D&D (2024) Do you think they will add more races to PHB2024 to make up for dropping other stuff?

[Mirrorrorrim]

D&D players roughly divide into two camps:

1. Everything in the game must have a unique mechanical expression. If it doesn't, it doesn't exist.

2. Rules and Lore can disconnect and things can be refluffed into other things.

The first group is the one who is always looking for new options, like a dedicated Psionics system, katanas on the weapon table, and a witch class or subclass. The latter is fine making a crossbow into a gun or a bard is a warlord. It's not an either/or but a slide scale. Anyway, I think this is coming down to those who feel hybrids should have unique mechanics vs those who are willing to refluff. I admit I usually fall into the first group but with the sheer volume of hybrid species (or the potential problems with a build a bear system) I'm going to accept a refluff system.

Agreed, and it's frustrating for the mechanical-only crowd to call the refluff-friendly rules racist (which is what is being done by by using real world racist labeling like the One Drop Rule. It's inflammatory rhetoric that is inaccurate.) The mechanics are not the only factor in determining species. I feel that it's not even more important. I think that is the big divide here. The refluff crowd sees the ability to have any hybrid as a boon to the narrative, opening mixed species options, and it's not erasing anything.

Here are my concerns leading to my belief that another pass at the "Children of Different Humanoid Kinds" rules would be appropriate:

1. It's weird to have "Half-elves" as the only hybrid race option. THAT sounds exclusionary. Note that some Half-elf supporters are fine with replacing Half-orcs stats with Orc stats, which suggests that it is merely a personal preference for a particular species, rather than a moral argument. Doing it for one hybrid race suggests that the same treatment should be given to all hybrids. But it is far beyond the scope of the game to create all the unique Half-species entries (including building lore for hundreds of hybrid combos), or to create a build-a-species system. These won't fit into the PH and wouldn't be able to take every other species in other books into consideration.
2. Currently, Half-elves are not significantly mechanically unique in a way that warrants their own entry. When compared to the Elf, the variation is less than the elf lineages. They lose Trance and they get Skill Versatilty instead of Keen Senses (Perception). That is so minor. Even in BG3, half-elves are getting the Elf spells. It's almost a cosmetic variant. As I pointed out elsewhere, "Elf-kin" could totally be a subrace option under Elf if really necessary. Either way, if the "Half-elf" were to be included in the PH on its own, it would need to reimagined like the rest of the PH species. Would updating the mechanics erase the earlier Half-elf? No. So there should be no argument against changing it at all. Just compare the playtest Human to the earlier Humans. Though they look very different it doesn't erase the earlier variants. There is NO erasure, just a different focus in the next book. The Half-elf entry will still be in our 2014 books and in DDB.
3. I would hazard a guess that if the "Children of Different Humanoid Kinds" rules became reality, and was implemented in DDB, we'd see so much more variety in characters built, even if the mechanics were not unique, because people care more about the story of their characters. I think elf/human hybrids will still be in a slight majority due to historical relevance (and they are traditionally pretty/charismatic), but being able to look like a Wood Elf, while have Forest Gnome abilities sounds pretty damn cool for people who don't want to play a Small character. Or if you want to look like a Dwarf but have Orc abilities, be a Dorc. It is a worthy effort to create the new Hybrid-friendly rules to OPEN more options, as a VARIANT for existing hybrids and non-represented hybrids. Every species in the UA is a variant of what came before in earlier books. Again, the earlier variants are not being erased.

 

[DEFCON 1]

True, your class and subclass does provide your character with 20 levels worth of game mechanics. You got me wondering if Level Up's Origin mechanics are less sucky than 5e's. Heritage covers a given people's 'genetics' while giving you what are essentially two 'feats' at 1st and 10th level. Then there is Culture which covers the make-up for a particular society, and the culture you are a part of doesn't have to be tied to your Heritage.

Yes, it is less sucky. Just how like Baby Geniuses is less sucky than Baby Geniuses 2.

 

[Corinnguard]

Yes, it is less sucky. Just how like Baby Geniuses is less sucky than Baby Geniuses 2.

Level Up = 5e: The Sequel.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yes, it is less sucky. Just how like Baby Geniuses is less sucky than Baby Geniuses 2.

Starting to wonder at this point what it is you actually want from a rulebook, as you seem to believe that rules are bad or at best don't matter.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Feels like you are making things up at this point. The Hadozee never loved Slavery in the recent Spelljammer box

I said the company loves using slavery as a backstory. As in they use it all the damn time for absolutely no good reason. In that post, I didn't even use the word 'Hadozee', so I'm confused as to where you even got there.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Agreed, and it's frustrating for the mechanical-only crowd to call the refluff-friendly rules racist (which is what is being done by by using real world racist labeling like the One Drop Rule. It's inflammatory rhetoric that is inaccurate.)

I can get you not agreeing, but don't tell me wrong about things that exist and effect my life. 'Pick one' is a BIG thing for a mulatto in America.

 

[Yaarel]

I said the company loves using slavery as a backstory. As in they use it all the damn time for absolutely no good reason. In that post, I didn't even use the word 'Hadozee', so I'm confused as to where you even got there.

Same thought crossed my mind with regard to the Giant "ordning". I mean really? Yet an other D&D "racism is fun" trope in all its blatancy.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Starting to wonder at this point what it is you actually want from a rulebook, as you seem to believe that rules are bad or at best don't matter.

I want rules that are somewhat easy to use and somewhat fun to play. They don't have to be the greatest board game rules in the world, because I have plenty of other board games that will be better board game experiences than anything WotC could attach to the roleplaying inherent in D&D.

D&D is not a board game. It shouldn't be treated or held up like it was a board game. It is only somewhat board game-adjacent. D&D combat needs to be a somewhat entertaining board game mini-game that produces results that can align themselves to a narrative... a narrative which can then be built upon by what the players all choose to do. Because what players choose to do is the roleplaying and is the entire point of the experience (in my opinion.)

D&D is about players choosing to do things in a fantasy setting to create a story... and when there are questions about those choices... there are board game rules to help determine the results for the players to then continue on creating their story. And those board game rules do not have to be intricate, do not have to be elaborate, do not have to be balanced on the edge of a knife, nor aligned to the narrative on a one-for-one basis. They just have to give us potentially interesting results. Results more interesting and more dramatic than if we were to ask the player to come up with an answer themselves. And the players then 'Yes, And' those results and continue building their narrative.

So long as the board game rules give us an answer to those questions players ask and result in a jumping off point for the narrative and roleplaying to continue from that point (and can hopefully be somewhat fun to get via the dice rolling and number crunching)... then we're good. We're playing D&D.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I want rules that are somewhat easy to use and somewhat fun to play. They don't have to be the greatest board game rules in the world, because I have plenty of other board games that will be better board game experiences than anything WotC could attach to the roleplaying inherent in D&D.

D&D is not a board game. It shouldn't be treated or held up like it was a board game. It is only somewhat board game-adjacent. D&D combat needs to be a somewhat entertaining board game mini-game that produces results that can align themselves to a narrative... a narrative which can then be built upon by what the players all choose to do. Because what players choose to do is the roleplaying and is the entire point of the experience (in my opinion.)

D&D is about players choosing to do things in a fantasy setting to create a story... and when there are questions about those choices... there are board game rules to help determine the results for the players to then continue on creating their story. And those board game rules do not have to be intricate, do not have to be elaborate, do not have to be balanced on the edge of a knife, nor aligned to the narrative on a one-for-one basis. They just have to give us potentially interesting results. Results more interesting and more dramatic than if we were to ask the player to come up with an answer themselves. And the players then 'Yes, And' those results and continue building their narrative.

So long as the board game rules give us an answer to those questions players ask and result in a jumping off point for the narrative and roleplaying to continue from that point (and can hopefully be somewhat fun to get via the dice rolling and number crunching)... then we're good. We're playing D&D.

I don't agree. I really want more out a rulebook I'm paying for than easy to use and somewhat fun to play. I certainly don't want the rules to intentionally create dramatic outcomes. That's for the DM and the players to determine.

 

[Corinnguard]

Which is what Level Up is trying to do while being somewhat compatible with 5e.