The thing about Dex and Con is I think it's far less hard to imagine an extremely klutzy elf and a very dextrous dwarf, or a very hardy goblin and a sickness-prone goliath.
And there’s no possible way an orc who doesn’t work out could have less muscle power than a goblin who does?
I'm in the camp of "species is not my preferred term but it's ultimately a whatever call." I understand the reasons behind the change and don't have a problem with them.
Bringing it back to ability scores: to me, the ONLY ability score which should be affected by species is Strength (as I've said before). Yes, this is a game with wizards and dragons and gods. No, I refuse to accept that the strongest kobold is equal in strength to the strongest goliath. (And don't tell me the ability scores are pure abstractions because that kobold with the 20 STR can, by game rules, carry as much as weight as the goliath with 20 STR. Which is flat out absurd.)
Actually, a Goliath has the little giant trait, so they can carry more than a kobold. Double, in fact. And even with a 20 str, a kobold has disadvantage with heavy weapons. So there will be some significant differences in play between the two, even if they have the same str.
I'm in the camp of "species is not my preferred term but it's ultimately a whatever call." I understand the reasons behind the change and don't have a problem with them.
Bringing it back to ability scores: to me, the ONLY ability score which should be affected by species is Strength (as I've said before). Yes, this is a game with wizards and dragons and gods. No, I refuse to accept that the strongest kobold is equal in strength to the strongest goliath. (And don't tell me the ability scores are pure abstractions because that kobold with the 20 STR can, by game rules, carry as much as weight as the goliath with 20 STR. Which is flat out absurd.)
Actually, a Goliath has the little giant trait, so they can carry more than a kobold. Double, in fact. And even with a 20 str, a kobold has disadvantage with heavy weapons. So there will be some significant differences in play between the two, even if they have the same str.
Well, that aspect of heavy weapons will probably be gone in the next PHB. But yeah, the lift, push, carry traits on races/species like orcs, goliaths, and minotaurs is a good way to reflect greater average muscle power without getting into ASI’s.
I prefer just calling them races. It's quite annoying that nowadays folks don't understand that words can have multiple definitions/usages in different contexts. I don't like how science-y the term "species" sounds nor see the need for a word change. I'll just keep calling them races personally.
You do know your post is simultaneously complaining about people who do not understand that words can have different usages… and you complaining about a word for one specific usage while you ignore other, older usages of the word?
Here is the thing, folks would have been upset regardless. Fifty years of usage is hard to overcome. Wizards decided they would rather abandon a word used by the incredibly racist Gary Gygax, and used by Gygax in furtherance of his active attempts to inject his small-minded bigotry into the game. They could have acknowledged the game’s racist history and tried to rehabilitate the word; that would have been fine. They could do what they did and choose a different word - also fine. It really is not something worth getting all worked up over - though, I personally suspect most of the folks getting worked up about the language change are doing so less because they care about linguistics and more to dog whistle.
how am I ignoring other uses of the word? I didn't deny other uses of any words. Show me where I did such a thing.
You are the one getting worked up here. I was calm in my post and that was the only one I made, unlike you as you chose to instead just accuse me of bigotry. I just simply said "I don't like this change so I shall ignore it".
Most of the complaints about strength can be solved without reference to species: just tie the ability score modifier to size. If you (for whatever reason) have a Small human, it's going to have a low Strength; if you have a Medium halfling, it's going to have a normal Strength. I would not expect people to be offended by "someone 3' tall is probably weaker than someone 5' tall".
Moving some features out of racial traits and on to backgrounds is good, but it's not enough. It doesn't matter if we're just being "a little bit" reliant on a racist worldview for game mechanics. The idea that the races are irrevocably, biologically different in a way that matters to game design is rotten to its core. Any fragment that is allowed to remain will poison everything around it.
Hyperbolic posts like this are almost as nonproductive as those actively trying to preserve the problematic aspects of the game.
The real problems are things like “this race can never be as smart as another” or “this race is always evil.” Other, common sense mechanical elements are obviously sensible. A rabbit-folk should be better at jumping than a human; a sea elf should be able to swim better. Subterranean or nocturnal creatures should be better at seeing in the dark.
That is what Wizards is doing - rather than focus on penalties (“always worse at X” “always such and such morality”), they are focusing on giving everyone additive bonuses unique to their identity. That is the key difference between the Gygax system (which should be removed) and what Wizards is doing - these are things that add to the creatures, and not take away. Crossing the line to “let us also remove the additives also” is when you start moving away from the ultimate goal of positive representations of different species, and end up with a situation where your choice of species is little more than a coat of meaningless paint.
I read all of your replies in this thread and I am once again reminded of why I set notifications for every time you post! I also didn't know all this about Tolkien although I did know about his ridicule of the Nazis!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM for life by choice, biggest fan of D&D specifically.
The thing about Dex and Con is I think it's far less hard to imagine an extremely klutzy elf and a very dextrous dwarf, or a very hardy goblin and a sickness-prone goliath.
And there’s no possible way an orc who doesn’t work out could have less muscle power than a goblin who does?
Again, by itself, sure, a goblin could have a higher strength than an orc. But I'm talking about max score possible, not variations. My homebrew rule is that gnomes, goblins, kobolds and halflings can't have higher than 16 STR without magical aid, temporary or permanent. But even then, it's perfectly possible to have a halfling with 16 STR and an orc with 9. My objection is, as I said, thinking it's absurd that the strongest kobold would be equal to the strongest goliath. I'm talking about maximums, not saying the Small-sized species can NEVER have a high STR score than the Medium-sized ones.
Most of the complaints about strength can be solved without reference to species: just tie the ability score modifier to size. If you (for whatever reason) have a Small human, it's going to have a low Strength; if you have a Medium halfling, it's going to have a normal Strength. I would not expect people to be offended by "someone 3' tall is probably weaker than someone 5' tall".
I'm not a supporter of choosing the size of your character regardless of species. I know it's in the next version, but I don't like it.
The thing about Dex and Con is I think it's far less hard to imagine an extremely klutzy elf and a very dextrous dwarf, or a very hardy goblin and a sickness-prone goliath.
And there’s no possible way an orc who doesn’t work out could have less muscle power than a goblin who does?
Again, by itself, sure, a goblin could have a higher strength than an orc. But I'm talking about max score possible, not variations. My homebrew rule is that gnomes, goblins, kobolds and halflings can't have higher than 16 STR without magical aid, temporary or permanent. But even then, it's perfectly possible to have a halfling with 16 STR and an orc with 9. My objection is, as I said, thinking it's absurd that the strongest kobold would be equal to the strongest goliath. I'm talking about maximums, not saying the Small-sized species can NEVER have a high STR score than the Medium-sized ones.
And with the "powerful build" features, they're not. They objectively bring far more muscle power to the table, just not in the explosive strength context of combat and saves. It's not a perfect simulation, but D&D has never been a simulation game.
Most of the complaints about strength can be solved without reference to species: just tie the ability score modifier to size. If you (for whatever reason) have a Small human, it's going to have a low Strength; if you have a Medium halfling, it's going to have a normal Strength. I would not expect people to be offended by "someone 3' tall is probably weaker than someone 5' tall".
I'm not a supporter of choosing the size of your character regardless of species. I know it's in the next version, but I don't like it.
My point is: biological differences in strength really are about size. There's no reason a 6'/180# human, a 6'/180# elf, and a 6'/180# orc should have different Strength (or Dexterity).
Panta, I'm fine with that. Again, I don't have a problem with variation or even fun/unexpected contrasts (a goblin stronger than an orc! a dwarf more dexterous than an elf!).
Most of the complaints about strength can be solved without reference to species: just tie the ability score modifier to size. If you (for whatever reason) have a Small human, it's going to have a low Strength; if you have a Medium halfling, it's going to have a normal Strength. I would not expect people to be offended by "someone 3' tall is probably weaker than someone 5' tall".
I'm not a supporter of choosing the size of your character regardless of species. I know it's in the next version, but I don't like it.
I really dislike this as well. I don't get a vote though.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Given that for combined lineage characters you average out the lifespan of the parents, half elves do maintain a fair bit of their core theme as they live significantly longer than humans but significantly less than elves. And appearance is between you and the DM That said, maintaining the elven darkvision and charm/sleep resistance while not trancing (potentially with the larger spiritual questions that raises depending on what lore you use) did add something extra to it. If it really bugs you in that case, you can just keep using the current block though, so while I agree it's a bit of a thematic loss on that particular front, overall I view the material as a net gain for giving a simple and permissive answer to the general question of "can X and Y races/species have kids together?". And half-orcs definitely aren't needed as a discreet block now that orcs have finally been normalized as part of the PHB.
As for half-dragons, you can spin a dragonborn block as one if you want, and just apply the "double lifespan" bit from the MM if you want that vibe and the DM is okay with it. There's pretty much nothing else in the MM section for them that isn't covered by the Dragonborn block.
Everyone's just a human with a spot of flavor now.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Everyone's just a human with a spot of flavor now.
They haven't changed anything that dramatically on the mechanical end. We'll see how much official lore and such we get to help give different vibes in roleplay, but that's a separate issue.
I dont think they had to. Everything is the same age, and the same speed, and can be the same size. You can pick your feat and stats from background. There's not much left to set something aside from something else other than whatever backstory you choose to give your character. Mechanically, they are mostly the same.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Bringing it back to ability scores: to me, the ONLY ability score which should be affected by species is Strength (as I've said before). Yes, this is a game with wizards and dragons and gods. No, I refuse to accept that the strongest kobold is equal in strength to the strongest goliath. (And don't tell me the ability scores are pure abstractions because that kobold with the 20 STR can, by game rules, carry as much as weight as the goliath with 20 STR. Which is flat out absurd.)
This is a convenience thing. Because the weight of equipment should obviously also be related to size. Plate armour for a kobold would weigh a lot less than plate armour for a goliath, a one-person tent big enough for a kobold would be smaller and lighter than a one-person tent big enough for a goliath, etc.. etc... The problem though, is that different types of equipment don't all scale the same. A greatsword is essentially linear in scale so a 3' tall kobolds sword would be half the weight as a 6' tall goliath's sword. In contrast armour scales by surface area which scales as the square so the kobold's plate armour would be 1/4 the weight as the goliath's armour. And food/rations/potions scale by volume which scales to the third power so a healing potion for a kobold would weigh 1/8 as much as a healing potion for the goliath.
So you end up in a situation where you either have to duplicate all items for each different Size of character you allow in the game, or require all characters to be the same overall size, or just ignore scaling by size for carry capacity and equipment weight.
Meh I'm just going to use Race. Why? Merely because I have used it for decades and it feels right. It is only a problem if you let it be a problem an thus you can choose not to use it in "your" game. Heck given how one dnd or dnd 2024 has been tested and the things they have suggested I think I'll just stick to the original 5e.
I dont think they had to. Everything is the same age, and the same speed, and can be the same size. You can pick your feat and stats from background. There's not much left to set something aside from something else other than whatever backstory you choose to give your character. Mechanically, they are mostly the same.
Personally don't think anything has changed mechanically with ability scores moving to background (even if I don't like it) but that's with hoping the size choices are just between small (preferred choice) and medium. However I do think some of the appeal of overcoming those racial differences will be lost, in saying that my first character was a kobold with sunlight sensitivity from volos purely for that trait
Also wouldn't be surprised if standardizing species was a move towards videogame logic to help the vtt programmers streamline their work
I dont think they had to. Everything is the same age, and the same speed, and can be the same size. You can pick your feat and stats from background. There's not much left to set something aside from something else other than whatever backstory you choose to give your character. Mechanically, they are mostly the same.
Pretty sure we still have long-live races, they just made human standard the minimum. And if you review the UA Gnomes and Halflings are Small only, most of the others are Medium only. And they certainly have not gotten rid of racial/species features. So no, they aren't standardizing everything to a single template, that is an objectively incorrect assertion.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
And there’s no possible way an orc who doesn’t work out could have less muscle power than a goblin who does?
Actually, a Goliath has the little giant trait, so they can carry more than a kobold. Double, in fact.
And even with a 20 str, a kobold has disadvantage with heavy weapons.
So there will be some significant differences in play between the two, even if they have the same str.
Well, that aspect of heavy weapons will probably be gone in the next PHB. But yeah, the lift, push, carry traits on races/species like orcs, goliaths, and minotaurs is a good way to reflect greater average muscle power without getting into ASI’s.
how am I ignoring other uses of the word? I didn't deny other uses of any words. Show me where I did such a thing.
You are the one getting worked up here. I was calm in my post and that was the only one I made, unlike you as you chose to instead just accuse me of bigotry. I just simply said "I don't like this change so I shall ignore it".
Er ek geng, þat er í þeim skóm er ek valda.
UwU
Most of the complaints about strength can be solved without reference to species: just tie the ability score modifier to size. If you (for whatever reason) have a Small human, it's going to have a low Strength; if you have a Medium halfling, it's going to have a normal Strength. I would not expect people to be offended by "someone 3' tall is probably weaker than someone 5' tall".
I read all of your replies in this thread and I am once again reminded of why I set notifications for every time you post! I also didn't know all this about Tolkien although I did know about his ridicule of the Nazis!
DM for life by choice, biggest fan of D&D specifically.
Again, by itself, sure, a goblin could have a higher strength than an orc. But I'm talking about max score possible, not variations. My homebrew rule is that gnomes, goblins, kobolds and halflings can't have higher than 16 STR without magical aid, temporary or permanent. But even then, it's perfectly possible to have a halfling with 16 STR and an orc with 9. My objection is, as I said, thinking it's absurd that the strongest kobold would be equal to the strongest goliath. I'm talking about maximums, not saying the Small-sized species can NEVER have a high STR score than the Medium-sized ones.
I'm not a supporter of choosing the size of your character regardless of species. I know it's in the next version, but I don't like it.
And with the "powerful build" features, they're not. They objectively bring far more muscle power to the table, just not in the explosive strength context of combat and saves. It's not a perfect simulation, but D&D has never been a simulation game.
My point is: biological differences in strength really are about size. There's no reason a 6'/180# human, a 6'/180# elf, and a 6'/180# orc should have different Strength (or Dexterity).
Panta, I'm fine with that. Again, I don't have a problem with variation or even fun/unexpected contrasts (a goblin stronger than an orc! a dwarf more dexterous than an elf!).
I really dislike this as well. I don't get a vote though.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
Given that for combined lineage characters you average out the lifespan of the parents, half elves do maintain a fair bit of their core theme as they live significantly longer than humans but significantly less than elves. And appearance is between you and the DM That said, maintaining the elven darkvision and charm/sleep resistance while not trancing (potentially with the larger spiritual questions that raises depending on what lore you use) did add something extra to it. If it really bugs you in that case, you can just keep using the current block though, so while I agree it's a bit of a thematic loss on that particular front, overall I view the material as a net gain for giving a simple and permissive answer to the general question of "can X and Y races/species have kids together?". And half-orcs definitely aren't needed as a discreet block now that orcs have finally been normalized as part of the PHB.
As for half-dragons, you can spin a dragonborn block as one if you want, and just apply the "double lifespan" bit from the MM if you want that vibe and the DM is okay with it. There's pretty much nothing else in the MM section for them that isn't covered by the Dragonborn block.
Everyone's just a human with a spot of flavor now.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
They haven't changed anything that dramatically on the mechanical end. We'll see how much official lore and such we get to help give different vibes in roleplay, but that's a separate issue.
I dont think they had to. Everything is the same age, and the same speed, and can be the same size. You can pick your feat and stats from background. There's not much left to set something aside from something else other than whatever backstory you choose to give your character. Mechanically, they are mostly the same.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
This is a convenience thing. Because the weight of equipment should obviously also be related to size. Plate armour for a kobold would weigh a lot less than plate armour for a goliath, a one-person tent big enough for a kobold would be smaller and lighter than a one-person tent big enough for a goliath, etc.. etc... The problem though, is that different types of equipment don't all scale the same. A greatsword is essentially linear in scale so a 3' tall kobolds sword would be half the weight as a 6' tall goliath's sword. In contrast armour scales by surface area which scales as the square so the kobold's plate armour would be 1/4 the weight as the goliath's armour. And food/rations/potions scale by volume which scales to the third power so a healing potion for a kobold would weigh 1/8 as much as a healing potion for the goliath.
So you end up in a situation where you either have to duplicate all items for each different Size of character you allow in the game, or require all characters to be the same overall size, or just ignore scaling by size for carry capacity and equipment weight.
Meh I'm just going to use Race. Why? Merely because I have used it for decades and it feels right. It is only a problem if you let it be a problem an thus you can choose not to use it in "your" game. Heck given how one dnd or dnd 2024 has been tested and the things they have suggested I think I'll just stick to the original 5e.
Personally don't think anything has changed mechanically with ability scores moving to background (even if I don't like it) but that's with hoping the size choices are just between small (preferred choice) and medium. However I do think some of the appeal of overcoming those racial differences will be lost, in saying that my first character was a kobold with sunlight sensitivity from volos purely for that trait
Also wouldn't be surprised if standardizing species was a move towards videogame logic to help the vtt programmers streamline their work
Pretty sure we still have long-live races, they just made human standard the minimum. And if you review the UA Gnomes and Halflings are Small only, most of the others are Medium only. And they certainly have not gotten rid of racial/species features. So no, they aren't standardizing everything to a single template, that is an objectively incorrect assertion.