Very disappointed

Quote from JoeltheWalrus >>

Quote from ConalTheGreat >>

Quote from JoeltheWalrus >>

Quote from Portential >>

You aren't going with a post modern mind frame, facts don't matter, identity matters.  A lot of the complaints that WotC are bowing to are hedged in that philosophy.  Tell me that you believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that if a concerted effort was made to make WotC look ableist for not putting wheel chair, height, mute and deafness as defining character traits and giving players the ability to change them to strengths not flaws isn't being done now.  It's a post modern argument, and I get where you are going. 

There is an effort now to get wheelchairs put into D&D, neverminded the Regeneration spell, Heal Spell or Wish Spell making that condition not logical in D&D for an adventurer with money, power and high level clerical friends.  If they cast a spell and heal it, its considered ableist.  Its going to come in most likely not in Tasha but in the next source book.  Fantasy Logic doesn't matter to post modern logic.  Isn't the blindness/deafness spell ableist, isn't it wrong to use that spell as a negative effect?  This is coming to the game and if WotC doesn't start saying no for game balance, we are going to get some really wonderful new "optional" rules that will take hold in adventure league games because its in the book and its legal.

 The spell regeneration would cost about ten thousand GP. That is a lifetime of wages for a skilled worker. 

 I do like the idea that there is an organization in the world that works to give all the injured people regeneration. Something  that people would donate money for, or it would come out of their taxes.

 Sure, if that exists in your world. That would be a rather benevolent society. 

 It is certainly getting added to my world, perhaps Ill have an NPC propose it to the players. Could be interesting. 

Quote from Portential >>

I lived through the satanic panic watching TSR recoil in fear and its happening again.

The difference between that and what's happening now is that there are real people saying, "Yes this is and has been actually hurting us." Then people are resolving to do better and make better content that pulls from all the available talent and not just from certain viewpoints. The fact that you see them as the same just highlights that you, personally, have never been hurt in this way, which is a privilege you should be thankful for.

Quote from ConalTheGreat >>

Quote from JoeltheWalrus >>

Quote from ConalTheGreat >>

Quote from JoeltheWalrus >>

Quote from Portential >>

You aren't going with a post modern mind frame, facts don't matter, identity matters.  A lot of the complaints that WotC are bowing to are hedged in that philosophy.  Tell me that you believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that if a concerted effort was made to make WotC look ableist for not putting wheel chair, height, mute and deafness as defining character traits and giving players the ability to change them to strengths not flaws isn't being done now.  It's a post modern argument, and I get where you are going. 

There is an effort now to get wheelchairs put into D&D, neverminded the Regeneration spell, Heal Spell or Wish Spell making that condition not logical in D&D for an adventurer with money, power and high level clerical friends.  If they cast a spell and heal it, its considered ableist.  Its going to come in most likely not in Tasha but in the next source book.  Fantasy Logic doesn't matter to post modern logic.  Isn't the blindness/deafness spell ableist, isn't it wrong to use that spell as a negative effect?  This is coming to the game and if WotC doesn't start saying no for game balance, we are going to get some really wonderful new "optional" rules that will take hold in adventure league games because its in the book and its legal.

 The spell regeneration would cost about ten thousand GP. That is a lifetime of wages for a skilled worker. 

 I do like the idea that there is an organization in the world that works to give all the injured people regeneration. Something  that people would donate money for, or it would come out of their taxes.

 Sure, if that exists in your world. That would be a rather benevolent society. 

 It is certainly getting added to my world, perhaps Ill have an NPC propose it to the players. Could be interesting. 

 Yeah. The players can actually use their vast wealth for a good cause. 

EDIT: I did some quick maths, and the tax would roughly amount to four GP per person, per year. This is presuming one hundred accidents per year, each costing ten thousand gold to fix, and a city with a population of twenty five thousand people. 

Quote from Portential >>

To me this is more from a lore and world building perspective.  You imagine ancient Elven civilizations with powerful wizards.  You don't imagine an ancient Dwarven civilizations based on powerful wizards.  There are basic spices used for Fantasy worlds, dwarves are martial and rowdy, elves are magical and haughty.  It gets people into the campaign easier and helps verisimilitude.  They could go with the excuse, its a rare character that can do this and is a hero.  I normally give my players an advantage on character creation for stats and a feat to separate them from the world, so I can go with that I guess.  But rules as written, Mountain Dwarfs are the most effective race in the game.  To me this is more from an adventurers league perspective.  You might not like it and not use it at your table, however you will have to use it when doing adventurers league.  You aren't going to have a choice on it unless they explicitly list it out, which I doubt WotC will.

 Sure, if your world is a typical Tolkein-esque fantasy world. 

Adventures league doesn't matter to me. I'm not one of the people who play in it.

As far as lore goes, that's up the the DM and or the world builder of the game. If they want to use that style of fantasy then sure, but if someone comes to my table and tells me that I cant write a story that i want because someone else did it a different way, they will be kindly removed from my table.

Quote from JoeltheWalrus >>

I actually think that Wizards is doing an excellent job of making D&D. Tasha's looks like it might be one of their best books yet, and setting books have drastically increased in quality since SCAG. (M:tG on the other hand...)

I tried to read Dragonlance a few years ago, and found it to be really disappointing. Unoriginal genre fiction. Not to say that other people don't like it, and I like some of Weis and Hickman's other work, but I did not enjoy that series. 

 Half way through Dragons of Autumn Twilight I was picturing JRR Tolkein and his characters essentially. But I powered through and found I really enjoyed them (winter, spring and even summer). If you havent read or listened to them its definitely worth it IMO.

If a player intends to use the rules to min-max, and this makes the game less enjoyable for you or your players, than disallow the player from using the rules.  

 In most worlds, humans are the most common because they were the most balanced stat wise.  

Humans are the most common on most worlds because they are the most common (the ONLY) sentient race on ours. We write what we know. This is the simple reason why in the vast majority of fantasy literature, the "default" race is humans.

Humans are also the "most balanced" stat wise again, because humans are us. We are in the middle, the center of the bell curve. Then other races like elves, dwarves, etc, end up as the outliers. Star Trek, Star Wars, etc. -- all do the same thing. For all the varied races in the Star Wars universe for example, all the main characters are humans. The non-human characters are cool and even popular (R2, Chewie, BB-8), but the central tension of every movie, and the primary character development, all revolves around humans (Luke, Leia, Han, Lando, Rey, Fin, Poe). One reason for this is it's just easier in terms of make-up effects, but the other reason is that the species we most relate to is humans, so that's who our fiction revolves around.

Yes, there are exceptions -- but the #1 reason that nearly all fantastical fiction revolves around humans is that the people writing and reading the stories, the people playing the games, are humans.

Noone is debating that, Its just not the only thing that there is. To say otherwise is to invalidate literally every other story written. 

Quote from Lyxen >>

Quote from JoeltheWalrus >>

Quote from Portential >>

To me this is more from a lore and world building perspective.  You imagine ancient Elven civilizations with powerful wizards.  You don't imagine an ancient Dwarven civilizations based on powerful wizards.  There are basic spices used for Fantasy worlds, dwarves are martial and rowdy, elves are magical and haughty.  It gets people into the campaign easier and helps verisimilitude.  They could go with the excuse, its a rare character that can do this and is a hero.  I normally give my players an advantage on character creation for stats and a feat to separate them from the world, so I can go with that I guess.  But rules as written, Mountain Dwarfs are the most effective race in the game.  To me this is more from an adventurers league perspective.  You might not like it and not use it at your table, however you will have to use it when doing adventurers league.  You aren't going to have a choice on it unless they explicitly list it out, which I doubt WotC will.

 Sure, if your world is a typical Tolkein-esque fantasy world. 

 

Which, let's face it, is the case for most of the worlds published bt WotC, apart from Dark Sun.

 Ravnica, Theros, and sorta of Ebberon all do not follow the stereotypes.

This thread persists in going off topic, into subjects neither related to the OPs post nor appropriate for the site. As such, it shall be locked for the benefit of all involved to avoid any escalation