Actually we could have stopped right here, because this is the actual essence of it all. This is why all these changes happen. You're right, there is a miniscule segment of people, actually some of them way outside the 'community', which demand these changes. But not because of harm. In fact, those are neither tropes, nor have they been ever harmful.
The fact that you don't know anyone personally who finds them objectionable or harmful doesn't mean that it's a miniscule segment of people, it just means the people who object aren't in your circle. Which, giving the degree of political polarization in this country, is not really surprising.
Frankly, WotC would just love to sweep the whole issue under the rug, it's kind of a lose-lose proposition to get involved, but they didn't have a great choice, so they made some bets about the actual makeup of their player base, and they bet on the Critical Role side (new season has two orc PCs...) over the OSR side.
Moral complexity leads to richer storytelling. "They're evil" is dull. "This particular kingdom of orcs are hemmed in on all sides by other kingdoms, which inevitably leads to conflict" has more potential for resolutions.
I've stayed out of this thread until now, but this is it in a nutshell
Imagine Orcs and Elves in one party. Two species, who waged war on every occasion, mostly initiated by orcs, and still hate each other to death. For those folks, who have been into DnD for as long as I am, there is a real point in that regard
I don't have to imagine it, I'm DMing it. The party is an orc warlock, an elf ranger, a kobold paladin, a human sorcerer and a halfling rogue (soon to be replaced by a dragonborn cleric/warlock MC, because the player wants to switch). They get along fine, because in my homebrew world, those wars (which were not "mostly initiated by the orcs") are in the past -- although it's a recent enough past that there are still factions of xenophobes on all sides out there plotting to undo the peace
And for the record, I've been playing since AD&D/BECMI days
Stop trying to inflict your stale, boring, dated lore on the rest of us. We certainly aren't preventing you from sticking to the Old Ways in your campaign
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator (Assassin rogue) Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
An imaginative world like yours, where there is no conflict between those races
You should probably try reading the whole post before you respond to it
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator (Assassin rogue) Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Clearly there is nothing that anyone here can say that will ever change your mind. So the discussion has reached an impasse. You are free to continue running orcs however you see fit at your table, and the rest of us will run them however wee see fit at our tables. And that's it.
Oh, this is objectively very true. You basically gave the very explanation. Segments of the community, meaning the minority, which was yelling the loudest. Pretty much like the Twitter phenomenon.
There are literally dozens of different accounts replying and disagreeing with you on this thread, all with various amounts of likes. You're the only one arguing the other way around, and all your posts are desperately like-less. I don't know whatever echo chamber you came from that gave you the opposite idea, but it is quite obvious who the "loud yelling minority" is in this situation, and this, the feeling deep within you that you've been left out on the wrong side of the argument and that most people obviously disagree with these outdated and stereotypical views is the main reason why you're pissed and angry at this non-issue issue you've raised for yourself, which was a most welcome change to the vast majority of the community, even those who do not come from any activist background...
You mean there is a reason why orcs are evil by default in your campaign.
Not in mine, as I have not created the various D&D settings.
The Forgotten Realms has had a peaceful orc kingdom last for over 100 years right next to their human and dwarven neighbors. It fell but that was due to some people on both sides not being able to let the past be past ... so how does your representation of the lore of orcs fit that? I dont see what you are saying in the lore of each and every D&D setting, or even just the prominent ones. But then we all take that lore and change it and make the settings our own. There is nothing wrong in doing that. Just be aware that you are doing that and dont try to force your version of the setting on everyone else.
. . . D+D needs enemies that can just be killed because they're evil (or otherwise 'bad' in some deterministic way). Most campaigns don't want to grapple with complicated moral questions every single combat. (Some do, and that's fine for them. But the MM needs to support the average campaign). . .
Do your players really grapple with complicated moral questions every time they kill a human bandit or an assassin? You seem to be equating 'orcs are not automatically evil' with 'all orcs are now good'.
And I can assure you, having played plenty of games in which non-humans didn't even exist (e.g. an Arthurian campaign setting), there is no need for there to be a dedicated enemy race.
But, if you want to run an orc-base campaign, and you just add a couple species abilities to an existing stat block, you have tons more choices. The orcs can get smarter and tougher as the PCs do, you can have an orc archmage running the show. Put them in everywhere and give them bigger motivations and make them an ongoing threat.
That's never been the role for Orcs. They were among the bipedal fodder meant to introduce players to D&D monsters, along with Kobolds and Goblins up to large groups by third level. From the graduate to Ogres and more stiff competition. None were ever meant to progress like PC's. And while one might be Chieftain or Shaman, they could never be "arch" anything, unless they had some kind of powerful relic they kept hidden
That's never been the role for Orcs. They were among the bipedal fodder meant to introduce players to D&D monsters, along with Kobolds and Goblins up to large groups by third level. From the graduate to Ogres and more stiff competition. None were ever meant to progress like PC's. And while one might be Chieftain or Shaman, they could never be "arch" anything, unless they had some kind of powerful relic they kept hidden
AD&D didn't generally have high level orcs or rules for creating them (though it was AD&D, so people just made stuff up), but starting with 3e they had no level limits and you have characters like Obould Many-Arrows.
But, if you want to run an orc-base campaign, and you just add a couple species abilities to an existing stat block, you have tons more choices. The orcs can get smarter and tougher as the PCs do, you can have an orc archmage running the show. Put them in everywhere and give them bigger motivations and make them an ongoing threat.
That's never been the role for Orcs. They were among the bipedal fodder meant to introduce players to D&D monsters, along with Kobolds and Goblins up to large groups by third level. From the graduate to Ogres and more stiff competition. None were ever meant to progress like PC's. And while one might be Chieftain or Shaman, they could never be "arch" anything, unless they had some kind of powerful relic they kept hidden
I’ve been playing since 1e/becmi. I know well what their role has been. I also know that things change and “that’s the way we’ve always done it” is about the worst reason to keep doing something. If you’ve got other reason, of course those should stand or fall on their own merits. But if we’re going to compare ideas, I think “you can tell better, more nuanced stories with more variety” beats out “that’s what we did in the 70’s.”
And, hey, as lots have said at this point, you want orcs to be mindless bags of hp the PCs use to grind up a couple low levels, cool. Do that. I’m sure you’ll have fun with it. But why do people keep insisting that is the one true way to play?
But, if you want to run an orc-base campaign, and you just add a couple species abilities to an existing stat block, you have tons more choices. The orcs can get smarter and tougher as the PCs do, you can have an orc archmage running the show. Put them in everywhere and give them bigger motivations and make them an ongoing threat.
That's never been the role for Orcs. They were among the bipedal fodder meant to introduce players to D&D monsters, along with Kobolds and Goblins up to large groups by third level. From the graduate to Ogres and more stiff competition. None were ever meant to progress like PC's. And while one might be Chieftain or Shaman, they could never be "arch" anything, unless they had some kind of powerful relic they kept hidden
I’ve been playing since 1e/becmi. I know well what their role has been. I also know that things change and “that’s the way we’ve always done it” is about the worst reason to keep doing something. If you’ve got other reason, of course those should stand or fall on their own merits. But if we’re going to compare ideas, I think “you can tell better, more nuanced stories with more variety” beats out “that’s what we did in the 70’s.”
And, hey, as lots have said at this point, you want orcs to be mindless bags of hp the PCs use to grind up a couple low levels, cool. Do that. I’m sure you’ll have fun with it. But why do people keep insisting that is the one true way to play?
I'd just like the MM to support DMs doing normal things. It shouldn't take that much effort to put together a low-level orc encounter, whether they're a PC race or not. I also think we should have elves, dwarves, etc... in the MM too. Just because it's a PC race doesn't mean we should make it more complicated to prepare the encounter.
But, if you want to run an orc-base campaign, and you just add a couple species abilities to an existing stat block, you have tons more choices. The orcs can get smarter and tougher as the PCs do, you can have an orc archmage running the show. Put them in everywhere and give them bigger motivations and make them an ongoing threat.
That's never been the role for Orcs. They were among the bipedal fodder meant to introduce players to D&D monsters, along with Kobolds and Goblins up to large groups by third level. From the graduate to Ogres and more stiff competition. None were ever meant to progress like PC's. And while one might be Chieftain or Shaman, they could never be "arch" anything, unless they had some kind of powerful relic they kept hidden
I’ve been playing since 1e/becmi. I know well what their role has been. I also know that things change and “that’s the way we’ve always done it” is about the worst reason to keep doing something. If you’ve got other reason, of course those should stand or fall on their own merits. But if we’re going to compare ideas, I think “you can tell better, more nuanced stories with more variety” beats out “that’s what we did in the 70’s.”
And, hey, as lots have said at this point, you want orcs to be mindless bags of hp the PCs use to grind up a couple low levels, cool. Do that. I’m sure you’ll have fun with it. But why do people keep insisting that is the one true way to play?
I'd just like the MM to support DMs doing normal things. It shouldn't take that much effort to put together a low-level orc encounter, whether they're a PC race or not. I also think we should have elves, dwarves, etc... in the MM too. Just because it's a PC race doesn't mean we should make it more complicated to prepare the encounter.
It’s not complicated, though. You pick some humanoids of appropriate CR and theme. You call them orcs, elves, etc. You optionally make a note about their species traits. And voila! You’ve got your encounter.
I’ve been playing since 1e/becmi. I know well what their role has been. I also know that things change and “that’s the way we’ve always done it” is about the worst reason to keep doing something. If you’ve got other reason, of course those should stand or fall on their own merits. But if we’re going to compare ideas, I think “you can tell better, more nuanced stories with more variety” beats out “that’s what we did in the 70’s.”
And, hey, as lots have said at this point, you want orcs to be mindless bags of hp the PCs use to grind up a couple low levels, cool. Do that. I’m sure you’ll have fun with it. But why do people keep insisting that is the one true way to play?
I'd just like the MM to support DMs doing normal things. It shouldn't take that much effort to put together a low-level orc encounter, whether they're a PC race or not. I also think we should have elves, dwarves, etc... in the MM too. Just because it's a PC race doesn't mean we should make it more complicated to prepare the encounter.
That’s the thing, “normal” isn’t objective. As has been pointed out, there are different versions of how orcs, let alone other species, behave in different published settings. And as the most common setting is homebrew, there are countless worlds out there that no one knows how that table does things.
As for having stat blocks for each of them, there are 10 species in the PHB. Theres another 33 in mordenkainen’s, and a lot more in the various setting books. Even if we restrict it to just the PHB, it’s a lot and a really inefficient way to use the space. It’s much easier to do something like ace of rogues says, pick a CR appropriate stat blocks, and add a couple species traits to it. Or don’t add the species traits, so you can have a group of bandits made up of different species, and describe them as such. But once the fight starts, you don’t have the headache of tracking which bandit was an orc vs. a Goliath or human. Unless you want to, of course, then you can. Keeping it bare bones allows each DM to flesh it out however they like.
I’ve been playing since 1e/becmi. I know well what their role has been. I also know that things change and “that’s the way we’ve always done it” is about the worst reason to keep doing something. If you’ve got other reason, of course those should stand or fall on their own merits. But if we’re going to compare ideas, I think “you can tell better, more nuanced stories with more variety” beats out “that’s what we did in the 70’s.”
And, hey, as lots have said at this point, you want orcs to be mindless bags of hp the PCs use to grind up a couple low levels, cool. Do that. I’m sure you’ll have fun with it. But why do people keep insisting that is the one true way to play?
I'd just like the MM to support DMs doing normal things. It shouldn't take that much effort to put together a low-level orc encounter, whether they're a PC race or not. I also think we should have elves, dwarves, etc... in the MM too. Just because it's a PC race doesn't mean we should make it more complicated to prepare the encounter.
That’s the thing, “normal” isn’t objective. As has been pointed out, there are different versions of how orcs, let alone other species, behave in different published settings. And as the most common setting is homebrew, there are countless worlds out there that no one knows how that table does things.
As for having stat blocks for each of them, there are 10 species in the PHB. Theres another 33 in mordenkainen’s, and a lot more in the various setting books. Even if we restrict it to just the PHB, it’s a lot and a really inefficient way to use the space. It’s much easier to do something like ace of rogues says, pick a CR appropriate stat blocks, and add a couple species traits to it. Or don’t add the species traits, so you can have a group of bandits made up of different species, and describe them as such. But once the fight starts, you don’t have the headache of tracking which bandit was an orc vs. a Goliath or human. Unless you want to, of course, then you can. Keeping it bare bones allows each DM to flesh it out however they like.
And most of the ones in Mordenkainen's are in the MM.
I really dislike this idea that species are just visual skins that are completely interchangeable. They should not be. An orc should be different enough from an elf that you can't use the same statblock.
I’ve been playing since 1e/becmi. I know well what their role has been. I also know that things change and “that’s the way we’ve always done it” is about the worst reason to keep doing something. If you’ve got other reason, of course those should stand or fall on their own merits. But if we’re going to compare ideas, I think “you can tell better, more nuanced stories with more variety” beats out “that’s what we did in the 70’s.”
And, hey, as lots have said at this point, you want orcs to be mindless bags of hp the PCs use to grind up a couple low levels, cool. Do that. I’m sure you’ll have fun with it. But why do people keep insisting that is the one true way to play?
I'd just like the MM to support DMs doing normal things. It shouldn't take that much effort to put together a low-level orc encounter, whether they're a PC race or not. I also think we should have elves, dwarves, etc... in the MM too. Just because it's a PC race doesn't mean we should make it more complicated to prepare the encounter.
That’s the thing, “normal” isn’t objective. As has been pointed out, there are different versions of how orcs, let alone other species, behave in different published settings. And as the most common setting is homebrew, there are countless worlds out there that no one knows how that table does things.
As for having stat blocks for each of them, there are 10 species in the PHB. Theres another 33 in mordenkainen’s, and a lot more in the various setting books. Even if we restrict it to just the PHB, it’s a lot and a really inefficient way to use the space. It’s much easier to do something like ace of rogues says, pick a CR appropriate stat blocks, and add a couple species traits to it. Or don’t add the species traits, so you can have a group of bandits made up of different species, and describe them as such. But once the fight starts, you don’t have the headache of tracking which bandit was an orc vs. a Goliath or human. Unless you want to, of course, then you can. Keeping it bare bones allows each DM to flesh it out however they like.
And most of the ones in Mordenkainen's are in the MM.
I really dislike this idea that species are just visual skins that are completely interchangeable. They should not be. An orc should be different enough from an elf that you can't use the same statblock.
Two arms, two legs, one head, in the same neighborhood for body mass; pretty limited room for differentiation, particularly for generic spear carrier types. And since they’ve already got a bunch of generic mechanical archetypes in the NPC blocks, it’d be a bit of a trick to come up with several more for each PHB race that aren’t 95% something they already did.
I really dislike this idea that species are just visual skins that are completely interchangeable. They should not be. An orc should be different enough from an elf that you can't use the same statblock.
You don't. You add species adjustments to the base stat block. I agree that the DMG should be more helpful about how you do that.
Two arms, two legs, one head, in the same neighborhood for body mass; pretty limited room for differentiation, particularly for generic spear carrier types.
Exactly. An orc should be different from an elf in situations where that difference is relevant
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator (Assassin rogue) Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
. . .I'd just like the MM to support DMs doing normal things. It shouldn't take that much effort to put together a low-level orc encounter, whether they're a PC race or not. I also think we should have elves, dwarves, etc... in the MM too. Just because it's a PC race doesn't mean we should make it more complicated to prepare the encounter. . .
. . .I really dislike this idea that species are just visual skins that are completely interchangeable. They should not be. An orc should be different enough from an elf that you can't use the same statblock. . .
And that is not only a very valid complaint, it is one I also happen to agree with (yes, I will absolutely recognize things as valid complaints even if I don't agree with them).
Hopefully, at some point in the near future, WotC will hear that complaint and provide some sort of system where you can combine a 'species' and a 'type' (e.g. orc brute, elf warrior, drow assassin). Until that happens, we will just have to homebrew such things ourselves (which, honestly, produces a better fit, but it is also a bit more work).
However, that is a complaint about a lack of quick and easy system to handle that sort of thing, which is very, very different from the complaint 'they removed orcs'.
It takes maybe 5 minutes to copy racial traits onto a physical copy of an NPC block. Little bit more involved if you’re working in Beyond, but that’s been the case for everything for years, so it’s not a unique 2024 issue.
It takes maybe 5 minutes to copy racial traits onto a physical copy of an NPC block. Little bit more involved if you’re working in Beyond, but that’s been the case for everything for years, so it’s not a unique 2024 issue.
Absolutely. The only real issue (and it isn't much of one) is figuring out when certain level based racial abilities should kick in (e.g. Celestial Revelation for an Aasimar).
Possibly a few of the racial abilities could also be 'trimmed' to make them a little easier for the DM to handle when there's a group of these humanoids. As an example, just say that orcs can Dash as a Bonus Action. No temporary hit points and no limit to the number of times they can use it. It isn't exactly identical to Adrenaline Surge, but close enough (in my opinion) and far easier to track when there are 8 of the buggers running around.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The fact that you don't know anyone personally who finds them objectionable or harmful doesn't mean that it's a miniscule segment of people, it just means the people who object aren't in your circle. Which, giving the degree of political polarization in this country, is not really surprising.
Frankly, WotC would just love to sweep the whole issue under the rug, it's kind of a lose-lose proposition to get involved, but they didn't have a great choice, so they made some bets about the actual makeup of their player base, and they bet on the Critical Role side (new season has two orc PCs...) over the OSR side.
I've stayed out of this thread until now, but this is it in a nutshell
I don't have to imagine it, I'm DMing it. The party is an orc warlock, an elf ranger, a kobold paladin, a human sorcerer and a halfling rogue (soon to be replaced by a dragonborn cleric/warlock MC, because the player wants to switch). They get along fine, because in my homebrew world, those wars (which were not "mostly initiated by the orcs") are in the past -- although it's a recent enough past that there are still factions of xenophobes on all sides out there plotting to undo the peace
And for the record, I've been playing since AD&D/BECMI days
Stop trying to inflict your stale, boring, dated lore on the rest of us. We certainly aren't preventing you from sticking to the Old Ways in your campaign
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator (Assassin rogue)
Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
You should probably try reading the whole post before you respond to it
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator (Assassin rogue)
Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Clearly there is nothing that anyone here can say that will ever change your mind. So the discussion has reached an impasse. You are free to continue running orcs however you see fit at your table, and the rest of us will run them however wee see fit at our tables. And that's it.
Anzio Faro. Protector Aasimar light cleric. Lvl 18.
Viktor Gavriil. White dragonborn grave cleric. Lvl 20.
Ikram Sahir ibn-Malik al-Sayyid Ra'ad. Brass dragonborn draconic sorcerer Lvl 9. Fire elemental devil.
Wrangler of cats.
There are literally dozens of different accounts replying and disagreeing with you on this thread, all with various amounts of likes. You're the only one arguing the other way around, and all your posts are desperately like-less. I don't know whatever echo chamber you came from that gave you the opposite idea, but it is quite obvious who the "loud yelling minority" is in this situation, and this, the feeling deep within you that you've been left out on the wrong side of the argument and that most people obviously disagree with these outdated and stereotypical views is the main reason why you're pissed and angry at this non-issue issue you've raised for yourself, which was a most welcome change to the vast majority of the community, even those who do not come from any activist background...
The Forgotten Realms has had a peaceful orc kingdom last for over 100 years right next to their human and dwarven neighbors. It fell but that was due to some people on both sides not being able to let the past be past ... so how does your representation of the lore of orcs fit that? I dont see what you are saying in the lore of each and every D&D setting, or even just the prominent ones. But then we all take that lore and change it and make the settings our own. There is nothing wrong in doing that. Just be aware that you are doing that and dont try to force your version of the setting on everyone else.
Do your players really grapple with complicated moral questions every time they kill a human bandit or an assassin? You seem to be equating 'orcs are not automatically evil' with 'all orcs are now good'.
And I can assure you, having played plenty of games in which non-humans didn't even exist (e.g. an Arthurian campaign setting), there is no need for there to be a dedicated enemy race.
That's never been the role for Orcs. They were among the bipedal fodder meant to introduce players to D&D monsters, along with Kobolds and Goblins up to large groups by third level. From the graduate to Ogres and more stiff competition. None were ever meant to progress like PC's. And while one might be Chieftain or Shaman, they could never be "arch" anything, unless they had some kind of powerful relic they kept hidden
AD&D didn't generally have high level orcs or rules for creating them (though it was AD&D, so people just made stuff up), but starting with 3e they had no level limits and you have characters like Obould Many-Arrows.
I’ve been playing since 1e/becmi. I know well what their role has been.
I also know that things change and “that’s the way we’ve always done it” is about the worst reason to keep doing something. If you’ve got other reason, of course those should stand or fall on their own merits. But if we’re going to compare ideas, I think “you can tell better, more nuanced stories with more variety” beats out “that’s what we did in the 70’s.”
And, hey, as lots have said at this point, you want orcs to be mindless bags of hp the PCs use to grind up a couple low levels, cool. Do that. I’m sure you’ll have fun with it. But why do people keep insisting that is the one true way to play?
I'd just like the MM to support DMs doing normal things. It shouldn't take that much effort to put together a low-level orc encounter, whether they're a PC race or not. I also think we should have elves, dwarves, etc... in the MM too. Just because it's a PC race doesn't mean we should make it more complicated to prepare the encounter.
It’s not complicated, though. You pick some humanoids of appropriate CR and theme. You call them orcs, elves, etc. You optionally make a note about their species traits. And voila! You’ve got your encounter.
That’s the thing, “normal” isn’t objective. As has been pointed out, there are different versions of how orcs, let alone other species, behave in different published settings. And as the most common setting is homebrew, there are countless worlds out there that no one knows how that table does things.
As for having stat blocks for each of them, there are 10 species in the PHB. Theres another 33 in mordenkainen’s, and a lot more in the various setting books. Even if we restrict it to just the PHB, it’s a lot and a really inefficient way to use the space. It’s much easier to do something like ace of rogues says, pick a CR appropriate stat blocks, and add a couple species traits to it.
Or don’t add the species traits, so you can have a group of bandits made up of different species, and describe them as such. But once the fight starts, you don’t have the headache of tracking which bandit was an orc vs. a Goliath or human. Unless you want to, of course, then you can. Keeping it bare bones allows each DM to flesh it out however they like.
And most of the ones in Mordenkainen's are in the MM.
I really dislike this idea that species are just visual skins that are completely interchangeable. They should not be. An orc should be different enough from an elf that you can't use the same statblock.
Two arms, two legs, one head, in the same neighborhood for body mass; pretty limited room for differentiation, particularly for generic spear carrier types. And since they’ve already got a bunch of generic mechanical archetypes in the NPC blocks, it’d be a bit of a trick to come up with several more for each PHB race that aren’t 95% something they already did.
You don't. You add species adjustments to the base stat block. I agree that the DMG should be more helpful about how you do that.
Exactly. An orc should be different from an elf in situations where that difference is relevant
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator (Assassin rogue)
Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
And that is not only a very valid complaint, it is one I also happen to agree with (yes, I will absolutely recognize things as valid complaints even if I don't agree with them).
Hopefully, at some point in the near future, WotC will hear that complaint and provide some sort of system where you can combine a 'species' and a 'type' (e.g. orc brute, elf warrior, drow assassin). Until that happens, we will just have to homebrew such things ourselves (which, honestly, produces a better fit, but it is also a bit more work).
However, that is a complaint about a lack of quick and easy system to handle that sort of thing, which is very, very different from the complaint 'they removed orcs'.
It takes maybe 5 minutes to copy racial traits onto a physical copy of an NPC block. Little bit more involved if you’re working in Beyond, but that’s been the case for everything for years, so it’s not a unique 2024 issue.
Absolutely. The only real issue (and it isn't much of one) is figuring out when certain level based racial abilities should kick in (e.g. Celestial Revelation for an Aasimar).
Possibly a few of the racial abilities could also be 'trimmed' to make them a little easier for the DM to handle when there's a group of these humanoids. As an example, just say that orcs can Dash as a Bonus Action. No temporary hit points and no limit to the number of times they can use it. It isn't exactly identical to Adrenaline Surge, but close enough (in my opinion) and far easier to track when there are 8 of the buggers running around.