the professional design side of the conversation is that we don't need to care about what's realistic. Our job is to make it clear what we want. WotC's job is to figure out how to best deliver on that realistically.
I will bet you a spare spleen that Wizards will not implement the system you desire, i.e. hard and fast etched-in-steel hard-coded Official Rules for mixing up species traits. They won't do that because they did not design their species system for it and they cannot redesign species around the whole "Major/Minor" traits thing everybody keeps pushing for because some species having nothing but a giant array of minor traits (PHB half-elves) and some species are literally nothing except their one major gigantic species-defining trait (aarakocra).
Sure, but like... they're revising everything now. You get that, right? This is an opportunity to redo races according to a new paradigm that allows for mixed-race characters to be mechanically represented in a diverse and respectful way. And you're absolutely right that it's super possible, even likely, that they will not do that. But aggressively chastising people for daring to ask WotC to do some work to make a better game is kind of super weird?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So it's OK for Wizards to cause real-world harm because it's just "too difficult" for them to come up with something that probably exists in other game systems?
I feel like the any two species mixing while being mechanically supported needs to be a new edition. Doing it while also remaining 'backwards compatible' doesn't work, as every previous player species won't function with the mix and match rules.
Let me see if I can get through.
You're saying that it's ok that a character with diverse ancestry can't be represented mechanically via race/species selection because there are other ways, right? Let's look at an example.
Let's say I have a character who has elf ancestry who is a blacksmith-cum-assassin-cum-adventurer. If I choose an orc, I can use my background, language, feat (and so forth) choices to reflect that, right?
If I want to the same character but half-elf half human, do I get to have the same depth? No, I don't, not if I want both ancestries represented. I have to sacrifice my feat, or my language, or something that would otherwise represent my backstory in order to get my human ancestry represented.
Why should having mixed ancestry mean having to have a blander background than someone who is completely from one ancestry?
You seem to think the concern is with the playtest as a whole. It isn't. The system as a whole may well be better than 5e. However, that specific mechanic is problematic - and the solution that "yeah, you can just accept a blander background in trade for having diverse parents" is hurtful to some as well.
And that's the point. 5e ain't perfect, but the solution... isn't any better. Well, it might for some, but for many it's just as bad and for more than a few it's worse.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
There are multiple ways of introducing a system for mixing species without a new edition. Sure, it may not be fully integrated with 5e species but so long as they're balanced with them it's fine (like how you can have a 5e Evocation Wizard alongside a 1D&D Moon Devotion Paladin - it's not really viable to mix subclass of one to the of the other - but you can certainly have them alongside each other).
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
It's unbelievable how we are told we must accept change after change to the game so as not to cause offense—because this does lead to real-world harm—but when a single change offends others that no longer matters because then balance and options is suddenly of much greater importance.
The decision is grotesque and so is the zeal with which people are defending it.
This argument has been ongoing since the Origins playtest dropped last August, and in a way it's been ongoing since Tasha's Cauldron was announced threeish years ago. People screamed. They ranted and yowled and hurled flaming pitchforks at the idea that species wasn't etched in titanium and there could be some flex in the system. We still get people shrieking and hollering about something as easy and harmless as floating ASIs.
Do you honestly think keeping the half-person stat blocks from R5e is the solution? Telling people "you can either be the child of orcish **** or a pointish-eared person everybody hates for no actual reason, but any other combination is not allowed"? Do you think keeping the "half-person" language is the way to go, constantly insinuating that these characters don't count as full, real people?
I'm not saying "do nothing and keep the Origins playtest blurb". I'm saying "Actively push people towards homebrew and figuring out the bespoke solution that works for them, with guidelines on how to do so and hopefully what to avoid." Wizards cannot make a point-builder system for lineage without provoking widespread outrage and rejection - Fourth Edition was pretty close to a point-builder system and it still catches flak for being Literally The Worst Thing Ever Invented Since Mustard Gas. It constantly gets shit on for being too complicated, too game-y, too Not D&D, and just a terrible horrible no good very bad idea in every way.
People don't want it. They want to be able to say "I'm an elf ranger" and be done with it, without having to put any more thought or effort into their character. The people who do want to put more thought and effort into it have to homebrew. That's the price we pay for this edition being as successful as it is and getting us all that juicy third-party aftermarket support and mainstream acceptance - the game is designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator* and anyone who gives more of a shit than Suzie Fire the teenage Twitter influencer has to put in extra work over and above the system.
Is it ideal? No. But it is reality.
Please do not contact or message me.
True. Though it sadly wouldn't work with the motm player species as they're already released, and they're kind of meant to be up to new edition standards. But if you accept that everything before the 2024 PHB won't work with the hybrid-species rules, it could be done. And honestly I think that's the best option.
In fact the reason I think nothing like that is being considered is that WotC wants to advertise things like MotM as up to date with onednd.
This is an absolutely insane false dichotomy. WotC absolutely have the resources to balance something as simple as “split each race’s features into an A and a B category, mixed race characters pick one parent’s A traits and the other parent’s B traits.”
"Please understand that taking a character who's supposed to be mixed or multiracial and telling them to "pick" which one of their parent's heritages they "count" as is a trauma that many mixed people are subjected to constantly. Don't replicate that in game."
"People of mixed race have long faced racial discrimination either being forced to choose one heritage, or having society choose one for them. Codifying the same thing in your game by having PCs of mixed race choose one side for stats is the same thing and is very racist."
Two.
Two comments among what must be hundreds.
From livid mixed-race players.
Deeply hurt by this decision.
And people here don't care. People who fill up entire threads talking about how they want the game to be more welcoming.
Just stop and think about that for a minute.
Okay, that is one person's perspective, but not the perspective I share. Nor is it the perspective of a few multiracial people I've spoken to, some on these forums.
I could, but this is the first time you've addressed it. All I was asking was if you could see that point.
One. Everything after that is either free to choose or, in the case of lifespan, suggested to be the average.
I just think that Background, Feat, Language, etc are supposed to be just as important parts of the character origins process and part and parcel of making a holistic character, rather than focusing on how their parentage somehow makes them better at sports, just as an example. That kind of stereotyping is what makes me and others I've talked to uncomfortable and this new system makes us more comfortable.
I acknowledge that you feel differently, perhaps because the existence of Half Elves or Half Orcs made you feel seen. If that is the case I think that's a beautiful thing and I resonate with that, that's why I was always drawn to Half Elves. But I'd like you to try and open your mind to the the possibility that that experience is still available and now just opened up to a wider diversity of mixed heritage characters that were not available before.
My defense of this playtest option is not because of balance factors. It's because it does make me feel more welcome and it does so for other people I've talked to as well.
Again, I acknowledge that you feel differently. There can be conflicting feelings about the same thing.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
So you don't care if it is deeply hurtful for many of us of mixed-race to be told we must now elevate the race of one parent over another when rolling up half-elves or any half- character because that is our lived experience?
No matter how many times you repeat your point about Background and Language it goes nowhere towards addressing that. You've made pretty clear by now you just don't care.
As I said:
Step outside of these forums and go and read the comments from many a mixed-race player about this decision.
Some are posted above.
But stop just dismissing our response to this.
It's gross.
CELESTIAL. NOBODY IS ASKING FOR THAT.
Despite the accusations you keep slinging at me, I don't like the Origins heritage blurb. I didn't like it when it was fresh and new. I ignored it when making new characters in the 1DD system. I am not advocating for "no solution", I am advocating for the best solution. I will bet you a spare spleen that Wizards will not implement the system you desire, i.e. hard and fast etched-in-steel hard-coded Official Rules for mixing up species traits. They won't do that because they did not design their species system for it and they cannot redesign species around the whole "Major/Minor" traits thing everybody keeps pushing for because some species having nothing but a giant array of minor traits (PHB half-elves) and some species are literally nothing except their one major gigantic species-defining trait (aarakocra).
They would have to design the different species systematically in order for there to be a systematic way to split and mix them up, and if they tried to rebuild every species in D&D in a systematic way that allowed for easy and intuitive mixing of traits according to Official Rules, and Wizards hasn't made a single systematic design decision for D&D since 4e exploded in their faces. Everything they do - everything - is based on tradition, gut feeling, and "ehh, close enough", which means modifying those systems also has to be gut feeling and close-enough. That is the domain of homebrew, and I would love if Wizards did the same thing the Tal'Dorei Campaign Guide Reborn did and include a lovely little guide on best practices for doing so, while encouraging DMs to be flexible and allow for uncommon combinations and cautioning players against gaming the system for More Pluses.
if it were just the new PHB species? They could probably work something out. Have an index with recommended trait combinations somewhere in the book. But they introduce two or three new species with every single book these days, and the rules would also have to coincide with every single species ever printed for 5e, every species that will ever be printed for 5e, and also most every species ever printed in 4e or 3/3.5e because people keep cramming those in 5e with a backhoe. I can't foresee a situation where Wizards can provide Recommended Trait Mixes for every single combination of people in all of D&D, especially once you get beyond dual lineages and start getting into mixing characters from already-mixed parentage.
Homebrew is how you get what you want and tailor your character to exactly the vision you have for it, and DMs need to unclench their sphincters and allow players to make tweaks like that. I would love for Wizards to explicitly encourage this in the Species section of the new book, tell DMs to relax and let their players monkey with the controls a little bit while telling players that creating an aarakocra tortle drow tiefling aasimar with Flight, Shell, Super Darkvision, Trance, Infernal Heritage, and Celestial Heritage is an abuse of the DM's trust and should be avoided. There's no good way they can write hard-coded rules for this; guidance on how to do it ourselves is the best we can get.
Please do not contact or message me.
The level of insensitivity coming from people here who claim to be all about sensitivity is disturbing.
I do care, very much. But I can care about that and at the same time tell you that I feel differently. I'm not even going so far as to say that how they are handling it is how it should eventually be published, I'm just saying that the change was a welcome one that made me, personally, feel more included and less left out.
I don't really think of it as elevating one parentage over the other because I honestly think that all the other parts of Character Origins are just as important and significant ways in representing one's history and origins. I'm not repeating it because I think I will convince you, I'm just saying that's how I actually feel.
I can care and acknowledge how something makes you feel, while also telling you that I feel differently. I'm not sure exactly how to resolve this seeming conflict other than to say that there is a possible perspective to see this in a way that is acknowledging the multiracial character's history, albeit imperfectly, while also not singling out one particular community in an othering way. And that way would be to look at the character origins process holistically, and regarding all the parts of it as a way to represent a character's history and heritage.
But I understand if you don't see it that way and I do care that this is hurtful to you.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Fine. You wanna be that way?
What would you prefer? Clearly the answer is "keep the half-person stat blocks". Okay. Again - how does that allow for any diversity beyond half-elves and half-orcs? Half-orcs have always been a squicky, awful, nasty idea crammed into the book because in 2014 Wizards wasn't allowed to say "you can just play an orc". That leaves half-elves and half-elves alone, which means your heritage will always consist of 1x full-blooded human and 1x full-blooded elf, no matter what you might actually want your character to be.
Perfect example: Gwendolyn de Rolo. Gwen's father is human, her mother is a half-elf, and yet she herself is a tiefling because Percival did an oopsie during the Vox Machina campaign. How do you systematically, fairly, and without resorting to homebrew mingle the traits of Human, Half-Elf, and Tiefling in a single character? Humans don't have any species traits; their traits are "get expanded access to feats". Half-elves have a fat pile of minor traits that's vaguely-sorta-not-really tangentially related to something that might be "Human+Elf" but generally does a very poor job of being Human+Elf. And tieflings have two major traits - a highly beneficial damage resistance and innate spellcasting, mated to nothing else but Galactic Standard Darkvision.
How do you systematically mix those up?
Please do not contact or message me.
You may not be, but Ophidimancer has said that he prefers "just pick one parent's race to be" to "your mixed heritage has a unique mechanical place," so I dunno about "nobody."
You're advocating for "offload the work onto DMs," which is definitely not the best solution. It may be the most realistic solution, but the benefit of not being on the professional design side of the conversation is that we don't need to care about what's realistic. Our job is to make it clear what we want. WotC's job is to figure out how to best deliver on that realistically.
Sure, but like... they're revising everything now. You get that, right? This is an opportunity to redo races according to a new paradigm that allows for mixed-race characters to be mechanically represented in a diverse and respectful way. And you're absolutely right that it's super possible, even likely, that they will not do that. But aggressively chastising people for daring to ask WotC to do some work to make a better game is kind of super weird?