Being offended on behalf of poor orcs that is some next level method RP-ing ;-)
I can see that you meant this as a joke, but you know that this misses the point, right? No on is offended on behalf of orcs. The hurt comes from a number of things, but the two that I think are most relevant is..
1) When a fictional species uses so many of the tropes that are associated with a racial stereotype that it is obvious to everyone except the writers and directors who are not of that minority. Like the Nemodians in Star Wars were so painfully obvious stereotypical Asians to every Asian American who saw them and it left us feeling uncomfortable because we knew that if we brought it up we would get dismissed because they're aliens and they didn't mean it that way. Orcs hit some of those painful notes to people. That alone is reason enough to do away with them entirely, but I'm wiling to humor an attempt to make them no longer a source of trauma.
2) When you grow up hearing, "Oh you're [X] so you must be good at [Y]" or "You can't do [X], you're [Y]" it leaves you feeling very unseen. Like people don't actually care about your own accomplishments, likes, dislikes, etc. None of that matters, people just look at you and assign you to the monolithic identity they've decided to put you in. It's dehumanizing. I'm not even talking about racial slurs or outright bigotry because somehow that can sometimes be easier to ignore and write off as mindless hatred. No, this kind of stuff can come from people who like you and are your friends. It's tiring and the less of that kind of reasoning is in my rpg's the better.
Again I don't care about people's arbitrary notions of genre purity, art evolves. And I really don't care about people's ideas of fictionally biological verisimilitude. You accept that dragons can fly despite the aerodynamics. If racial bonuses is the hill people are going to die on well ... they should go do that, then.
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!
An elephant doesn't have to train to be able to carry heavier loads than a horse, it simply can because of physiological differences. I can't outrun my dog no matter how hard I train or how little he trains (that's fine, Usain Bolt couldn't outrun my dog either). Skill, training is whatever stat you choose to put in an ability and whether you spend a class-based ASI on improving that ability further.
And if we untied ASI from race/species..... we could give that elephant a feature allowing it to carry more than the horse!
Fantastic, but again: 1) we don't have all that many such features and 2) what is the fundamental difference between an ASI and such a feature?
A feature would simply dictate how the elephant can carry more.
if we leave the "an elephant has to have a +2 STR because inherently they can carry more than the horse" as how it must be done, well then we have an issue because at some point down the road in levels.... well the horse and the elephant will both have 20 STR and be carrying the same about of weight.
But if we say elephants carry weight is 25xSTR well then we don't have an issue because an average horse will not be able to carry as much as an average elephant.
If we gave elephants and horses class levels, sure. We don't, so we don't have this issue.
An elephant doesn't have to have +2 Str because they can carry more than a horse. An elephant should have a higher strength than a horse because it is physically stronger. It can carry more because it is stronger, not the other way around.
A specific carrying modifier, like Powerful Build, is not suitable for representing a strength difference. It affects carrying, nothing else. An 18 Str goliath is not stronger than a 20 Str half-orc. In fact, the half-orc is stronger. Yet the goliath can carry a lot more weight.
That's a false comparison. Even if a riding horse and elephant had equal strength, the elephant would be able to carry more because it's Huge and the horse is only Large.
So powerful build is relevant. It's just as relevant as comparing a goliath to a gnome.
An elephant doesn't have to train to be able to carry heavier loads than a horse, it simply can because of physiological differences. I can't outrun my dog no matter how hard I train or how little he trains (that's fine, Usain Bolt couldn't outrun my dog either). Skill, training is whatever stat you choose to put in an ability and whether you spend a class-based ASI on improving that ability further.
And if we untied ASI from race/species..... we could give that elephant a feature allowing it to carry more than the horse!
Fantastic, but again: 1) we don't have all that many such features and 2) what is the fundamental difference between an ASI and such a feature?
A feature would simply dictate how the elephant can carry more.
if we leave the "an elephant has to have a +2 STR because inherently they can carry more than the horse" as how it must be done, well then we have an issue because at some point down the road in levels.... well the horse and the elephant will both have 20 STR and be carrying the same about of weight.
But if we say elephants carry weight is 25xSTR well then we don't have an issue because an average horse will not be able to carry as much as an average elephant.
If we gave elephants and horses class levels, sure. We don't, so we don't have this issue.
An elephant doesn't have to have +2 Str because they can carry more than a horse. An elephant should have a higher strength than a horse because it is physically stronger. It can carry more because it is stronger, not the other way around.
A specific carrying modifier, like Powerful Build, is not suitable for representing a strength difference. It affects carrying, nothing else. An 18 Str goliath is not stronger than a 20 Str half-orc. In fact, the half-orc is stronger. Yet the goliath can carry a lot more weight.
That's a false comparison. Even if a riding horse and elephant had equal strength, the elephant would be able to carry more because it's Huge and the horse is only Large.
So powerful build is relevant. It's just as relevant as comparing a goliath to a gnome.
Powerful Build is only relevant to carrying. It doesn't make anyone stronger. If you think my example sucks, fine, we can go with wolves and vultures instead or not even use any specific comparisons at all. Is there a problem with the argument that not all species are equally strong on average, disregarding training?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
An elephant doesn't have to train to be able to carry heavier loads than a horse, it simply can because of physiological differences. I can't outrun my dog no matter how hard I train or how little he trains (that's fine, Usain Bolt couldn't outrun my dog either). Skill, training is whatever stat you choose to put in an ability and whether you spend a class-based ASI on improving that ability further.
And if we untied ASI from race/species..... we could give that elephant a feature allowing it to carry more than the horse!
Fantastic, but again: 1) we don't have all that many such features and 2) what is the fundamental difference between an ASI and such a feature?
A feature would simply dictate how the elephant can carry more.
if we leave the "an elephant has to have a +2 STR because inherently they can carry more than the horse" as how it must be done, well then we have an issue because at some point down the road in levels.... well the horse and the elephant will both have 20 STR and be carrying the same about of weight.
But if we say elephants carry weight is 25xSTR well then we don't have an issue because an average horse will not be able to carry as much as an average elephant.
If we gave elephants and horses class levels, sure. We don't, so we don't have this issue.
An elephant doesn't have to have +2 Str because they can carry more than a horse. An elephant should have a higher strength than a horse because it is physically stronger. It can carry more because it is stronger, not the other way around.
A specific carrying modifier, like Powerful Build, is not suitable for representing a strength difference. It affects carrying, nothing else. An 18 Str goliath is not stronger than a 20 Str half-orc. In fact, the half-orc is stronger. Yet the goliath can carry a lot more weight.
That's a false comparison. Even if a riding horse and elephant had equal strength, the elephant would be able to carry more because it's Huge and the horse is only Large.
So powerful build is relevant. It's just as relevant as comparing a goliath to a gnome.
Powerful Build is only relevant to carrying. It doesn't make anyone stronger. If you think my example sucks, fine, we can go with wolves and vultures instead or not even use any specific comparisons at all. Is there a problem with the argument that not all species are equally strong on average, disregarding training?
With all due respect, yes a creature's larger carrying capacity does make it stronger than another with a lesser capacity. A creature's Strength stat is nothing more than an abstraction that connects to disparate game mechanics. It influences some attacks and general athleticism, and that's it. A larger creature, or one with a feature like Powerful Build, can indeed be considered stronger than a creature without that also has a higher raw stat.
Take Ants and Dung Beetles. Ants are incredibly strong for their size, but they will never be able to roll the balls of shit that a Dung Beetle can.
Or take Birds. A Hawk and a Hummingbird can both fly, but different. Penguins swim and dive, Ostriches run, Flamingos have long legs too but THEY can fly and would most likely break their legs if they tried to sprint.
An elephant doesn't have to train to be able to carry heavier loads than a horse, it simply can because of physiological differences. I can't outrun my dog no matter how hard I train or how little he trains (that's fine, Usain Bolt couldn't outrun my dog either). Skill, training is whatever stat you choose to put in an ability and whether you spend a class-based ASI on improving that ability further.
And if we untied ASI from race/species..... we could give that elephant a feature allowing it to carry more than the horse!
Fantastic, but again: 1) we don't have all that many such features and 2) what is the fundamental difference between an ASI and such a feature?
A feature would simply dictate how the elephant can carry more.
if we leave the "an elephant has to have a +2 STR because inherently they can carry more than the horse" as how it must be done, well then we have an issue because at some point down the road in levels.... well the horse and the elephant will both have 20 STR and be carrying the same about of weight.
But if we say elephants carry weight is 25xSTR well then we don't have an issue because an average horse will not be able to carry as much as an average elephant.
If we gave elephants and horses class levels, sure. We don't, so we don't have this issue.
An elephant doesn't have to have +2 Str because they can carry more than a horse. An elephant should have a higher strength than a horse because it is physically stronger. It can carry more because it is stronger, not the other way around.
A specific carrying modifier, like Powerful Build, is not suitable for representing a strength difference. It affects carrying, nothing else. An 18 Str goliath is not stronger than a 20 Str half-orc. In fact, the half-orc is stronger. Yet the goliath can carry a lot more weight.
That's a false comparison. Even if a riding horse and elephant had equal strength, the elephant would be able to carry more because it's Huge and the horse is only Large.
So powerful build is relevant. It's just as relevant as comparing a goliath to a gnome.
Powerful Build is only relevant to carrying. It doesn't make anyone stronger. If you think my example sucks, fine, we can go with wolves and vultures instead or not even use any specific comparisons at all. Is there a problem with the argument that not all species are equally strong on average, disregarding training?
Can I just note I think a problem in all of these biological difference discussions is people keep using these species with massive differences that are not at all comparable to the various PC races.
Like yes, an elephant is very different to a ape.
But most PC classes are mostly the same size, capable of using the same tools, capable of understanding the same languages, both spoken and written, and in some cases (Humans with orcs and elves at least) capable of interbreeding.
DND species are not Horse/Elephant, Vulture/Wolf, or Cat/Human level different. They're more "Tiger/Lion" level different. Even if we're talking Loxodon vs Human, they're both big bipedal entities that (by virtue of game rules even before this change) have basically the same upper and lower limits on ability scores, can speak each others languages, use the same tools (unless your GM is demanding your loxodon can't use a sword made for human hands and has to pay a bunch of extra gold for custom handles).
Being offended on behalf of poor orcs that is some next level method RP-ing ;-)
I can see that you meant this as a joke, but you know that this misses the point, right? No on is offended on behalf of orcs. The hurt comes from a number of things, but the two that I think are most relevant is..
1) When a fictional species uses so many of the tropes that are associated with a racial stereotype that it is obvious to everyone except the writers and directors who are not of that minority. Like the Nemodians in Star Wars were so painfully obvious stereotypical Asians to every Asian American who saw them and it left us feeling uncomfortable because we knew that if we brought it up we would get dismissed because they're aliens and they didn't mean it that way. Orcs hit some of those painful notes to people. That alone is reason enough to do away with them entirely, but I'm wiling to humor an attempt to make them no longer a source of trauma.
2) When you grow up hearing, "Oh you're [X] so you must be good at [Y]" or "You can't do [X], you're [Y]" it leaves you feeling very unseen. Like people don't actually care about your own accomplishments, likes, dislikes, etc. None of that matters, people just look at you and assign you to the monolithic identity they've decided to put you in. It's dehumanizing. I'm not even talking about racial slurs or outright bigotry because somehow that can sometimes be easier to ignore and write off as mindless hatred. No, this kind of stuff can come from people who like you and are your friends. It's tiring and the less of that kind of reasoning is in my rpg's the better.
Again I don't care about people's arbitrary notions of genre purity, art evolves. And I really don't care about people's ideas of fictionally biological verisimilitude. You accept that dragons can fly despite the aerodynamics. If racial bonuses is the hill people are going to die on well ... they should go do that, then.
Not to be dismissive of anyone's plight, but:
1) this is an issue with one or more races, not with diversity between races. Remove those specific races, you'll remove the issue - whether other rzces have their own specific and possibly unique racial bonuses or not.
2) while this one is a much better argument, the problem with it is that it extends beyond racial bonuses because that is much more (though not exclusively) a cultural thing than a biological one. To remove it from the game, we'd have to remove cultural differences altogether because every culture comes with preconceptions and assumptions about its members. Every player who wants to "play against type" acknowledges there is a type in the first place.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
With all due respect, yes a creature's larger carrying capacity does make it stronger than another with a lesser capacity. A creature's Strength stat is nothing more than an abstraction that connects to disparate game mechanics. It influences some attacks and general athleticism, and that's it. A larger creature, or one with a feature like Powerful Build, can indeed be considered stronger than a creature without that also has a higher raw stat.
Ok, so I'll rephrase in a more technical manner: carrying capacity is determined among other things by Str score; Str score is not determined by carrying capacity.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
2) while this one is a much better argument, the problem with it is that it extends beyond racial bonuses because that is much more (though not exclusively) a cultural thing than a biological one. To remove it from the game, we'd have to remove cultural differences altogether because every culture comes with preconceptions and assumptions about its members. Every player who wants to "play against type" acknowledges there is a type in the first place.
First of all this is a Nirvana Fallacy. Second, are you the one here who is expressing that something about the game is hurtful? No? Well then take it from someone who is, this small step makes it better. I don't expect a perfect response because I swim in a sea of racism that is both pervasive and subtle. I have come to expect everything from school to work to everyday shopping interactions to come with a tiny little papercut of racism. It's easy to avoid the giant spiky cactuses of racism (you can spot the proud racists) but it's a lot harder to avoid the more subtle examples, the ones where you feel silly even bringing them up, but they add up. Death by a hundred million papercuts. Removing one or even a hundred sources of these papercuts is not an end-all, be-all, but it is a step.
Honestly I don't even really care to make a convincing argument to you. I'm just relieved that there are signs of progress. I think I will focus my efforts toward encouraging this stance with Wizards. I will fill out their survey and give my critiques of the goth lineages. Then I will make sure to fill out the additional comments section, mention the stances on lineages and say "MORE OF THIS PLEASE." Then I will fill out another survey and say so again.
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!
I really like the new Lineage system, I love how you can have a vampire dwarf, or a previously dead tiefling. Except for this. I get having a dwarf who, since he now is a vampire, he thirsts for blood, and isn't as hardy anymore. Or the tiefling. Now that you died, you don't retain as much of a connection to your demonic ancestry. Here's what is hard to understand.
Loxodon: Oh no! This Loxodon's trunk got cut off!
Tortle: Well I guess this tortle was born without a shell.
Tabaxi, Leonin, and Tortle: They got declawed...
Warforged: Bedtime!
All races with sunlight sensitivity: Sunscreen is a thing now
Aarakocra: Wings got cut off. Now can't bully the kenku's because they are wingless anymore.
Changeling: I got stuck in one of my forms!
Grung and Locathah: Nah, I don't need water anymore.
The list goes on. While I love the idea, it's hard to justify some of these.
I really like the new Lineage system, I love how you can have a vampire dwarf, or a previously dead tiefling. Except for this. I get having a dwarf who, since he now is a vampire, he thirsts for blood, and isn't as hardy anymore. Or the tiefling. Now that you died, you don't retain as much of a connection to your demonic ancestry. Here's what is hard to understand.
Loxodon: Oh no! This Loxodon's trunk got cut off!
Tortle: Well I guess this tortle was born without a shell.
Tabaxi, Leonin, and Tortle: They got declawed...
Warforged: Bedtime!
All races with sunlight sensitivity: Sunscreen is a thing now
Aarakocra: Wings got cut off. Now can't bully the kenku's because they are wingless anymore.
Changeling: I got stuck in one of my forms!
Grung and Locathah: Nah, I don't need water anymore.
The list goes on. While I love the idea, it's hard to justify some of these.
Yeah, I feel like these work better as templates you add to existing characters, like the Hollow One from Wildemont or the Supernatural Gifts from Theros, instead of replacing everything from the base race. Though that does mess with the balance to be fair.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
I really like the new Lineage system, I love how you can have a vampire dwarf, or a previously dead tiefling. Except for this. I get having a dwarf who, since he now is a vampire, he thirsts for blood, and isn't as hardy anymore. Or the tiefling. Now that you died, you don't retain as much of a connection to your demonic ancestry. Here's what is hard to understand.
Loxodon: Oh no! This Loxodon's trunk got cut off!
Tortle: Well I guess this tortle was born without a shell.
Tabaxi, Leonin, and Tortle: They got declawed...
Warforged: Bedtime!
All races with sunlight sensitivity: Sunscreen is a thing now
Aarakocra: Wings got cut off. Now can't bully the kenku's because they are wingless anymore.
Changeling: I got stuck in one of my forms!
Grung and Locathah: Nah, I don't need water anymore.
The list goes on. While I love the idea, it's hard to justify some of these.
Agreed. I very much wish these new lineages were templates, like the Half-Dragon or Anvilwrought.
DND species are not Horse/Elephant, Vulture/Wolf, or Cat/Human level different. They're more "Tiger/Lion" level different.
So bottom line, they're different? Because that's all the examples try to illustrate.
A hyperbolic bad example is a hyperbolic bad example regardless of if it's meant to illustrate a thing that is true.
When you're trying to discuss the difference between two "find the difference" pictures, comparing them to the differences between the Mona Lisa and Avengers Endgame is a useless comparison, even if they're both "Different pieces of artistic endeavors"
2) while this one is a much better argument, the problem with it is that it extends beyond racial bonuses because that is much more (though not exclusively) a cultural thing than a biological one. To remove it from the game, we'd have to remove cultural differences altogether because every culture comes with preconceptions and assumptions about its members. Every player who wants to "play against type" acknowledges there is a type in the first place.
First of all this is a Nirvana Fallacy. Second, are you the one here who is expressing that something about the game is hurtful? No? Well then take it from someone who is, this small step makes it better. I don't expect a perfect response because I swim in a sea of racism that is both pervasive and subtle. I have come to expect everything from school to work to everyday shopping interactions to come with a tiny little papercut of racism. It's easy to avoid the giant spiky cactuses of racism (you can spot the proud racists) but it's a lot harder to avoid the more subtle examples, the ones where you feel silly even bringing them up, but they add up. Death by a hundred million papercuts. Removing one or even a hundred sources of these papercuts is not an end-all, be-all, but it is a step.
I didn't say there is a perfect solution. I pointed out this is an imperfect one. If it's a step in the right direction for you, that's great. I just don't see it that way, because I don't see the removal of fixed racial attribute bonuses changing racial expectations all that much. Regardless of PC stats, every setting book and several sourcebooks are loaded with them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Chess is balanced. Every piece is equally present on both sides, every type of chess piece is the same on both sides. Black King does not move 2 squares instead of 1.
D&D hasn't been balanced in the PHB to start with. That is A REASON why we play it. Because it has Variety!
Can you, truly, truly, not see how this whole idea is hurtful to folks?
I truly don't understand why so many people are hung up on the idea that ALL of a given species' identity is wrapped up in a handful of points. Like, all the non_ASI traits of a species are completely pointless. It doesn't matter that elves have Trance, Fey Ancestry, Keen Senses (which is questionable but Perception is already weird), and extended life spans. None of that matters, none of that has anything to do with being an elf. That +2 to Dex, though? THAT is truly the Essence of Elf. That +2 to Dexterity is the absolute core of Elfdom, and without it none shall ever recognize an Elf as an Elf ever again. Thou shalt know an Elf by Dex bonus, and by Dex bonus alone. Woe betide she who chooses to play an Elf to explore elven culture, or the alien mystery of the Trance stat. NAY - it is for Dex alone that one chooses to walk the path of the Elf.
Can you, truly, truly, not see how this whole idea is hurtful to folks?
I truly don't understand why so many people are hung up on the idea that ALL of a given species' identity is wrapped up in a handful of points. Like, all the non_ASI traits of a species are completely pointless. It doesn't matter that elves have Trance, Fey Ancestry, Keen Senses (which is questionable but Perception is already weird), and extended life spans. None of that matters, none of that has anything to do with being an elf. That +2 to Dex, though? THAT is truly the Essence of Elf. That +2 to Dexterity is the absolute core of Elfdom, and without it none shall ever recognize an Elf as an Elf ever again. Thou shalt know an Elf by Dex bonus, and by Dex bonus alone. Woe betide she who chooses to play an Elf to explore elven culture, or the alien mystery of the Trance stat. NAY - it is for Dex alone that one chooses to walk the path of the Elf.
Have I made this ridiculous enough yet?
While I do support these new changes, both of you are taking things too far. Yurei, pangurjan never said that, and I don't believe they think that either. pangurjan, you're being kind of aggressive. Both of you should calm down a bit.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
All stars fade. Some stars forever fall. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Homebrew (Mostly Outdated):Magic Items,Monsters,Spells,Subclasses ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If there was no light, people wouldn't fear the dark.
I truly don't understand why so many people are hung up on the idea that ALL of a given species' identity is wrapped up in a handful of points. Like, all the non_ASI traits of a species are completely pointless. It doesn't matter that elves have Trance, Fey Ancestry, Keen Senses (which is questionable but Perception is already weird), and extended life spans. None of that matters, none of that has anything to do with being an elf. That +2 to Dex, though? THAT is truly the Essence of Elf. That +2 to Dexterity is the absolute core of Elfdom, and without it none shall ever recognize an Elf as an Elf ever again. Thou shalt know an Elf by Dex bonus, and by Dex bonus alone. Woe betide she who chooses to play an Elf to explore elven culture, or the alien mystery of the Trance stat. NAY - it is for Dex alone that one chooses to walk the path of the Elf.
So the +2 to DEX is preventing you from exploring the finer nuances of what it means for an elf to go against their upbringing and their societies culture?
I can see that you meant this as a joke, but you know that this misses the point, right? No on is offended on behalf of orcs. The hurt comes from a number of things, but the two that I think are most relevant is..
1) When a fictional species uses so many of the tropes that are associated with a racial stereotype that it is obvious to everyone except the writers and directors who are not of that minority. Like the Nemodians in Star Wars were so painfully obvious stereotypical Asians to every Asian American who saw them and it left us feeling uncomfortable because we knew that if we brought it up we would get dismissed because they're aliens and they didn't mean it that way. Orcs hit some of those painful notes to people. That alone is reason enough to do away with them entirely, but I'm wiling to humor an attempt to make them no longer a source of trauma.
2) When you grow up hearing, "Oh you're [X] so you must be good at [Y]" or "You can't do [X], you're [Y]" it leaves you feeling very unseen. Like people don't actually care about your own accomplishments, likes, dislikes, etc. None of that matters, people just look at you and assign you to the monolithic identity they've decided to put you in. It's dehumanizing. I'm not even talking about racial slurs or outright bigotry because somehow that can sometimes be easier to ignore and write off as mindless hatred. No, this kind of stuff can come from people who like you and are your friends. It's tiring and the less of that kind of reasoning is in my rpg's the better.
Again I don't care about people's arbitrary notions of genre purity, art evolves. And I really don't care about people's ideas of fictionally biological verisimilitude. You accept that dragons can fly despite the aerodynamics. If racial bonuses is the hill people are going to die on well ... they should go do that, then.
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!
That's a false comparison. Even if a riding horse and elephant had equal strength, the elephant would be able to carry more because it's Huge and the horse is only Large.
So powerful build is relevant. It's just as relevant as comparing a goliath to a gnome.
Powerful Build is only relevant to carrying. It doesn't make anyone stronger. If you think my example sucks, fine, we can go with wolves and vultures instead or not even use any specific comparisons at all. Is there a problem with the argument that not all species are equally strong on average, disregarding training?
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
With all due respect, yes a creature's larger carrying capacity does make it stronger than another with a lesser capacity. A creature's Strength stat is nothing more than an abstraction that connects to disparate game mechanics. It influences some attacks and general athleticism, and that's it. A larger creature, or one with a feature like Powerful Build, can indeed be considered stronger than a creature without that also has a higher raw stat.
Take Ants and Dung Beetles. Ants are incredibly strong for their size, but they will never be able to roll the balls of shit that a Dung Beetle can.
Or take Birds. A Hawk and a Hummingbird can both fly, but different. Penguins swim and dive, Ostriches run, Flamingos have long legs too but THEY can fly and would most likely break their legs if they tried to sprint.
#OpenDnD
Can I just note I think a problem in all of these biological difference discussions is people keep using these species with massive differences that are not at all comparable to the various PC races.
Like yes, an elephant is very different to a ape.
But most PC classes are mostly the same size, capable of using the same tools, capable of understanding the same languages, both spoken and written, and in some cases (Humans with orcs and elves at least) capable of interbreeding.
DND species are not Horse/Elephant, Vulture/Wolf, or Cat/Human level different.
They're more "Tiger/Lion" level different.
Even if we're talking Loxodon vs Human, they're both big bipedal entities that (by virtue of game rules even before this change) have basically the same upper and lower limits on ability scores, can speak each others languages, use the same tools (unless your GM is demanding your loxodon can't use a sword made for human hands and has to pay a bunch of extra gold for custom handles).
Not to be dismissive of anyone's plight, but:
1) this is an issue with one or more races, not with diversity between races. Remove those specific races, you'll remove the issue - whether other rzces have their own specific and possibly unique racial bonuses or not.
2) while this one is a much better argument, the problem with it is that it extends beyond racial bonuses because that is much more (though not exclusively) a cultural thing than a biological one. To remove it from the game, we'd have to remove cultural differences altogether because every culture comes with preconceptions and assumptions about its members. Every player who wants to "play against type" acknowledges there is a type in the first place.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Ok, so I'll rephrase in a more technical manner: carrying capacity is determined among other things by Str score; Str score is not determined by carrying capacity.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
So bottom line, they're different? Because that's all the examples try to illustrate.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
First of all this is a Nirvana Fallacy. Second, are you the one here who is expressing that something about the game is hurtful? No? Well then take it from someone who is, this small step makes it better. I don't expect a perfect response because I swim in a sea of racism that is both pervasive and subtle. I have come to expect everything from school to work to everyday shopping interactions to come with a tiny little papercut of racism. It's easy to avoid the giant spiky cactuses of racism (you can spot the proud racists) but it's a lot harder to avoid the more subtle examples, the ones where you feel silly even bringing them up, but they add up. Death by a hundred million papercuts. Removing one or even a hundred sources of these papercuts is not an end-all, be-all, but it is a step.
Honestly I don't even really care to make a convincing argument to you. I'm just relieved that there are signs of progress. I think I will focus my efforts toward encouraging this stance with Wizards. I will fill out their survey and give my critiques of the goth lineages. Then I will make sure to fill out the additional comments section, mention the stances on lineages and say "MORE OF THIS PLEASE." Then I will fill out another survey and say so again.
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!
This.
I really like the new Lineage system, I love how you can have a vampire dwarf, or a previously dead tiefling. Except for this. I get having a dwarf who, since he now is a vampire, he thirsts for blood, and isn't as hardy anymore. Or the tiefling. Now that you died, you don't retain as much of a connection to your demonic ancestry. Here's what is hard to understand.
Loxodon: Oh no! This Loxodon's trunk got cut off!
Tortle: Well I guess this tortle was born without a shell.
Tabaxi, Leonin, and Tortle: They got declawed...
Warforged: Bedtime!
All races with sunlight sensitivity: Sunscreen is a thing now
Aarakocra: Wings got cut off. Now can't bully the kenku's because they are wingless anymore.
Changeling: I got stuck in one of my forms!
Grung and Locathah: Nah, I don't need water anymore.
The list goes on. While I love the idea, it's hard to justify some of these.
When players get creative.
Yeah, I feel like these work better as templates you add to existing characters, like the Hollow One from Wildemont or the Supernatural Gifts from Theros, instead of replacing everything from the base race. Though that does mess with the balance to be fair.
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
Characters for Tenebris Sine Fine
RoughCoronet's Greater Wills
Agreed. I very much wish these new lineages were templates, like the Half-Dragon or Anvilwrought.
A hyperbolic bad example is a hyperbolic bad example regardless of if it's meant to illustrate a thing that is true.
When you're trying to discuss the difference between two "find the difference" pictures, comparing them to the differences between the Mona Lisa and Avengers Endgame is a useless comparison, even if they're both "Different pieces of artistic endeavors"
I didn't say there is a perfect solution. I pointed out this is an imperfect one. If it's a step in the right direction for you, that's great. I just don't see it that way, because I don't see the removal of fixed racial attribute bonuses changing racial expectations all that much. Regardless of PC stats, every setting book and several sourcebooks are loaded with them.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Chess is balanced. Every piece is equally present on both sides, every type of chess piece is the same on both sides. Black King does not move 2 squares instead of 1.
D&D hasn't been balanced in the PHB to start with. That is A REASON why we play it. Because it has Variety!
#OpenDnD
Pang.
Can you, truly, truly, not see how this whole idea is hurtful to folks?
I truly don't understand why so many people are hung up on the idea that ALL of a given species' identity is wrapped up in a handful of points. Like, all the non_ASI traits of a species are completely pointless. It doesn't matter that elves have Trance, Fey Ancestry, Keen Senses (which is questionable but Perception is already weird), and extended life spans. None of that matters, none of that has anything to do with being an elf. That +2 to Dex, though? THAT is truly the Essence of Elf. That +2 to Dexterity is the absolute core of Elfdom, and without it none shall ever recognize an Elf as an Elf ever again. Thou shalt know an Elf by Dex bonus, and by Dex bonus alone. Woe betide she who chooses to play an Elf to explore elven culture, or the alien mystery of the Trance stat. NAY - it is for Dex alone that one chooses to walk the path of the Elf.
Have I made this ridiculous enough yet?
Please do not contact or message me.
While I do support these new changes, both of you are taking things too far. Yurei, pangurjan never said that, and I don't believe they think that either. pangurjan, you're being kind of aggressive. Both of you should calm down a bit.
All stars fade. Some stars forever fall.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homebrew (Mostly Outdated): Magic Items, Monsters, Spells, Subclasses
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If there was no light, people wouldn't fear the dark.
So the +2 to DEX is preventing you from exploring the finer nuances of what it means for an elf to go against their upbringing and their societies culture?
#OpenDnD