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

[Yaarel]

I do, which is the best part of Sea Elf being right there, forever.

ELF SPECIES

TRITON SPECIES

TRITON/ELF MULTISPECIES

 

[DEFCON 1]

You're welcome to believe that what I want is entirely a product of my imagination, with no connection to anything outside of that (as denigrating and insulting as that is), but I don't have to go along with your dismissive attitude. You can make a rule set that focuses on simulation, to a greater or lesser degree. Designers have done it. How you or I feel about it is personal and subjective. That it exists is not.

By the way, despite my strong opinions about playstyles, I have never told anyone that what they want out of a game is merely a product of their own imagination. Seems a little harsh to me, although of course that's just my opinion.

I was not trying to use "imagination" in a way that was denoting what you were doing was "fake" (if that's what you got from it.) What I meant was that D&D is a game of imagination. Everything we do with the rules is translated into this imaginary world we have in our heads. None of us at the table are literally doing or seeing what is talked about... we are imagining it. That's the whole point of the game.

So when you use the term "verisimilitude"... the definition of it is "the appearance of being true or real." So you want rules in the game that to you appear real. Now they aren't actually real, but rather, you are imagining them to be. You are suspending your disbelief. That's by definition the point. But because of the fact that there is nothing real at the table (other than of course the papers, pencils, miniatures, maps, dice etc.)... that appearance of reality is entirely down to you. It's your imagination that says "If I roll over a 16 with this d20, then my character has swung a sword and hit the arm of this orc." And the reason why that works for you (if indeed that rule does) is because that rule is not doing anything to impinge upon your verisimilitude. For you... that d20 roll hits the sweet spot where you willing accept the belief of the sword hitting the orc.

But why that rule and not some other rule? I mean there's absolutely no one-for-one simulation of rolling a die equaling hitting someone with a sword-- we've completely made that up. But we accept it and believe in it. So why are we unwilling to accept other rules as not being "believable"? That's where I just shake my head... how someone is able and willing to believe these hundreds of different things as having the "appearance of being real" (even though they are 100% not)... and yet these other things they can't. And they spend pages upon pages upon pages going on and on about how the game is suffering because of it. Because they specifically just cannot or are unwilling to believe in its appearance of being real.

You ask me why I don't care about the game rules or have disdain for them... and the answer is that none of the game rules give me ANY verisimilitude to the point where I get mad at them existing or not existing, or angry with WotC for including or not including them. The rules are just... tools. That's it. I believe in them just enough to use them to get what I need. That's all. And I have so many rules in my toolbox already that needing WotC to provide for me the exact tool I think I need is nothing but a waste of my time. And I choose not to worry about the rules WotC provides, because I can just use a different one I already have when the time comes for its necessity.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I was not trying to use "imagination" in a way that was denoting what you were doing was "fake" (if that's what you got from it.) What I meant was that D&D is a game of imagination. Everything we do with the rules is translated into this imaginary world we have in our heads. None of us at the table are literally doing or seeing what is talked about... we are imagining it. That's the whole point of the game.

So when you use the term "verisimilitude"... the definition of it is "the appearance of being true or real." So you want rules in the game that to you appear real. Now they aren't actually real, but rather, you are imagining them to be. You are suspending your disbelief. That's by definition the point. But because of the fact that there is nothing real at the table (other than of course the papers, pencils, miniatures, maps, dice etc.)... that appearance of reality is entirely down to you. It's your imagination that says "If I roll over a 16 with this d20, then my character has swung a sword and hit the arm of this orc." And the reason why that works for you (if indeed that rule does) is because that rule is not doing anything to impinge upon your verisimilitude. For you... that d20 roll hits the sweet spot where you willing accept the belief of the sword hitting the orc.

But why that rule and not some other rule? I mean there's absolutely no one-for-one simulation of rolling a die equaling hitting someone with a sword-- we've completely made that up. But we accept it and believe in it. So why are we unwilling to accept other rules as not being "believable"? That's where I just shake my head... how someone is able and willing to believe these hundreds of different things as having the "appearance of being real"... and yet these other things they can't. And they spend pages upon pages upon pages going on and on about how the game is suffering because of it. Because they specifically just cannot or are unwilling to believe in its appearance of being real.

You ask me why I don't care about the game rules or have disdain for them... and the answer is that none of the game rules give me ANY verisimilitude to the point where I get mad at them existing or not existing, or angry with WotC for including or not including them. The rules are just... tools. That's it. And I have so many rules in my toolbox already that needing WotC to provide for me the exact tool I think I need is nothing but a waste of my time. And I choose not to worry about the rules WotC provides, because I can just use a different one I already have when the time comes for its necessity.

Ok. I get your your perspective now. I don't really see why you bother getting involved in discussions about rules you don’t care about (you certainly can't say I don't care, for example), but to each their own.

 

[Vaalingrade]

And as a mixed person myself, I would ask that you kindly don't tell me I have to accept the Half-breed naming convention, or claim that it isn't a problem for a society to label a mixed people "Half-breeds".

When did I do this?

Please point it out.

Because I have said both options are bad and they should do a good one instead of either. Like this entire time.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Ok. I get your your perspective now. I don't really see why you bother getting involved in discussions about rules you don’t care about (you certainly can't say I don't care, for example), but to each their own.

I get involved in discussions here on EN World because arguing about D&D is fun. Same as I'm sure as most other people. I'd like to think I might actually change minds in the process... but we both know that's not really true. But I don't actually get involved in threads I don't care about... I get involved with the threads where either I'm interested in the topic, or someone posts something I think is just wrong. Either a poster is using faulty logic (in my estimation) that I just have a uncontrollable urge to try and tamp down... they are being deliberately insulting to the designers of this game for no other reason that they think their opinion of what is right and wrong with the game allows them to do that (which again I am urged to tamp down)... or because they are getting themselves worked up about something that I don't think deserves nearly the energy that they are giving it, so I try to give an unasked-for hand to try and help them see things a little differently so as to not get so bent out of shape over something that doesn't deserve it (before that person ultimately devolves into the previous type of poster.)

No different than anyone else here on the boards, really.

 

[Mecheon]

Currently, Half-elves are not significantly mechanically unique in a way that warrants their own entry.

I think this ultimately is the reason Half Elves are getting removed. On a mechanical and conceptual level they, by definition, run into overlap with humans and elves, so it makes the default player options less interesting or diverse. Especially given the Big D&D things around tend to go for the wilder choices

Much worse in earlier editions of the game, where half the default player races are "Some variety of human or elf" and probably another reason tieflings in particular caught on so well. I get people like their history, but if selling this as "Here's the first thing to buy" you kind of want to cast a wider net of player options, and D&D's "You only get the interesting player options by buying in harder" has always been a bit, eh.

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.

It remains my headcanon that any Giant empire that tried to have the Ordning stick around as a thing inevitable fails due to the fact the system just, ain't designed well

 

[Remathilis]

I think this ultimately is the reason Half Elves are getting removed. On a mechanical and conceptual level they, by definition, run into overlap with humans and elves, so it makes the default player options less interesting or diverse. Especially given the Big D&D things around tend to go for the wilder choices

Much worse in earlier editions of the game, where half the default player races are "Some variety of human or elf" and probably another reason tieflings in particular caught on so well. I get people like their history, but if selling this as "Here's the first thing to buy" you kind of want to cast a wider net of player options, and D&D's "You only get the interesting player options by buying in harder" has always been a bit, eh.


It remains my headcanon that any Giant empire that tried to have the Ordning stick around as a thing inevitable fails due to the fact the system just, ain't designed well

Honestly, the half-elf race hasn't had a strong mechanical niche since 2e. Once upon a time, they were a more flexible elf: they got a few elf traits (infravision and 30% resistance to sleep and charm) but the big thing was greater class and multi-class options than an elf. Once class options were decoupled from race (and humans got some real racial traits) they were an afterthought race. 3e half-elves were awful, and 3.5 added benefits to make them diplomacers because bards or something. Idk.

 

[Scott Christian]

I think they should make a way for any "____"-kin or half-kin or any other mix to happen. But in order for this to happen they either need to make an entire 1,000 page book regarding all of them. (There are soooooo many combinations!)

Or

Make a standard rule that allows a mixture of the elements; however, a way where the PC cannot gain an advantage just by being this mixed species. I propose you get to pick two feats from each race for a total of four. But you have no bonuses to your starting abilities. No plus to strength or con or dex, etc.

 

[SkidAce]

Honestly, the half-elf race hasn't had a strong mechanical niche since 2e. Once upon a time, they were a more flexible elf: they got a few elf traits (infravision and 30% resistance to sleep and charm) but the big thing was greater class and multi-class options than an elf. Once class options were decoupled from race (and humans got some real racial traits) they were an afterthought race. 3e half-elves were awful, and 3.5 added benefits to make them diplomacers because bards or something. Idk.

Interesting sidebar from 2e:

Because of the class and multiclass options, and versatility...in my world's pre history the "half-elf" was the Progenitor race, and split into elves and humans. Thus a half elf was a throw back to the Eldar.

 

[Azzy]

Interesting sidebar from 2e:

That quote didn't come through.

Because of the class and multiclass options, and versatility...in my world's pre history the "half-elf" was the Progenitor race, and split into elves and humans. Thus a half elf was a throw back to the Eldar.

That's pretty neat!