I think that really summarizes it right there. We're not against more half-race options. Just that Half-elf and half-orc are pretty iconic by this point and removing them in favor of a watered down option feels wrong.
They weren't removed, they were folded into the greater idea of biracial and multiracial characters. Their mechanically distinctand thus slightly uncomfortable presence was removed to make room for the greater widening of multiracial characters.
This was why my first character was a Half-Elf; something I never did again. When I want to play someone descended from Elves, I just play an Elf because that edition made playing a Half-Elf mechanically regrettable. In that edition, splitting the difference between Humans and Elves just made for a bad playing experience. The lore for half-elves and half-orcs has always felt gross when I got around to reading it, which made me less-inclined to play half-orc as well. Mechanically they make sense in a high-combat game, and that's not really enticing to me. At the same time, the thought of, "if half-orcs and half-elves exist, why not others," only bothered me so much as an inconsistency. These rules address that, at least.
I don't feel like they really make me want to play a character of mixed fantasy races of any kind any more than I want to play a half-elf after that first time playing. They do make me ask, "Why mixed fantasy races at all?" And I can't think of a reason that satisfies me for allowing it in a game I run, it feels more like exoticizing lore compromising tone by making things weird and awkward. While I don't think this fixes the underlying problem, it at least settles a lot of questions and/or arguments. I think it's settled me on the idea that elves and humans don't have kids, even if elves and elves have kids; and so on. I would feel more represented by playing a character whose parents are a Wood Elf and a High Elf, which is an example of where I'd use this rule. 'Subrace' is a cursed term for a mechanic, but 'subsubrace' would be even worse. I'm sure someone's already written that word somewhere, long before me.
For me the best race to half race is the ardling. Want a beastial headed, but don't want the celestial stuff, Half-ardling/Half Dwarf, or human, or gnome or halfling if you maybe want a short beast person thing. Or maybe you want the other way around, you want a more humanoid celestial, then half ardling half human could look more human and still get celestial power and angel wings, or dwarf of halfing again.
You realize that, with the current entry, a lot of people will likely just flat-out gloss it over when reading the entries and not even realize that the option exists in the first place, right? You're not going to get, well, anything done if people don't even realize it's a choice in the book because the entry for something that should be a huge deal is so tiny and under-developed.
Why would they do that? And if so, whose fault is it? The words are there to read, and sidebars are always very easy to spot. This isn't like the d20 test thing where the proposed book actively contradicts itself.
Do I, personally, like the proposed rule? No, not really. But it's better for people who've lived that experience, and my 100% white-as-milk hindus can hit the homebrew sheets for my own personal games just fine. Hell, I just did - ran out a homebrew block for Critical Role's uniya over the weekend in preparation for some folks eying them as PCs for future Exandria games. I get my fancy mixed-traits character, and that character isn't forced down the throats of people for whom mixed-traits characters are an uncomfortable reminder of past harm.
Let the people for whom this is a splendid step forward have that step forward, hm?
Why does that only apply to mixed ancestry, and not the different races having distinct attributes based on their biology? Dwarves are being told to be not culturally, but inherently good at metalworking, but that's not an issue. Meanwhile, a kid of a dwarf and a human not being fully human or fully dwarven would be racist, then?
1.) Dwarves being genetically good at metalworking is still weird. It's in there, I imagine, because "DWARVES ARE SMITHS!" is one of the strongest culture/species associations in all of D&D and trying to sell grognards on the idea that dwarves are no better or worse as craftsmen than anyone else is not going to work. Personally I'd prefer if they simply had a predilection for craftsman's work and could choose which crafts they man'd, represented by a bonus floating tool proficiency, but eh.
2.) Thirteen pages of thread. Read them, please. The answer to your second question has been given dozens and dozens of times already.
Gonna bring up a point here, one that occured to me when working on that homebrew uniya sheet and in subsequent discussions.
Go read the half-elf block. Really read it. How often does the half-elf, as written, describe itself in terms of what a half-elf is as opposed to what a half-elf is not - namely, human or elf? The answer is effectively never. The entire species is described negatively, in terms of how it doesn't fit, what it is not, what it can't be. The whole thing is "you're Different, and we can't possibly allow that." Hell, the whole thing finishes its lore description with a sentence saying "both sides of the half-elf's heritage suspect it of being unfairly biased towards the other."
Looking at it through my imperfect understanding of the experiences of those who live such a dichotomy in real life? I'm astonished anybody plays half-elves. Their write-up is absolutely awful and whoever did it back in 2014 should be ashamed. Frankly I'm annoyed at myself that it took me this long to notice just how bleak, exclusionary, and punishing the half-elf write-up is. Even the half-orc write-up is stronger, though mostly because the half-orc write-up is actually describing plain old regular orcs in a way that gets by the "we can't let orcs be their own thing in D&D" Grognard Block that was in evidence in 2014.
Why does that only apply to mixed ancestry, and not the different races having distinct attributes based on their biology? Dwarves are being told to be not culturally, but inherently good at metalworking, but that's not an issue. Meanwhile, a kid of a dwarf and a human not being fully human or fully dwarven would be racist, then?
The issue is that, in various settings, a kingdom/culture tends to also encompass its entire race too. While I'm sure we'd all agree that no one individual dwarf is inherently good at metalwork or whatever the problem is that most settings will only have one or two dwarven kingdoms and both will be very... dwarfy... and all dwarfs will have no choice but to have come from said kingdom(s). While humans get it 'better' even then they tend to be almost exclusively feudal european with, if they're lucky, asian or a Nordic (if you consider that different enough) variations. So if you meet a dwarf you can safely assume he's from the dwarf kingdom and adhires to the dwarf culture because, well, he doesn't exactly have much in the way of choices. Sure, some GM's won't do that, but to most it's just not something they thought of or cared about.
Why would they do that? And if so, whose fault is it? The words are there to read, and sidebars are always very easy to spot. This isn't like the d20 test thing where the proposed book actively contradicts itself.
Do I, personally, like the proposed rule? No, not really. But it's better for people who've lived that experience, and my 100% white-as-milk hindus can hit the homebrew sheets for my own personal games just fine. Hell, I just did - ran out a homebrew block for Critical Role's uniya over the weekend in preparation for some folks eying them as PCs for future Exandria games. I get my fancy mixed-traits character, and that character isn't forced down the throats of people for whom mixed-traits characters are an uncomfortable reminder of past harm.
Let the people for whom this is a splendid step forward have that step forward, hm?
People misread their own spells, honestly, all the time and GM's will flat-out get rules wrong when the DM's guide outright says the exact opposite or something. As much as we'd like to think they pour over the PHB like some tome of arcane knowledge and dedicate as much time to it as if they were studying for a bachlors degree, most people will probably look at the index, see a class, see a race, and go 'yea. That sounds cool.' and that will be it. I wonder how many casual players even read all the stat-blocks, not even the full entries, the stat blocks, for all the races in the base game. I assure you it's less than 100% and I wouldn't be shocked if it was closer to 50 or even 25%. Regulating ANYTHING to a side bar, no matter how important or whatever it is, practically ensures half of casual players will just... gloss it over.
Gonna bring up a point here, one that occured to me when working on that homebrew uniya sheet and in subsequent discussions.
Go read the half-elf block. Really read it. How often does the half-elf, as written, describe itself in terms of what a half-elf is as opposed to what a half-elf is not - namely, human or elf? The answer is effectively never. The entire species is described negatively, in terms of how it doesn't fit, what it is not, what it can't be. The whole thing is "you're Different, and we can't possibly allow that." Hell, the whole thing finishes its lore description with a sentence saying "both sides of the half-elf's heritage suspect it of being unfairly biased towards the other."
Looking at it through my imperfect understanding of the experiences of those who live such a dichotomy in real life? I'm astonished anybody plays half-elves. Their write-up is absolutely awful and whoever did it back in 2014 should be ashamed. Frankly I'm annoyed at myself that it took me this long to notice just how bleak, exclusionary, and punishing the half-elf write-up is. Even the half-orc write-up is stronger, though mostly because the half-orc write-up is actually describing plain old regular orcs in a way that gets by the "we can't let orcs be their own thing in D&D" Grognard Block that was in evidence in 2014.
I think we can both agree that what the PHB describes and how people actually PLAY the race/class aren't exactly 'entirely aligned'. The vast majority of half-orcs I've played with have been lovable hug-bugs that no one hates even if they're stupid and tend to rage. I can only speculate but I think the 2014 entry was based off of how they wanted people to play the race and how it had been presented in their other media, not off of how people were, ya know, actually playing half-elves.
Gonna bring up a point here, one that occured to me when working on that homebrew uniya sheet and in subsequent discussions.
Go read the half-elf block. Really read it. How often does the half-elf, as written, describe itself in terms of what a half-elf is as opposed to what a half-elf is not - namely, human or elf? The answer is effectively never. The entire species is described negatively, in terms of how it doesn't fit, what it is not, what it can't be. The whole thing is "you're Different, and we can't possibly allow that." Hell, the whole thing finishes its lore description with a sentence saying "both sides of the half-elf's heritage suspect it of being unfairly biased towards the other."
Looking at it through my imperfect understanding of the experiences of those who live such a dichotomy in real life? I'm astonished anybody plays half-elves. Their write-up is absolutely awful and whoever did it back in 2014 should be ashamed. Frankly I'm annoyed at myself that it took me this long to notice just how bleak, exclusionary, and punishing the half-elf write-up is. Even the half-orc write-up is stronger, though mostly because the half-orc write-up is actually describing plain old regular orcs in a way that gets by the "we can't let orcs be their own thing in D&D" Grognard Block that was in evidence in 2014.
I think we can both agree that what the PHB describes and how people actually PLAY the race/class aren't exactly 'entirely aligned'. The vast majority of half-orcs I've played with have been lovable hug-bugs that no one hates even if they're stupid and tend to rage. I can only speculate but I think the 2014 entry was based off of how they wanted people to play the race and how it had been presented in their other media, not off of how people were, ya know, actually playing half-elves.
Okay? But that says nothing about Yurei's very valid critique of the writing and the material itself.
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!
A cool 1st level feat would be one that let you get a feature from your other half-race. You could only take this at first level and only once and you must choose a race that isn’t your main race. So if you choose Elf as your main race then take this Half Race feat you could get pick Human and gain Resourceful and Skillful, or Pick Orc and gain Powerful Build and Relentless Endurance, or pick Etc and gain some of the Racial features to make you feel like truly a have race. This could be an option for those who want more than just the look like, and are willing to pay the feat price to gain more racial features.
A cool 1st level feat would be one that let you get a feature from your other half-race. You could only take this at first level and only once and you must choose a race that isn’t your main race. So if you choose Elf as your main race then take this Half Race feat you could get pick Human and gain Resourceful and Skillful, or Pick Orc and gain Powerful Build and Relentless Endurance, or pick Etc and gain some of the Racial features to make you feel like truly a have race. This could be an option for those who want more than just the look like, and are willing to pay the feat price to gain more racial features.
Lucky and Skilled, both level 1 Feats, work pretty well to mimic the Human racial abilities. Tough seems a decent way to reflect Orc heritage. The system allows for this already.
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!
A cool 1st level feat would be one that let you get a feature from your other half-race. You could only take this at first level and only once and you must choose a race that isn’t your main race. So if you choose Elf as your main race then take this Half Race feat you could get pick Human and gain Resourceful and Skillful, or Pick Orc and gain Powerful Build and Relentless Endurance, or pick Etc and gain some of the Racial features to make you feel like truly a have race. This could be an option for those who want more than just the look like, and are willing to pay the feat price to gain more racial features.
Lucky and Skilled, both level 1 Feats, work pretty well to mimic the Human racial abilities. Tough seems a decent way to reflect Orc heritage. The system allows for this already.
Nah, that’s a good way to play it for some races, but clearly not the same as a true “half race” feat. Lucky is a good supplement for Resourceful and skilled does cover the extra skill humans get. Tough is nothing like Orc features. You could say tough for half dwarf. Some of the other races are nigh impossible to replicant with this method. One of them gives limited flight. There is no feat for that. Also a half dragonborn would be a really tricky one to replicate with current feats.
Gonna bring up a point here, one that occured to me when working on that homebrew uniya sheet and in subsequent discussions.
Go read the half-elf block. Really read it. How often does the half-elf, as written, describe itself in terms of what a half-elf is as opposed to what a half-elf is not - namely, human or elf? The answer is effectively never. The entire species is described negatively, in terms of how it doesn't fit, what it is not, what it can't be. The whole thing is "you're Different, and we can't possibly allow that." Hell, the whole thing finishes its lore description with a sentence saying "both sides of the half-elf's heritage suspect it of being unfairly biased towards the other."
Looking at it through my imperfect understanding of the experiences of those who live such a dichotomy in real life? I'm astonished anybody plays half-elves. Their write-up is absolutely awful and whoever did it back in 2014 should be ashamed. Frankly I'm annoyed at myself that it took me this long to notice just how bleak, exclusionary, and punishing the half-elf write-up is. Even the half-orc write-up is stronger, though mostly because the half-orc write-up is actually describing plain old regular orcs in a way that gets by the "we can't let orcs be their own thing in D&D" Grognard Block that was in evidence in 2014.
I think we can both agree that what the PHB describes and how people actually PLAY the race/class aren't exactly 'entirely aligned'. The vast majority of half-orcs I've played with have been lovable hug-bugs that no one hates even if they're stupid and tend to rage. I can only speculate but I think the 2014 entry was based off of how they wanted people to play the race and how it had been presented in their other media, not off of how people were, ya know, actually playing half-elves.
Okay? But that says nothing about Yurei's very valid critique of the writing and the material itself.
Cause I agree with her?
A while back I had another topic in which I complained about how they were presenting tieflings in 1DD cause every tiefling I knew LOVED the 'societal outcast' aspect of their character and I felt that, by changing that, the designers were engaging in a fundimental misunderstanding of what drew people to the race in the first place. When it became clear that my experiences weren't an accurate representation I accepted that; but I do maintain that it's extremely important for the devs, and by extension the PHB, to present a version of the races that is at least semi-reflective of how people actually play them since that's usually what draws people to want to play the race in the first place. If the 5e PHB is not giving an accurate representation of how people actually play half-elves then, IMO, it should be changed to reflect how they're actually played.
In my recent campaign, I was sitting down at 'session zero' to help the players make characters. Speaking with one who hadn't played since 3rd edition, I was explaining what some of the newer race options were like, and how they were generally played according to the books. She stopped me and asked very earnestly:
'Do we really have to have racism in my fantasy escapism?'
'No. No we don't.'
I'm don't have anything to add here that would contribute more than the voices of the people who this directly affects the most. I just wanted you to know that you have support from people that hear you. If you ever write that game Dhauna, let me know. I would really like to see it.
For me the best race to half race is the ardling. Want a beastial headed, but don't want the celestial stuff, Half-ardling/Half Dwarf, or human, or gnome or halfling if you maybe want a short beast person thing. Or maybe you want the other way around, you want a more humanoid celestial, then half ardling half human could look more human and still get celestial power and angel wings, or dwarf of halfing again.
You realize that, with the current entry, a lot of people will likely just flat-out gloss it over when reading the entries and not even realize that the option exists in the first place, right? You're not going to get, well, anything done if people don't even realize it's a choice in the book because the entry for something that should be a huge deal is so tiny and under-developed.
Why would they do that? And if so, whose fault is it? The words are there to read, and sidebars are always very easy to spot. This isn't like the d20 test thing where the proposed book actively contradicts itself.
Do I, personally, like the proposed rule? No, not really. But it's better for people who've lived that experience, and my 100% white-as-milk hindus can hit the homebrew sheets for my own personal games just fine. Hell, I just did - ran out a homebrew block for Critical Role's uniya over the weekend in preparation for some folks eying them as PCs for future Exandria games. I get my fancy mixed-traits character, and that character isn't forced down the throats of people for whom mixed-traits characters are an uncomfortable reminder of past harm.
Let the people for whom this is a splendid step forward have that step forward, hm?
Please do not contact or message me.
Why does that only apply to mixed ancestry, and not the different races having distinct attributes based on their biology? Dwarves are being told to be not culturally, but inherently good at metalworking, but that's not an issue. Meanwhile, a kid of a dwarf and a human not being fully human or fully dwarven would be racist, then?
1.) Dwarves being genetically good at metalworking is still weird. It's in there, I imagine, because "DWARVES ARE SMITHS!" is one of the strongest culture/species associations in all of D&D and trying to sell grognards on the idea that dwarves are no better or worse as craftsmen than anyone else is not going to work. Personally I'd prefer if they simply had a predilection for craftsman's work and could choose which crafts they man'd, represented by a bonus floating tool proficiency, but eh.
2.) Thirteen pages of thread. Read them, please. The answer to your second question has been given dozens and dozens of times already.
Please do not contact or message me.
Gonna bring up a point here, one that occured to me when working on that homebrew uniya sheet and in subsequent discussions.
Go read the half-elf block. Really read it. How often does the half-elf, as written, describe itself in terms of what a half-elf is as opposed to what a half-elf is not - namely, human or elf? The answer is effectively never. The entire species is described negatively, in terms of how it doesn't fit, what it is not, what it can't be. The whole thing is "you're Different, and we can't possibly allow that." Hell, the whole thing finishes its lore description with a sentence saying "both sides of the half-elf's heritage suspect it of being unfairly biased towards the other."
Looking at it through my imperfect understanding of the experiences of those who live such a dichotomy in real life? I'm astonished anybody plays half-elves. Their write-up is absolutely awful and whoever did it back in 2014 should be ashamed. Frankly I'm annoyed at myself that it took me this long to notice just how bleak, exclusionary, and punishing the half-elf write-up is. Even the half-orc write-up is stronger, though mostly because the half-orc write-up is actually describing plain old regular orcs in a way that gets by the "we can't let orcs be their own thing in D&D" Grognard Block that was in evidence in 2014.
Please do not contact or message me.
The issue is that, in various settings, a kingdom/culture tends to also encompass its entire race too. While I'm sure we'd all agree that no one individual dwarf is inherently good at metalwork or whatever the problem is that most settings will only have one or two dwarven kingdoms and both will be very... dwarfy... and all dwarfs will have no choice but to have come from said kingdom(s). While humans get it 'better' even then they tend to be almost exclusively feudal european with, if they're lucky, asian or a Nordic (if you consider that different enough) variations. So if you meet a dwarf you can safely assume he's from the dwarf kingdom and adhires to the dwarf culture because, well, he doesn't exactly have much in the way of choices. Sure, some GM's won't do that, but to most it's just not something they thought of or cared about.
People misread their own spells, honestly, all the time and GM's will flat-out get rules wrong when the DM's guide outright says the exact opposite or something. As much as we'd like to think they pour over the PHB like some tome of arcane knowledge and dedicate as much time to it as if they were studying for a bachlors degree, most people will probably look at the index, see a class, see a race, and go 'yea. That sounds cool.' and that will be it. I wonder how many casual players even read all the stat-blocks, not even the full entries, the stat blocks, for all the races in the base game. I assure you it's less than 100% and I wouldn't be shocked if it was closer to 50 or even 25%. Regulating ANYTHING to a side bar, no matter how important or whatever it is, practically ensures half of casual players will just... gloss it over.
I think we can both agree that what the PHB describes and how people actually PLAY the race/class aren't exactly 'entirely aligned'. The vast majority of half-orcs I've played with have been lovable hug-bugs that no one hates even if they're stupid and tend to rage. I can only speculate but I think the 2014 entry was based off of how they wanted people to play the race and how it had been presented in their other media, not off of how people were, ya know, actually playing half-elves.
Okay? But that says nothing about Yurei's very valid critique of the writing and the material itself.
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!
A cool 1st level feat would be one that let you get a feature from your other half-race. You could only take this at first level and only once and you must choose a race that isn’t your main race. So if you choose Elf as your main race then take this Half Race feat you could get pick Human and gain Resourceful and Skillful, or Pick Orc and gain Powerful Build and Relentless Endurance, or pick Etc and gain some of the Racial features to make you feel like truly a have race. This could be an option for those who want more than just the look like, and are willing to pay the feat price to gain more racial features.
Lucky and Skilled, both level 1 Feats, work pretty well to mimic the Human racial abilities. Tough seems a decent way to reflect Orc heritage. The system allows for this already.
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!
Nah, that’s a good way to play it for some races, but clearly not the same as a true “half race” feat. Lucky is a good supplement for Resourceful and skilled does cover the extra skill humans get. Tough is nothing like Orc features. You could say tough for half dwarf. Some of the other races are nigh impossible to replicant with this method. One of them gives limited flight. There is no feat for that. Also a half dragonborn would be a really tricky one to replicate with current feats.
Cause I agree with her?
A while back I had another topic in which I complained about how they were presenting tieflings in 1DD cause every tiefling I knew LOVED the 'societal outcast' aspect of their character and I felt that, by changing that, the designers were engaging in a fundimental misunderstanding of what drew people to the race in the first place. When it became clear that my experiences weren't an accurate representation I accepted that; but I do maintain that it's extremely important for the devs, and by extension the PHB, to present a version of the races that is at least semi-reflective of how people actually play them since that's usually what draws people to want to play the race in the first place. If the 5e PHB is not giving an accurate representation of how people actually play half-elves then, IMO, it should be changed to reflect how they're actually played.
In my recent campaign, I was sitting down at 'session zero' to help the players make characters. Speaking with one who hadn't played since 3rd edition, I was explaining what some of the newer race options were like, and how they were generally played according to the books. She stopped me and asked very earnestly:
'Do we really have to have racism in my fantasy escapism?'
'No. No we don't.'
I'm don't have anything to add here that would contribute more than the voices of the people who this directly affects the most. I just wanted you to know that you have support from people that hear you. If you ever write that game Dhauna, let me know. I would really like to see it.
Much love.