Then I read the rules and, back then, half-orcs lose 2 intelligence points, and 2 charisma points, only getting 2 strength points in exchange. So I have to literally go "Yeah, one parent race/species is dumber, so I'm dumber than I could be, and I can't be a people person".
I don't think I have to explain how this really, REALLY sent a message that this game was NOT for me, or anyone like me.
Especially when in real life I had blood relatives who absolutely had that "You're lesser than us for not being fully like us" mentality.
I'm mixed too. This really resonated with me. Thank you for sharing Samedi. That last part is so poignant. I had to deal with that too, relatives calling me gringo at the dinner table until I finally had the guts to call one of them out and make a scene out of it. Being marginilized by your own family is terribly destructive and I got no satisfaction from challenging it. Only the disappointment I had to do it. I still felt in between. Like I didn't belong anywhere.
It's those kinds of experiences that strike so deeply and have such far reaching impact on how you interact with everything in your life that make this impossible to understand from an outsiders perspective. For anyone still wondering: "how could this game be hurtful, it wasn't intended to" please realize there is a whole world of pain you can never know about, and the consequences of such will always be a mystery. But when someone has the courage to speak up and share what is damaging to them and why, it's time to listen and try to understand.
These changes really do make a ton of potential players feel a LOT more welcome, and want to engage with the game more.
Is "But they're different species so they should be different" really worth the aspect of having someone pick up the book and feel like it's "Yeah, you suck for being mixed" and it taking literal decades for them to even think about giving the game a shot again?
Let's just call this what it is. A matter of priorities. Improving the world for systemically marginalized people is more important than preserving aspects of a game. End of discussion.
I'm a multiracial person, as such the concept of "half"-races appealed to me when I heard of DND.
A concept where I could really play into the aspect of my life of being from two different groups/cultures.
Then I read the rules and, back then, half-orcs lose 2 intelligence points, and 2 charisma points, only getting 2 strength points in exchange. So I have to literally go "Yeah, one parent race/species is dumber, so I'm dumber than I could be, and I can't be a people person".
I don't think I have to explain how this really, REALLY sent a message that this game was NOT for me, or anyone like me.
I'm not saying it should be a solution that appeals to you or even a great idea in general, but I've had several players play mixed-race characters without necessarily taking the mechanical traits of the official mixed race. A character with human, dwarven or elven traits can look and act like they have orc or goliath blood as well and explore that duality. Similarly, immigrant characters can revolve around feeling alienated and characters from ethnically mixed marriages can feel torn in two different directions (that's a trope I tend to go for myself). Hybrid race stigma has largely been removed in this edition, which is great, but the mechanical particulars of the few such races we have shouldn't be the sole representation of this character option in the first place.
I'm ... a bit taken aback at just how insensitive it is to respond to someone who just said, "I was turned off of the game because a very obviously close analog to myself was portrayed in a hurtful manner" by telling them, "maybe you should just ignore that and play another type of character instead."
Sometimes people don't respond well to implicit hints so here's me trying to be explicit. Pangurjan you are saying insensitive and hurtful things. You have said things directly to me that I find upsetting. Please reevaluate how you are choosing to speak to people about what is a sensitive and hurtful issue.
Yeah, when I read that I was basically that old Firefly gif of Mal just trying to figure out how to respond to something.
Then I read the rules and, back then, half-orcs lose 2 intelligence points, and 2 charisma points, only getting 2 strength points in exchange. So I have to literally go "Yeah, one parent race/species is dumber, so I'm dumber than I could be, and I can't be a people person".
I don't think I have to explain how this really, REALLY sent a message that this game was NOT for me, or anyone like me.
Especially when in real life I had blood relatives who absolutely had that "You're lesser than us for not being fully like us" mentality.
I'm mixed too. This really resonated with me. Thank you for sharing Samedi. That last part is so poignant. I had to deal with that too, relatives calling me gringo at the dinner table until I finally had the guts to call one of them out and make a scene out of it. Being marginilized by your own family is terribly destructive and I got no satisfaction from challenging it. Only the disappointment I had to do it. I still felt in between. Like I didn't belong anywhere.
It's those kinds of experiences that strike so deeply and have such far reaching impact on how you interact with everything in your life that make this impossible to understand from an outsiders perspective. For anyone still wondering: "how could this game be hurtful, it wasn't intended to" please realize there is a whole world of pain you can never know about, and the consequences of such will always be a mystery. But when someone has the courage to speak up and share what is damaging to them and why, it's time to listen and try to understand.
These changes really do make a ton of potential players feel a LOT more welcome, and want to engage with the game more.
Is "But they're different species so they should be different" really worth the aspect of having someone pick up the book and feel like it's "Yeah, you suck for being mixed" and it taking literal decades for them to even think about giving the game a shot again?
Let's just call this what it is. A matter of priorities. Improving the world for systemically marginalized people is more important than preserving aspects of a game. End of discussion.
Thanks man, and sorry you had to deal with that sort of nonsense as well.
But yeah, I can get it's a thing that's easy to not see for the folks who haven't had to deal with it directly.
I'm reminded of the quote from Lovecraft Country, both the book and the show. "Stories are like people, loving them doesn't make them perfect. You try to cherish their virtues, and overlook their flaws. The flaws are still there though"
The thing with DND is, in evolving game systems like this is, sometimes those flaws can be ironed out. If you loved the older version, that's fine. But just like rolling straight line stats, that doesn't mean it has to stay around forever and be the default for everyone coming in.
A'IGHT. Got some vidja gaeming dun, even won a few rounds. Came back, read another page or so of
A.) Folks sharing their situations and showing solidarity with those who are unfortunate enough to be in a less than ideal position. Cool! That's a positive benefit, even if I wish it was less necessary. And
B.) A few folks clinging to "I understand the old way was hurtful and you're glad it's not causing pain anymore, but...man, I just don't care." Which is less cool. I suppose, to be frank, it doesn't matter in the end. We've gotten our Tasha's Cauldron rules, the Lineage system is the new standard moving forward. Even if they start offering 'recommended' bioessential baked-in stats for people who insist that every origin in D&D needs to have one UND PRECISELY VUN proper thing it's supposed to be doing and to Gehenna with everything else? We can ignore it. If I wasn't terrified of breaking something because the homebrew system here is terrible, I would've already converted my Kitsune (Tyberos) species to use the new rules, and anything I build moving forward will definitely be going that route.
Time is on our side. Ten years ago, most of the folks in this thread who've come forward in solidarity would've had to keep silent and hide, afraid to share their pain for fear of being ridiculed and dismissed. Ten years from now we'll have a new D&D edition and these rules will be baked in from the start. We can all look forward to it. Except for the people who don't, I guess.
This hill will be ours eventually, so long as we can avoid being shamed off of it.
I am honestly flabbergasted by some of the responses I've seen here. I shouldn't be, but I am. The sheer callousness I've read in the past...****, I'm not even going to try to count how many pages. No ******* wonder people didn't feel safe coming into the game for so long.
Protip: When people come forward and give tangible examples of how aspects of the game caused them hurt and kept them from being able to enjoy the game, maybe, try...NOT being shitty to them about it? Even if you don't understand, (which, again, honestly flabbergasts me), it shouldn't be hard to recognize that challenging them on their ******* LIVED EXPERIENCES is a ******* SHITTYTHING TO DO!
Those who don’t like Tasha’s changes and hate all this aren’t D&D fans. They’re fans of their ideas first and foremost, and everything else comes second.
Though I agree with most of your statements on this thread, Yamana_Eajii, this is uncalled for. Just because I don't use the rules from Tasha's doesn't mean that I'm against D&D or that I'm "not a true fan." It's not a bad thing that most orcs in my campaign are stronger than most gnomes. What is a bad thing is when people try to restrict other people's fun, either by denying or criticizing the way they play.
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'm gonna unsubscribe from this thread now. Before I do, though, I'd like to say a massive thank you to Ophidimancer, Yurei, Samedi, and anyone else who has shared painful experiences here. Although I'm in the privileged position not to have suffered this myself, I support and stand with you all.
It's an interesting topic in regards to... well in way the blinders people will put on in a way.
"I don't want my choice to be sub optimal" (for instance orc wizard) OK.. I feel you, this is a game after all right? roll some dice and people will want every advantage can have..
But lets dive into that a little more.. why exactly are you wanting to play an orc wizard? Is he bunking the trend of the savage orc by studying magic? Ok.. so with floating asi's.. what exactly makes him special now as bunking the trend? If ASI's aren't set to what the genetic leaning of a species is and are just.. put em where you want your not really going against the grain because the grain no longer exists to go against.
The brutish nature of orcs? Look at em they're huge and they're muscle. Even your orc wizard should be fairly strong just by pure nature of being an orc. Guys never lifted an axe in his life but he's str 12 just like that human lumberjack that cuts down trees all day. But well now he's somehow not because as a wizard that's not optimal and he's no longer brutish somehow.
It's not really about my fun or my imagination it's more just I want the dice rolls to be high, but in that process your really just.. losing the core concept of what you wanted to play in the process.
Can try to frame it however you want but at the end of the day it's not an orc wizard you want to play but an optimal character. It's not a gnome barbarian its an optimal character. All the flash of being off beat but none of the downsides which no longer makes it off beat does it?
So at the end what exactly is it this is looking to accomplish?
At the end I don't think the core issue is ASI bumps by being a orc/gnome/goliath/elf, its that the system has come to rely so heavily on your stats in 5e coupled with the explosion of forum optimization that if your not the best at lvl 1 it somehow = not fun
Okay, here's a shocking proposition: maybe...people have different ideas for characters? Maybe my orc wizard has a physical ailment that makes them weaker than even other humanoids? Maybe I'm going to buck even more trends here and put my ASI's into Charisma and Wisdom? I certainly can't do that with the old static ASI's.
Also, here's another shocking proposition: maybe...people can have both an optimal character and *gasp* a core concept they want to play at the same time?!?! It's almost as if...the two aren't mutually exclusive! I know: shocking!
I'm gonna unsubscribe from this thread now. Before I do, though, I'd like to say a massive thank you to Ophidimancer, Yurei, Samedi, and anyone else who has shared painful experiences here. Although I'm in the privileged position not to have suffered this myself, I support and stand with you all.
While I'm still up, I'd like to second this. I appreciate those of you who took the time to share with us, and frankly, an unfortunate number of the responses you received only proved your points even further. I am genuinely still having trouble processing some of the awful, awful, awful responses you got. Just...disgraceful...
Come on, how can you rant that way when there is a CLASS, a beloved class, the sorcerer, which has INBORN sorcery because of his bloodline. Anyone without these bloodlines will NEVER have sorcery. Too bad...
Objection!
While lineage is a valid method of sparking sorcery, it is not the only method, nor necessarily the most common. It's viable to gain any sorcery origin from any number of methods - eating the flesh of a dragon for magic is a thing in real world myths, for instance.
To claim you can't have a specific sorcery origin without a specific bloodline is mistaken.
If I wasn't terrified of breaking something because the homebrew system here is terrible, I would've already converted my Kitsune (Tyberos) species to use the new rules, and anything I build moving forward will definitely be going that route.
Okay, I'm kind of curious now. How's the conversion going to go? Beyond just stats? Double typed? Any discussion of actual rules was burried but im actually cuious what rules you will implement....
I for one think this is an excellent move. The racial ability score increases had more than once put off a player in a campaign of mine from playing a concept that they enjoy simply because their class didn't synergise with their class. For example, a player once wanted to play a half-orc rogue and very nearly didn't because it would have poor level one dexterity. I had to explain to the character that I was happy to switch around the ASIs if this was the problem.
The fact that ASIs had been limiting the ideas of players is really off putting and I am glad that the races are now more freely interchangeable with every class. My mountain dwarf bard will be celebrating.
Okay, here's a shocking proposition: maybe...people have different ideas for characters? Maybe my orc wizard has a physical ailment that makes them weaker than even other humanoids? Maybe I'm going to buck even more trends here and put my ASI's into Charisma and Wisdom? I certainly can't do that with the old static ASI's.
Of course you can, just allocate the proper ability scores to these stats. This is much more impacting than the racial ASIs.
Also, here's another shocking proposition: maybe...people can have both an optimal character and *gasp* a core concept they want to play at the same time?!?! It's almost as if...the two aren't mutually exclusive! I know: shocking!
What is shocking is that once more this is player centrism that creates characters in a vacuum "just because they should be able to" without any regard for the rest of the world, the other players and especially the DM's view.
Of course, if all at your table are aligned with these views, please be my guest and use all these options. But they are options, and if at my table I don't use them because I want my high heroic fantasy to stay really fantastic with high colours and very much differentiated species, and characters well integrated in the history and culture of the fantasy world, I hope that, in this new dictatorship of cancel culture, I will not be cast aside as reject. Because how would this be for inclusiveness, heh ?
Great.
A) Thanks for bringing up cancel culture, no-one was persecuting you and we were all (or most of us) explaining our views in a civilised way. [REDACTED]
B) I do actually agree that use of this option should be cleared with the DM first, as should all use of optional rules. But I don't personally think it's game-breaking to allow a half-orc to be unusually charismatic - you never know, it might factor in with their Menacing racial trait. Or that an dwarf could be quick on its feet. Or even that there might be an unintelligent high elf! Just examples of how this might function.
C) By changing up your ASIs you are making your character an unusual example of your race - you should be able to explain why this is in your backstory.
D) If the DM makes this option available, they should make it available for all players.
Once we take into account these points, then I see no real problem. Naturally at your table, it's your rules.
Because the options being nothing about unusual characters, they simply are WotC response to cancel culture problems and a mana to powergamers. They benefit nothing else compared to what existed before.
So, several people have explained how they are helpful in overcoming in-game reminders of painful real-world situations, but they "benefit nothing else compared to what existed before"? The people who have spoken don't know their own minds, and didn't really find them helpful at all?
B) I do actually agree that use of this option should be cleared with the DM first, as should all use of optional rules. But I don't personally think it's game-breaking to allow a half-orc to be unusually charismatic - you never know, it might factor in with their Menacing racial trait. Or that an dwarf could be quick on its feet. Or even that there might be an unintelligent high elf! Just examples of how this might function.
And all this is basically ignoring the fact that you set ability scores anyway, and if you put your 16 in charisma for a half-orc, he is going to be very charismatic. You don't need the ASI rof that.
The problem is that, under the cover of "equal opportunity"(hence the cancel culture because the vocabulary used is extremely similar), people are just shooting for powergaming by having the best scores technically possible, and they will not accept anything else, just because they think that they should be allowed to.
In response, I would say that with use of standard array or point buy (both default options in the PHB that lots of players enjoy using), you cannot get a score above 15 without a racial ASI until 4th level. This lowers save DCs, attack modifiers and damage by a significant amount for a low-level character and has put players off before. It also suggests to players that if they want a novelty character, then they are going to have to fight with the racial ASIs.
C) By changing up your ASIs you are making your character an unusual example of your race - you should be able to explain why this is in your backstory.
And if you put your highest score in an unusual ability, you will ALREADY be unusual. The only thing that want you to cumulate the ASI on top is pure powergamer ego.
And the best proof of this is that, at the end, it will end up being a 20, so you will be on par and probably superior to most NPCs.
There is a huge difference between power-gamer ego, and wanting a character that isn't punished by rules that come with their concept.
And thanks for agreeing with me on one point. That was nice.
Dwarves who've taken to the sea and created a maritime culture and empire, using their more compact bodies to more efficiently crew powerful sailing vessels, no longer have to still be able to identify masonry of any sort with a mere look because reasons.
This is a big reason for why I really like the new system. I couldn't care less about the ability scores. It's the fluff extra features that make no sense when you take the character out of their stereotype - but they have to have them because - as you say - "reasons".
One of my characters is a Hill Dwarf raised near a glacier - who up until they started adventuring had never seen a building made of stone before - and yet - apparently - she's still got Stone Cunning - because you can't replace it RAW. That kind of thing doesn't promote RP - it stifles it.
I forgot to mention this. Emmber raises a really good point and I have to say that I totally agree. And no-one can argue that it comes form a power-gamer perspective.
By succumbing to the demands of cancel culture, they have avoided being "canceled".
If WoTC had resisted, then the cancel machinery would have kicked into gear.
Or sensible, rational human beings would have implemented the house rules they had been using for years to help players have a little more character versatility. And the people who disagreed with the Tasha options would have not used them. And DnD could continue unencumbered.
I can't tell whether I'm being naive, hopeful or realistic.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Chilling kinda vibe.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm mixed too. This really resonated with me. Thank you for sharing Samedi. That last part is so poignant. I had to deal with that too, relatives calling me gringo at the dinner table until I finally had the guts to call one of them out and make a scene out of it. Being marginilized by your own family is terribly destructive and I got no satisfaction from challenging it. Only the disappointment I had to do it. I still felt in between. Like I didn't belong anywhere.
It's those kinds of experiences that strike so deeply and have such far reaching impact on how you interact with everything in your life that make this impossible to understand from an outsiders perspective. For anyone still wondering: "how could this game be hurtful, it wasn't intended to" please realize there is a whole world of pain you can never know about, and the consequences of such will always be a mystery. But when someone has the courage to speak up and share what is damaging to them and why, it's time to listen and try to understand.
Let's just call this what it is. A matter of priorities. Improving the world for systemically marginalized people is more important than preserving aspects of a game. End of discussion.
Yeah, when I read that I was basically that old Firefly gif of Mal just trying to figure out how to respond to something.
I love that one! It's my most used gif response.
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!
Thanks man, and sorry you had to deal with that sort of nonsense as well.
But yeah, I can get it's a thing that's easy to not see for the folks who haven't had to deal with it directly.
I'm reminded of the quote from Lovecraft Country, both the book and the show.
"Stories are like people, loving them doesn't make them perfect. You try to cherish their virtues, and overlook their flaws. The flaws are still there though"
The thing with DND is, in evolving game systems like this is, sometimes those flaws can be ironed out.
If you loved the older version, that's fine. But just like rolling straight line stats, that doesn't mean it has to stay around forever and be the default for everyone coming in.
A'IGHT. Got some vidja gaeming dun, even won a few rounds. Came back, read another page or so of
A.) Folks sharing their situations and showing solidarity with those who are unfortunate enough to be in a less than ideal position. Cool! That's a positive benefit, even if I wish it was less necessary. And
B.) A few folks clinging to "I understand the old way was hurtful and you're glad it's not causing pain anymore, but...man, I just don't care." Which is less cool. I suppose, to be frank, it doesn't matter in the end. We've gotten our Tasha's Cauldron rules, the Lineage system is the new standard moving forward. Even if they start offering 'recommended' bioessential baked-in stats for people who insist that every origin in D&D needs to have one UND PRECISELY VUN proper thing it's supposed to be doing and to Gehenna with everything else? We can ignore it. If I wasn't terrified of breaking something because the homebrew system here is terrible, I would've already converted my Kitsune (Tyberos) species to use the new rules, and anything I build moving forward will definitely be going that route.
Time is on our side. Ten years ago, most of the folks in this thread who've come forward in solidarity would've had to keep silent and hide, afraid to share their pain for fear of being ridiculed and dismissed. Ten years from now we'll have a new D&D edition and these rules will be baked in from the start. We can all look forward to it. Except for the people who don't, I guess.
This hill will be ours eventually, so long as we can avoid being shamed off of it.
Please do not contact or message me.
I am honestly flabbergasted by some of the responses I've seen here. I shouldn't be, but I am. The sheer callousness I've read in the past...****, I'm not even going to try to count how many pages. No ******* wonder people didn't feel safe coming into the game for so long.
Protip: When people come forward and give tangible examples of how aspects of the game caused them hurt and kept them from being able to enjoy the game, maybe, try...NOT being shitty to them about it? Even if you don't understand, (which, again, honestly flabbergasts me), it shouldn't be hard to recognize that challenging them on their ******* LIVED EXPERIENCES is a ******* SHITTY THING TO DO!
*******. Seriously.
Though I agree with most of your statements on this thread, Yamana_Eajii, this is uncalled for. Just because I don't use the rules from Tasha's doesn't mean that I'm against D&D or that I'm "not a true fan." It's not a bad thing that most orcs in my campaign are stronger than most gnomes. What is a bad thing is when people try to restrict other people's fun, either by denying or criticizing the way they play.
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'm gonna unsubscribe from this thread now. Before I do, though, I'd like to say a massive thank you to Ophidimancer, Yurei, Samedi, and anyone else who has shared painful experiences here. Although I'm in the privileged position not to have suffered this myself, I support and stand with you all.
It's an interesting topic in regards to... well in way the blinders people will put on in a way.
"I don't want my choice to be sub optimal" (for instance orc wizard) OK.. I feel you, this is a game after all right? roll some dice and people will want every advantage can have..
But lets dive into that a little more.. why exactly are you wanting to play an orc wizard? Is he bunking the trend of the savage orc by studying magic? Ok.. so with floating asi's.. what exactly makes him special now as bunking the trend? If ASI's aren't set to what the genetic leaning of a species is and are just.. put em where you want your not really going against the grain because the grain no longer exists to go against.
The brutish nature of orcs? Look at em they're huge and they're muscle. Even your orc wizard should be fairly strong just by pure nature of being an orc. Guys never lifted an axe in his life but he's str 12 just like that human lumberjack that cuts down trees all day. But well now he's somehow not because as a wizard that's not optimal and he's no longer brutish somehow.
It's not really about my fun or my imagination it's more just I want the dice rolls to be high, but in that process your really just.. losing the core concept of what you wanted to play in the process.
Can try to frame it however you want but at the end of the day it's not an orc wizard you want to play but an optimal character. It's not a gnome barbarian its an optimal character. All the flash of being off beat but none of the downsides which no longer makes it off beat does it?
So at the end what exactly is it this is looking to accomplish?
At the end I don't think the core issue is ASI bumps by being a orc/gnome/goliath/elf, its that the system has come to rely so heavily on your stats in 5e coupled with the explosion of forum optimization that if your not the best at lvl 1 it somehow = not fun
Okay, here's a shocking proposition: maybe...people have different ideas for characters? Maybe my orc wizard has a physical ailment that makes them weaker than even other humanoids? Maybe I'm going to buck even more trends here and put my ASI's into Charisma and Wisdom? I certainly can't do that with the old static ASI's.
Also, here's another shocking proposition: maybe...people can have both an optimal character and *gasp* a core concept they want to play at the same time?!?! It's almost as if...the two aren't mutually exclusive! I know: shocking!
Seriously. This isn't hard to grasp, people.
While I'm still up, I'd like to second this. I appreciate those of you who took the time to share with us, and frankly, an unfortunate number of the responses you received only proved your points even further. I am genuinely still having trouble processing some of the awful, awful, awful responses you got. Just...disgraceful...
Objection!
While lineage is a valid method of sparking sorcery, it is not the only method, nor necessarily the most common. It's viable to gain any sorcery origin from any number of methods - eating the flesh of a dragon for magic is a thing in real world myths, for instance.
To claim you can't have a specific sorcery origin without a specific bloodline is mistaken.
Okay, I'm kind of curious now. How's the conversion going to go? Beyond just stats? Double typed? Any discussion of actual rules was burried but im actually cuious what rules you will implement....
I for one think this is an excellent move. The racial ability score increases had more than once put off a player in a campaign of mine from playing a concept that they enjoy simply because their class didn't synergise with their class. For example, a player once wanted to play a half-orc rogue and very nearly didn't because it would have poor level one dexterity. I had to explain to the character that I was happy to switch around the ASIs if this was the problem.
The fact that ASIs had been limiting the ideas of players is really off putting and I am glad that the races are now more freely interchangeable with every class. My mountain dwarf bard will be celebrating.
Chilling kinda vibe.
Great.
A) Thanks for bringing up cancel culture, no-one was persecuting you and we were all (or most of us) explaining our views in a civilised way. [REDACTED]
B) I do actually agree that use of this option should be cleared with the DM first, as should all use of optional rules. But I don't personally think it's game-breaking to allow a half-orc to be unusually charismatic - you never know, it might factor in with their Menacing racial trait. Or that an dwarf could be quick on its feet. Or even that there might be an unintelligent high elf! Just examples of how this might function.
C) By changing up your ASIs you are making your character an unusual example of your race - you should be able to explain why this is in your backstory.
D) If the DM makes this option available, they should make it available for all players.
Once we take into account these points, then I see no real problem. Naturally at your table, it's your rules.
Chilling kinda vibe.
"Cancel culture" isn't a thing, and I'm sick of seeing it dropped as some kind of magic word that dismisses real people's real problems.
So, several people have explained how they are helpful in overcoming in-game reminders of painful real-world situations, but they "benefit nothing else compared to what existed before"? The people who have spoken don't know their own minds, and didn't really find them helpful at all?
"I find this helpful"
"No you don't, shut up, I know better than you!"
Really?!
Cancel Culture? Really?
Who's being cancelled by this optional rule?
In response, I would say that with use of standard array or point buy (both default options in the PHB that lots of players enjoy using), you cannot get a score above 15 without a racial ASI until 4th level. This lowers save DCs, attack modifiers and damage by a significant amount for a low-level character and has put players off before. It also suggests to players that if they want a novelty character, then they are going to have to fight with the racial ASIs.
There is a huge difference between power-gamer ego, and wanting a character that isn't punished by rules that come with their concept.
And thanks for agreeing with me on one point. That was nice.
Oh, umm...
I forgot to mention this. Emmber raises a really good point and I have to say that I totally agree. And no-one can argue that it comes form a power-gamer perspective.
Chilling kinda vibe.
By succumbing to the demands of cancel culture, they have avoided being "canceled".
If WoTC had resisted, then the cancel machinery would have kicked into gear.
Or sensible, rational human beings would have implemented the house rules they had been using for years to help players have a little more character versatility. And the people who disagreed with the Tasha options would have not used them. And DnD could continue unencumbered.
I can't tell whether I'm being naive, hopeful or realistic.
Chilling kinda vibe.