Jeremy Crawford's comments on the direction races are taking going forward in D&D (https://www.enworld.org/threads/wotcs-jeremy-crawford-on-d-d-races-going-forward.672716/).
The short of it: They're slowly heading towards treating all things which are labeled "humanoid" to drop Intelligence debuffs and the mandatory evil alignment, like orcs, drow, and Vistani (which is a gypsy analogue in Ravenloft) as being on their radar for some changes that recognized a wider range of morality, or "Any creature with the Humanoid type should have the full capacity to be any alignmnet, i.e., they should have free will and souls."
They will likely also reclassify some "humanoids" in the monster manual like Gnolls to be "Fiends" and keep the mandatory evil alignment, as that aspect is directly sourced from "spawned hyenas who fed on demon-touched rotten meat". Maybe similar for minotaurs. But if a particular setting does not use that type of origin story for something like gnolls, it might keep them as humanoid but without the mandatory evil alignment.
Will they still get the strength and Con buff?
Quote from: oggsmash;1134250Will they still get the strength and Con buff?
They said they are heading more in the direction of Player's Guide to Wildemount, which says "Exandrian orcs are not bound to commit acts of evil by nature. An orc character has the following racial traits...Ability Score Increase. Your Strength score increases by 2, and your Constitution score increases by 1." They also get Darkvision, Aggressive, Powerful Build, and Primal Intuition.
So...all the good to being a raging barbarian culture, but no drawbacks?
Quote from: oggsmash;1134254So...all the good to being a raging barbarian culture, but no drawbacks?
Pretty much, though they also don't have the "Menancing" trait that grants them an automatic proficiency in Intimidation. It's more in line with all the other PHB races, which also don't get negatives to ability scores, just positives.
No tone down I can see. I wonder what spurred the change?
I had no idea any 5e humanoids had a mandatory evil alignment?!
No INT debuffs - heh.
Honestly i prefer race as class, but for people that like them, there are already very few negatives on 5e races so this doesnt surprise me. Though, they might wanna take a few of the positives of the yuan-ti
Why is it ok for fiends to be inherently evil though? Even Satan was a fallen angel, he was not created evil. And there's lots of fiction where a demon gets saved.
Quote from: S'mon;1134259I had no idea any 5e humanoids had a mandatory evil alignment?!
In older versions of D&D, demi-humans (elves, dwarves, etc) were the good guys and humanoids where evil. Being evil was the thing that separated the two groups. But players demanded that they be able to play the monster and are now demanding that the monsters aren't monsters anymore.
If you read the comments on this thread, it's clear that all these people want to play the most super special, trope-defying character possible. We're at the point now where the only way to subvert a trope is to not subvert it.
So glad I'm not buying any of their shit.
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1134266Why is it ok for fiends to be inherently evil though? Even Satan was a fallen angel, he was not created evil. And there's lots of fiction where a demon gets saved.
5e changed all the alignment-oriented spells and magical powers to detect and impact, "aberrations, celestials, elementals, fey, fiends, and undead." As to why those things are inherently good or evil, that's tied to the fluff description of them. I think you could change the alignment of those things, but I think it would be more difficult than just using persuasion. You'd need magic.
Quote from: hedgehobbit;1134267We're at the point now where the only way to subvert a trope is to not subvert it.
I kinda agree. I am playing a good-aligned halfling druid in a Ravenloft campaign where all the other players are neutral or even tend slightly evil (though the DM didn't set it up that way). And, he's got a solid good compass and is good-natured and light-hearted. It comes off as almost edgelord to not be evil and edgy in that group. At one point I wanted to take some foes prisoner and turn them into the local town guard to deal with, and everyone else looked at me like I had just said, "Let's all roast and eat the orc babies".
Quote from: Mistwell;1134275...I am playing a good-aligned halfling druid...
I've always thought D&D's alignment system was downright idiotic, but that statement just seems
so wrong!
Quote from: SavageSchemer;1134285I've always thought D&D's alignment system was downright idiotic, but that statement just seems so wrong!
He's a small man in a big world who wanted to be able to turn into a big bear.
This is a combination of forced "balancing" and hamfisted attempts to address "problematic cultural stereotyping in the fantasy genre" as one commenter put it. It's basically "Intelligence penalties are racist".
I hate this direction overall, and it just reeks of "participation trophy" culture, were people losing cuz they're feeble and incompetent is not OK, so we have to undermine the accomplishments of capable individuals in order to make weak people feel good about themselves. Or, in terms of the game rules, no humanoid now gets a penalty and all the bonuses are seriously toned down and sameyfied, so that there's very little difference between character races, and no race is truly superior to any other. Just superficially different, with a minor edge at most.
And don't get me wrong, I can understand balance concerns and overpowered races can be an issue. I just wish that they could do that without reaping the guts out of stronger races and artificially deflating them to bring them down to a weaker race's level.
A better solution, is obviously to have your attribute bonuses be drawn from your character's backstory and their lived experiences, their truths if you will. Gain points for having the emotionally moving backstory that gamers are all looking for these days.
Quote from: SavageSchemer;1134285I've always thought D&D's alignment system was downright idiotic, but that statement just seems so wrong!
Not so wrong once you consider that the druid's adherence a neutral alignment is a D&D invention to shoehorn them into the alignment system.
Quote from: oggsmash;1134297A better solution, is obviously to have your attribute bonuses be drawn from your character's backstory and their lived experiences, their truths if you will. Gain points for having the emotionally moving backstory that gamers are all looking for these days.
This really isn't a solution at all. The entire point of having race as a separate choice is for that choice to be meaningful. If you are going to make race just a backstory, the most optimal solution is to completely race as an option. Just allow a player to design the character they want and then use race the same way we now use gender; as a thematic choice no different that whether or not the character is wearing a hat. IOW, just a skin applied to a set of numbers.
Quote from: hedgehobbit;1134300This really isn't a solution at all. The entire point of having race as a separate choice is for that choice to be meaningful. If you are going to make race just a backstory, the most optimal solution is to completely race as an option. Just allow a player to design the character they want and then use race the same way we now use gender; as a thematic choice no different that whether or not the character is wearing a hat. IOW, just a skin applied to a set of numbers.
That seems to be the direction they are looking for. But I was being sarcastic.
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1134269So glad I'm not buying any of their shit.
There's no reason whatsoever to support companies who hate you.
Doubly so when there are plenty of game designers who just want to make games.
And an entire lifetime of cool RPGs were published before the turn of this century.
If I am not wrong 3e was the first edition to allow you to play a Good Drow. Especially if you play a Ranger that wields twin scimitars.
So welcome to the 21st Century Jeremy, glad to have you aboard.
Drow were like ninjas in the 80's: every kid wanted to be one 'cause they were so cool.
Are tieflings passe now? I can't keep track anymore.
Quote from: hedgehobbit;1134300This really isn't a solution at all. The entire point of having race as a separate choice is for that choice to be meaningful. If you are going to make race just a backstory, the most optimal solution is to completely race as an option. Just allow a player to design the character they want and then use race the same way we now use gender; as a thematic choice no different that whether or not the character is wearing a hat. IOW, just a skin applied to a set of numbers.
At the bare minimum I would bring back minimum score requirements if racial modifiers were no longer gonna be a thing and race is just going to be an "esthetic" (heck, I would bring them back regardless). But I suppose races having standards would also be racist.
Quote from: oggsmash;1134302That seems to be the direction they are looking for. But I was being sarcastic.
Yup, they're even thinking of phasing out "race". Cuz all of two games or so changed the name used for "race" to "ancestry" or whatever, which apparently means that "race" is falling out of favor. Cuz two companies using an even less accurate term to describe that thing that characters physically are, for purely ideological reasons, now indicates a general trend.
My understanding is D&D 4e debacle was the result of the company listening to the squeaky wheel fans demands too much and assuming that they made a product that their fans would insta-buy.
Should be amusing to see how this experiment goes.
Quote from: Shasarak;1134318If I am not wrong 3e was the first edition to allow you to play a Good Drow. Especially if you play a Ranger that wields twin scimitars.
So welcome to the 21st Century Jeremy, glad to have you aboard.
2e had supplements that allowed good Drow characters (Drow of the Underdark), even featured Eillistrae, goddess of the moon and good Drow. Though, the book specified that good drow were rare, and went to lengths to highlight how difficult to play those characters were supposed to be.
My main character back in the day was a non-scimitar wielding dark elf mage (witch kit) worshiper of Eillistrae (yes, I participated in this trend :p ).
Intelligence buffs will remain, right? Which indicates that the rules still support some races of creatures being inherently smarter.
The move concerning alignment seems to me to be another step in moving the literary background for the game from one tradition to another: less Appendix N and more... well, modern fantasy like that found in World of Warcraft's orcs and... I don't know I can't think of many examples.
Quote from: rocksfalleverybodydies;1134323My understanding is D&D 4e debacle was the result of the company listening to the squeaky wheel fans demands too much and assuming that they made a product that their fans would insta-buy.
Should be amusing to see how this experiment goes.
It was more the result of making the game intentionally compatible with video games during initial creation, and then a murder suicide (Joseph Batten) where all the data got locked encrypted and the entire plan dashed, with a tabletop-only emergency plan slapped on top of it to just get it out at all.
Perhaps the classic "race" has played itself out? I've been reading PF2 to get up to speed (analyzing it for potential publishing use), and that game has tweaked everything for maximum scores and wins. You WILL be awesome at whatever parts you choose to be awesome at. By 10th level and your second batch of FOUR (4!!!!) ability raises, you will be a godling. If you don't own a demiplane by 20th, you're not trying. They use "Ancestry" to replace "Race", but it's the same thing. Different name, same deal.
Maybe race should be rolled back into "role". Just a game with roles. One of those roles might be the typical Elf Bow Dual Sword Fighter of the High Forest. Another might be the Hardened Dwarf Warrior of the Stone Bear Clan. Or you're just a Witty Bard who might have a touch of Elf in their background. Focus on what each role does in the game, with choices focused on those roles. No races, no species, just "here are the choices of the part you play in this game".
I'm starting to see the benefits of ACKS/basic D&D's approach. When someone complains that the Orc is an evil archetype you point out that a) there are no Orc roles in the game and b) they were included as Bad Guystm, and NO you can't play one as the Paladin's nurse maid.
No one needs to be pin-holed into playing a "race" that represents a minority (if you're inclined to feel that way). If you want to be a strict fighter, you are a human fighter. If you want to play an Elf, you play the role that Elves (the society) in this world produce. No razor tightropes to tippy-toe across. It is what it is because #setting #game #fun #TheGMSaidSo.
Munchkin power-gamer optimize-geeks are just going to pick all the cool combos to get the best stats anyways. Why cloud all this build technique with stupid real-world equivalencies?
Quote from: hedgehobbit;1134267In older versions of D&D, demi-humans (elves, dwarves, etc) were the good guys and humanoids where evil. Being evil was the thing that separated the two groups. But players demanded that they be able to play the monster and are now demanding that the monsters aren't monsters anymore.
This is an old fallacy thats been around a while.
Actually in OD&D and B/BX nothing was inherintly allways evil or even allways good. You just leaned to law neutral or chaos. Orcs and Ogres originally were listed as Neutral or Chaos for example. Rocs were listed as Law or Neutral and Men were listed in all 3. Even in AD&D the alignment lists for monsters went right out the window pretty darn fast and you have pretty much anything popping up somewhere with whatever alignment someone wanted them to have. And some monsters have changed alignment from one edition to another.
Quote from: oggsmash;1134257No tone down I can see. I wonder what spurred the change?
Take a guess. Everyones falling over themselves to virtue signal how "progressive" they are and stamp out anything even remotely deemed "racist" by the loony fringe.
At this rate we'll probably see a return of the blue or purple drow.
Alignment has been divorced from its fictional origins long ago, and the relic that we have left in 5e is largely so confused by itself that I am only surprised that WotC haven't yet removed it whole-cloth.
It does follow pretty naturally that humanoids are being given the nuance that once belonged solely to humans. Non-humans out-number humans in modern games, and modern players generally hate the idea that they may not have total creative control over their character.
Quote from: Omega;1134345Take a guess. Everyones falling over themselves to virtue signal how "progressive" they are and stamp out anything even remotely deemed "racist" by the loony fringe.
At this rate we'll probably see a return of the blue or purple drow.
I always understood that purple or blue Drow were more of an artifact of artists who found it hard to draw creatures that were midnight black
Quote from: Omega;1134344This is an old fallacy thats been around a while.
Actually in OD&D and B/BX nothing was inherintly allways evil or even allways good. You just leaned to law neutral or chaos. Orcs and Ogres originally were listed as Neutral or Chaos for example. Rocs were listed as Law or Neutral and Men were listed in all 3. Even in AD&D the alignment lists for monsters went right out the window pretty darn fast and you have pretty much anything popping up somewhere with whatever alignment someone wanted them to have. And some monsters have shanged alignment from one edition to another.
And yet in the OD&D book it says Law=Good and Chaos=Evil, in more words but that's the gist of it.
Quote from: Mistwell;1134333It was more the result of making the game intentionally compatible with video games during initial creation, and then a murder suicide (Joseph Batten) where all the data got locked encrypted and the entire plan dashed, with a tabletop-only emergency plan slapped on top of it to just get it out at all.
I thought you were sh*tting me but it looks legit. Guy was some sort of messiah with all the cryptic answers kept locked away.
What a mental way to develop the system. It's a wonder that it got finished at all.
I pretty much signed off D&D after 2nd so an interesting tidbit in how not to run a development section.
Quote from: rocksfalleverybodydies;1134354I thought you were sh*tting me but it looks legit. Guy was some sort of messiah with all the cryptic answers kept locked away.
What a mental way to develop the system. It's a wonder that it got finished at all.
I pretty much signed off D&D after 2nd so an interesting tidbit in how not to run a development section.
Nah, that was not 4e that was the character creator side of 4e that was supposed to launch at the same time as the RPG.
Quote from: Mistwell;1134249Jeremy Crawford's comments on the direction races are taking going forward in D&D (https://www.enworld.org/threads/wotcs-jeremy-crawford-on-d-d-races-going-forward.672716/).
The short of it: They're slowly heading towards treating all things which are labeled "humanoid" to drop Intelligence debuffs and the mandatory evil alignment, like orcs, drow, and Vistani (which is a gypsy analogue in Ravenloft) as being on their radar for some changes that recognized a wider range of morality, or "Any creature with the Humanoid type should have the full capacity to be any alignmnet, i.e., they should have free will and souls."
They will likely also reclassify some "humanoids" in the monster manual like Gnolls to be "Fiends" and keep the mandatory evil alignment, as that aspect is directly sourced from "spawned hyenas who fed on demon-touched rotten meat". Maybe similar for minotaurs. But if a particular setting does not use that type of origin story for something like gnolls, it might keep them as humanoid but without the mandatory evil alignment.
That thread is a dumpster fire. A slew of folks thinking...I don't know if they are thinking. This ain't Seattle, and most of their thinking comes down to - we must make them so they aren't bad even if they are. Now to go bleach my brain. These people could ruin a wet dream.
Quote from: Shasarak;1134355Nah, that was not 4e that was the character creator side of 4e that was supposed to launch at the same time as the RPG.
No, AIR it was a sort of advanced VTT with purchasable 'virtual minis'; they demo'd it.
Quote from: S'mon;1134358No, AIR it was a sort of advanced VTT with purchasable 'virtual minis'; they demo'd it.
Tomato, Potato.
Quote from: Shasarak;1134352I always understood that purple or blue Drow were more of an artifact of artists who found it hard to draw creatures that were midnight black
Nope. There was an earlier iteration of the moral outrage brigade claiming that Drow = Black people. So they changed it. That is why some of us were going "god not this again" when it was trotted out yet again.
For what it's worth, in the original AD&D (before UA), any of the races could be any alignment. And racial modifiers were to physical attributes only--no modifiers to INT or WIS, and for CHR, while not explicitly stated, the fact that the penalties and caps only applied to dealings with individuals outside of their own race suggested that it was only the physical attractiveness component of CHR that was being affected.
To me, it's been a bit amusing watching a bunch of clowns trip over one another, gnashing and clawing their way back to how things were in the beginning.
5e was allready fairly no negative race mods as was. Think only the Kobold and orc had any in one of the expansions?
Always thought it was odd any of the new races had any negative stat mods. If it werent for the timing the change would really fit right in like a typo correction.
Honestly, once you open Pandora's Box, and start designing the game to accommodate IRL politics instead of game logic and fictional antecedents, there will be no end to the compromises you will have to make, because nothing will be enough.
Today, it is orcs; tomorrow, someone will ask why not gnolls (obviously products of the colonial imagination*) or minotaurs (obviously based on blacks**). There is no objective boundary where the moral policing stops. By making the changes, you are directly establishing the link between fantasy and reality. So from now on, your orcs will indeed be black people - where they only used to be pot-bellied brigands with pig snouts. It is like telling the evangelicals "Yes, folks, our spells are based on occult rituals. But SEE?! We only use WHITE MAGICK and WICCA, not SATANISM." It will never work, and there will always be more demands to give the stump of your arm after you have given your pinky finger, your hand, and your arm. And that will still not be enough.
____________
* as established by the criteria of raving lunatics
** as established by the criteria of raving lunatics
Quote from: Omega;1134368Nope. There was an earlier iteration of the moral outrage brigade claiming that Drow = Black people. So they changed it. That is why some of us were going "god not this again" when it was trotted out yet again.
If you say so. Having seen some poser artwork with vantablack-esque drow, I can say the coloration looks boring as shit. I can understand why people would be blending in shades of gray or blue/indigo to make them look interesting.
At this point I'm so checked out of official D&D I don't really give a rat's ass what they do with it. 5e has been a significant disappointment to me in many other ways than the political pandering (namely the Paizoesque adventure path model).
I've got OSR stuff to provide me with all the D&D I want, just the way I want it.
Quote from: Arkansan;1134395At this point I'm so checked out of official D&D I don't really give a rat's ass what they do with it. 5e has been a significant disappointment to me in many other ways than the political pandering (namely the Paizoesque adventure path model).
I've got OSR stuff to provide me with all the D&D I want, just the way I want it.
You bring up a great point. I do not understand the huge book module/adventure/campaigns. It seems more an attempt to write a pick your path book than create an adventure. An adventure, a real one, is dangerous. Those seem just dangerous enough to ensure the players level up to keep going with the novel than to create an adventure. I think much shorter modules, that have some risk, could be connected, or not would appeal to me more. Maybe create a compilation once you have 3 or 4 good modules connected.
It's only going to get worse.
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1134353And yet in the OD&D book it says Law=Good and Chaos=Evil, in more words but that's the gist of it.
Yeah, but the "more words" portion is more like that they can typically be considered good or evil, but don't necessarily have to be. And include some notes about how you have to decide if your "chaotic" character is a "happy-go-lucky" type or an actual evil bastard. Though, the association with Law=Good and Chaos=Evil is made.
Quote from: Omega;1134368Nope. There was an earlier iteration of the moral outrage brigade claiming that Drow = Black people. So they changed it. That is why some of us were going "god not this again" when it was trotted out yet again.
A lot of early art had dark elves depicted as brown skinned, like black people. I used to portray them as such in my campaigns and described my main (dark elf) character as having "milk chocolate" colored skin. When I recreated her in Neverwinter Nights and played her PW/RP servers people would sometimes give me crap about how "dark elves are smurfs, not brownies". But she was always a brownie so I kept her brown.
If different RPG races are clearly genetically/biologically distinct, didn't that implicitly reinforce our shared humanity regardless of our skin color?
Quote from: insubordinate polyhedral;1134414If different RPG races are clearly genetically/biologically distinct, didn't that implicitly reinforce our shared humanity regardless of our skin color?
Well, I guess the intelligence debuff maybe reinforces the idea that intelligence is in any way attributed to genetics. Every educated person knows there is zero genetic effect on intelligence and that implication of any thing else is going to lead to problematic and scientifically false conclusions.
But they did leave the elves as having an intelligence buff.....problematic? Not sure.
Quote from: oggsmash;1134415Well, I guess the intelligence debuff maybe reinforces the idea that intelligence is in any way attributed to genetics. Every educated person knows there is zero genetic effect on intelligence and that implication of any thing else is going to lead to problematic and scientifically false conclusions.
But they did leave the elves as having an intelligence buff.....problematic? Not sure.
Personally, I would hope that traditional elves in particular would be both smarter and wiser than me. I don't know why I would hope that other beings are just as stupid and foolish as I am, especially ones with long lifespans and/or supernatural aspects.
You would think living in your prime for hundreds of years you would pick up a few things.. I guess that is a way to make them smarter without saying they are born smarter. BUT the logical extrapolation from that is they must all be lazy fucks. Otherwise they would the absolute masters of magic, sword fighting, strategy, anything that takes a bit of time to master.
Quote from: oggsmash;1134418You would think living in your prime for hundreds of years you would pick up a few things.. I guess that is a way to make them smarter without saying they are born smarter. BUT the logical extrapolation from that is they must all be lazy fucks. Otherwise they would the absolute masters of magic, sword fighting, strategy, anything that takes a bit of time to master.
Maybe, although adventurers tend to start out on the young side, that whole hero's journey thing. Your dude ends up as Elrond, he has to adventure to get there (to be Tolkienian, again). But "young" by elven standards is still old by human standards, so hopefully they've still had some time to improve themselves.
Yeah, like old enough to be absolute technical masters of their fields.
Quote from: oggsmash;1134415Well, I guess the intelligence debuff maybe reinforces the idea that intelligence is in any way attributed to genetics. Every educated person knows there is zero genetic effect on intelligence and that implication of any thing else is going to lead to problematic and scientifically false conclusions.
But they did leave the elves as having an intelligence buff.....problematic? Not sure.
I hope you're joking, scientific research has proven there's a hereditary element of intelligence time and time again. Which doesn't mean epigenetics don't play a role, since they do; for instance malnutrition of the mother during pregnancy or childhood malnutrition will result on less healthy/intelligent people.
Which also doesn't mean it's certainly racial nor that it isn't; much less that we should make laws discriminating on the basis of race.
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1134421I hope you're joking, scientific research has proven there's a hereditary element of intelligence time and time again. Which doesn't mean epigenetics don't play a role, since they do; for instance malnutrition of the mother during pregnancy or childhood malnutrition will result on less healthy/intelligent people.
Which also doesn't mean it's certainly racial nor that it isn't; much less that we should make laws discriminating on the basis of race.
Joking? Every geneticist worth their salt knows evolution and differences are only up to the upper neck area.
Quote from: oggsmash;1134420Yeah, like old enough to be absolute technical masters of their fields.
I see your point. Well, I guess Tolkienian elves are arguably "lazy": song and art and nature being significant parts of their study. Maybe that's a backstory for an adventuring elf -- too ambitious to stand all the long nights of song and wine and food, had to party up with some humans to go Get Shit Done. :D
And even that is debatable, as everyone, everywhere, knows full well you can do anything you really want to do, just by wanting to do it a whole lot and working very hard.
Quote from: insubordinate polyhedral;1134423I see your point. Well, I guess Tolkienian elves are arguably "lazy": song and art and nature being significant parts of their study. Maybe that's a backstory for an adventuring elf -- too ambitious to stand all the long nights of song and wine and food, had to party up with some humans to go Get Shit Done. :D
people always leave out the debauchery. Wine, music and orgies all the time. I guess the adventurer types break away from this.
Quote from: oggsmash;1134425people always leave out the debauchery. Wine, music and orgies all the time. I guess the adventurer types break away from this.
I love the Dragon Quest take on this aspect of elves: They have a frivolous side that is there to deal with the vast weight of the years on their psyche. Basically, never mind seeing other beings come and go. When you've seen yet another civilization rise and fall, all an elf can do is go get drunk and party--maybe for a few decades. Having been to a lot of parties, they've mastered that, too. :D
Edit, I too fell into the sarchasm.
Quote from: oggsmash;1134422Joking? Every geneticist worth their salt knows evolution and differences are only up to the upper neck area.
Sorry my bad, I forgot that for a moment, don't know what came over me. :D
Apologies. I just thought Crawford was sort of trying to shoehorn that viewpoint into a game about dragons, elves and liches. I get that maybe a person wants to play an orc that is a talented wizard....but if orcs have the same potential to be great wizards as everyone else, it sort of takes a bit away from the MANY interesting roleplaying situations. I also think deciding suddenly the literal foot soldiers of evil are now any alignment they want (speaking to the NPCs since a player has always had wide latitude on their character alignment) it also kills off all sorts of built in role playing for the Good aligned, super smart and articulate Orc who is a wizard.
Quote from: oggsmash;1134425people always leave out the debauchery. Wine, music and orgies all the time. I guess the adventurer types break away from this.
Tolkien's elves sing and drink, but "Seldom is any tale told of deeds of lust among them" (
The Silmarillion).
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1134430Tolkien's elves sing and drink, but "Seldom is any tale told of deeds of lust among them" (The Silmarillion).
People didnt tell Epsteins secrets either. Not telling is different than not doing. First rule of sex club is............
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1134427Edit, I too fell into the sarchasm.
I have a more pressing question:
How the fuck do these very smart people think they'll be able to enforce this rule? Upon those who don't just up and leave? Because I don't even need to think to homebrew this shit out, I just need access to older rules to lift it from there.
In the event I was dumb enough to buy shit from WotC.
Quote from: insubordinate polyhedral;1134417Personally, I would hope that traditional elves in particular would be both smarter and wiser than me. I don't know why I would hope that other beings are just as stupid and foolish as I am, especially ones with long lifespans and/or supernatural aspects.
The way that elves are described they should probably get a bonus to all mental abilities, including Charisma, even more than they should get a Dexterity bonus, though I would give them that to, since they're supposed to be lithe and accurate shots. Maybe balance it out with a penalty to STR and CON, since they're not described as physically powerful at all. They should also get additional skills and knowledge due to their immense lifespans. But they don't, cuz "balance*".
*Which I agree is an issue, but it should be dealt with some other way than just artificially toning them all the way down. I even prefer the old XP penalty, as tedious as it can be.
Quote from: insubordinate polyhedral;1134419Maybe, although adventurers tend to start out on the young side, that whole hero's journey thing. Your dude ends up as Elrond, he has to adventure to get there (to be Tolkienian, again). But "young" by elven standards is still old by human standards, so hopefully they've still had some time to improve themselves.
According to the 5e write up at least, elves mature at about the same rate as humans, but their "understanding of adulthood" takes longer and they don't declare themselves "adult" till they're about a hundred. Meanwhile they already have the mental capacity to absorb knowledge and experiences throughout all that time, it's just that they're not emotionally mature yet like a grown up. But they still have a hundred freaking years of experience by the time they take up adventuring life. Even if they take things slow that's still a LOT of time to learn a lot of things and perfect someone's craft.
These things are why I generally have very human centric games. Even with D&D. I do like the take on Elves from DCC. They are smart, can fight, know magic, but....like to fiddle with chaos and magic a whole lot which tends to work against their long lifespan than with it. Because there, the more experience with magic doesnt play out well over a long time period.
Quote from: oggsmash;1134434These things are why I generally have very human centric games. Even with D&D. I do like the take on Elves from DCC. They are smart, can fight, know magic, but....like to fiddle with chaos and magic a whole lot which tends to work against their long lifespan than with it. Because there, the more experience with magic doesnt play out well over a long time period.
And the fact that most people just end up playing a human with prosthetic ears or a rubber suit.
Quote from: oggsmash;1134434These things are why I generally have very human centric games. Even with D&D. I do like the take on Elves from DCC. They are smart, can fight, know magic, but....like to fiddle with chaos and magic a whole lot which tends to work against their long lifespan than with it. Because there, the more experience with magic doesnt play out well over a long time period.
Another alternative could be to get rid of racial ability modifiers and declare 3-18 the absolute ability score range (barring STR & CON for large creatures). Then give every race minimum/maximum ability requirements to reflect their racial inclinations, instead of giving them bonuses (kinda like AD&D, but more extreme); forcing elves, for example, to have at least 13+ DEX, INT and CHA, and 11+ WIS just qualify for that race. Then get only whatever special abilities (and disadvantages) their race has, like darkvision or charm resistance.
That would take care of half the balancing issues, while retaining the general propensities for each race. And it would also help reduce the excessive numbers of non-humans without getting rid of them, since special races would no longer be something anyone can just pick and get score bonuses, but something they have to qualify for and potentially have to make sacrifices to get. Making non-humans even more special, but also less unbalanced to an extent.
Obviously, this would be even more problematic since you'd have to say that Orcs can only have an INT of like 16 (maybe 14) or less, which would be "racist". But that's a different matter.
Don't give SJWs an inch or even the satisfaction of rattling your cage even if you end up rejecting their premise later.
Tolkien Elves were better at humans at just about everything but that came from fatelink->world v1.0. When world 1.0 started to suck because of Morgoth introducing 'Fuck Yall' malware elves started to suck as well. Humans were patched in later to sort of fix the system without this flaw even if it mean they had no innate fate ink to world 1.0 and where mortal, and would enter some unknown project of Illuvitar later. The entire question of LOTR was wether the humans would at least patch most of 'Fuck' yall or if the malware would cause world v1.0 to be a bug addled mess until the maneframe fried.
As a patch Job humans were never meant to compete with elves fate link because that would make them susceptible to the same sort of corruption the elves where.
SJWs don't give a shit about all this and want something new to destroy because they hate nuance.
It occurs to me that Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay got a real boost by being full of demons when TSR decided they were ashamed of them. It might actually be a good time to be a publisher that takes a stand.
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1134432I have a more pressing question:
How the fuck do these very smart people think they'll be able to enforce this rule? Upon those who don't just up and leave? Because I don't even need to think to homebrew this shit out, I just need access to older rules to lift it from there.
In the event I was dumb enough to buy shit from WotC.
They can't. More and more people are just ignoring their stupidity. Houserules are a time-honored tradition since the inception of the hobby. And-
[video=youtube;NNuaGQ6-KnY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNuaGQ6-KnY[/youtube]
(I love how Carrier Fisher picks up Peter Cushing's accent in that scene, while in the rest of Star Wars, she talks like a californian. :D )
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1134442Don't give SJWs an inch or even the satisfaction of rattling your cage even if you end up rejecting their premise later.
Tolkien Elves were better at humans at just about everything but that came from fatelink->world v1.0. When world 1.0 started to suck because of Morgoth introducing 'Fuck Yall' malware elves started to suck as well. Humans were patched in later to sort of fix the system without this flaw even if it mean they had no innate fate ink to world 1.0 and where mortal, and would enter some unknown project of Illuvitar later. The entire question of LOTR was wether the humans would at least patch most of 'Fuck' yall or if the malware would cause world v1.0 to be a bug addled mess until the maneframe fried.
As a patch Job humans were never meant to compete with elves fate link because that would make them susceptible to the same sort of corruption the elves where.
SJWs don't give a shit about all this and want something new to destroy because they hate nuance.
I have often noted that the reason all the elves in LotR seem reasonable (even Lothlorien elves, despite being this side of xenophobic, weren't bad sorts) is that all the stupid, arrogant elves had gotten themselves killed off over millennia.
I mean, Feanor alone was the kind of titanic asshole that only a near-immortal elf could manage. Even humans couldn't match that level of jackassery.
Quote from: David Johansen;1134445It occurs to me that Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay got a real boost by being full of demons when TSR decided they were ashamed of them. It might actually be a good time to be a publisher that takes a stand.
Palladium Fantasy and RIFTS also benefited from touching themes which kiddy-TSR downright refused to: witchcraft, demon summoning, possession, settings with a darker tone, etc. Palladium (the company) was not an edgelord publisher in the White Wolf sense, but they made games where black magic was black magic, monsters were monsters, and heroism had a meaning.
That's my idea for taking a stand, too: not reveling in filth and risque content to show it to someone, nor becoming a mirror image of the woke publishers, just walking your own creative path, and not giving in to blackmail, whether it comes in the form of friendly concern or hostile accusations. A bit like what Ray Bradbury was suggesting in Coda (https://www.cato.org/blog/censoring-ray-bradbury).
Quote from: Arkansan;1134395At this point I'm so checked out of official D&D I don't really give a rat's ass what they do with it. 5e has been a significant disappointment to me in many other ways than the political pandering (namely the Paizoesque adventure path model).
I've got OSR stuff to provide me with all the D&D I want, just the way I want it.
:( But we had fun times in my PbP, I hope!
Never bought anything from WotC 5e, only used their Basic 5e, and that was enough to putter around some DIY fun. Still I end up back with my happy TSR/OSR. :) I prefer the old skool threat level and bare core with optional add-on levers; 5e simplifies a lot, but there is still some 'baked into the cake' stuff I want to cut-out to get a nice and plain canvas.
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1134427Edit, I too fell into the sarchasm.
:D I think I want to marry this portmanteau..... AAAAAaaaaaaa
aaaaaa!
Quote from: Opaopajr;1134469:( But we had fun times in my PbP, I hope!
The people demand more Opaopajr PbPs!
Quote from: insubordinate polyhedral;1134470The people demand more Opaopajr PbPs!
More PbP or you riot? :D Will you burn down gronan's hamburger joint in the 8th lvl of the dungeon? :p
The Reddit thread on this has gone belly-up, with most of the controversial posts now deleted. Well, at least the controversial posts that are dismissive of this whole D&D-is-racist thing.
I was just given a two-week ban, not sure why. For one of the following posts I assume. The quoted bit is another user, my responses are immediately after the quote. I apologize for the size of this comment. I thought there was a "Spoiler" tag to hide all the text, but no such luck.
Quote"When they're not in battle, xxx spend much of their time resting or dozing. They don't engage in crafting or agriculture to any great extent, or otherwise produce anything of value. They bully weaker creatures into doing their bidding, so they can take it easy. When a superior force tries to intimidate xxxx into service, they will try to escape rather than perform the work or confront the foe. Even when subsumed into a host and drawn into war, bugbears must often be roused from naps and bribed to get them to do their duties. This indolence offers no clue to how vicious the creatures are. Bugbears are capable of bouts of incredible ferocity, using their muscular bodies to exact swift and ruthless violence."
Reading this you might think it is from some 19th century colonialist talking about Africa, and all I did was remove the words "bugbear" and "goblinoid". There is some seriously messed up stuff in officially published books.
Well, first of all, only a racist 19th century colonialist would describe Africans that way.
And second of all, Bugbears are fantasy creatures, and comparing Africans to them is foolish. People who are not racist would not read that description and then think: "Huh, just like Africans." Bugbears are divorced from any real-world racism for the majority of players. Of course, now that your racist butt is drawing these comparisons I now have that connection in my mind, which is annoying and does no one any good. Thankfully I will forget about it soon enough and move on with my life.
QuoteHuh, isn't it weird how all the evil races are dark skinned or otherwise coded as being eastern, African, and Native American. Also isn't it weird that there isn't a single evil race that is coded as western European. Strange huh?
That's your definition. You're drawing these conclusions and then pointing out that there is this terribly racist problem, based on your conclusions. This whole way of thinking is cancerous.
QuoteThe thing that everyone here seems to be ignoring so they argue about "ugh pc culture ruins my dnd" is that a lot of the evil races are based on racist stereotypes and that can make people who belong to those groups very uncomfortable and not wanna play
QuoteExactly this. (friendly heads-up, discussion of extremely racist language follows) When I started playing in the 90's (yes, I'm old) the commmon vernacular about drow was "they're n****r elves." World of Warcraft forums had racist tropes about the Naga as well for obvious phonetic reasons. It's not to say that Ed or Bob was racist or had ill intent, it's just that the game was made and played by mostly white dudes, who didn't put a lot of thought put into the racial implications at the time. Most of us didn't understand the systemic nature of racism and our responsibility to remove ourselves from that cycle.
We do now, so we try to be better.
Being white in the '90s is no excuse for calling Drow nigger-elves, that's just dumb. I expect you were in the minority with that description, considering that it never appeared anywhere in any published game material and is an unpleasant thing to say.
QuoteThe thing that everyone here seems to be ignoring so they argue about "ugh pc culture ruins my dnd" is that a lot of the evil races are based on racist stereotypes and that can make people who belong to those groups very uncomfortable and not wanna play
It is not your or my or anyone else's responsibility to make sure that every single person out there is comfortable with our fantasy games. That's impossible and a ludicrous goal. If you don't think that's true, then EXHIBIT A: my parents who think D&D is morally bad for me because of its "spellcasting". Do we remove spellcasting so that they are comfortable with the game and willing to play it? No, we do not, 'cause who the fuck cares.
The only thing that matters is making sure that the people we play with are all having a good time and happy to be playing. If they are not having a good time, we can talk about it, and if the problem is that they don't like that the game has drow*, then they can go find another group. Anyone who expects more than that from me is over-stepping all expected bounds of a free society.
*This will never happen by the way, black people don't care that the game has Drow anymore than I care that the game has pale-skinned vampires.
Everyone calling Drow Nword elves seems like it should be in the vault of things that never happened. I think that guy made that up. I would not say no one ever said that, i just think he is lying and saying he heard it, ever. Well, unless he was the one saying it all the time.
Quote from: oggsmash;1134495Everyone calling Drow Nword elves seems like it should be in the vault of things that never happened. I think that guy made that up. I would not say no one ever said that, i just think he is lying and saying he heard it, ever. Well, unless he was the one saying it all the time.
In fairness, I
have heard (or rather read, since it was online) people can dark elves "ni@@3r elves" multiple times. But it was never that prevalent and it's not like dark elves are exactly an oppressed, inferior race. If anything they're the opposite: they're underground, racial supremacist elves who are more powerful than regular elves (or at least used to be before 5e), and enslave other races and brutalize them.
But of course, that is racist, because dark elves are dark skinned, which obviously means that they are "coded" black (as opposed to, you know, being a FICTIONAL species unrelated to humans). So they were obviously included in the game to portray all 'people of colour' in a negative light, cuz the common white supremacist agitprop against black is that they're a racially superior species that oppresses others (rather than the other way around).
Quote from: VisionStorm;1134499In fairness, I have heard (or rather read, since it was online) people can dark elves "ni@@3r elves" multiple times. But it was never that prevalent and it's not like dark elves are exactly an oppressed, inferior race. If anything they're the opposite: they're underground, racial supremacist elves who are more powerful than regular elves (or at least used to be before 5e), and enslave other races and brutalize them.
But of course, that is racist, because dark elves are dark skinned, which obviously means that they are "coded" black (as opposed to, you know, being a FICTIONAL species unrelated to humans). So they were obviously included in the game to portray all 'people of colour' in a negative light, cuz the common white supremacist agitprop against black is that they're a racially superior species that oppresses others (rather than the other way around).
I have seen all sorts of shit online that never, ever passed for "common vernacular" as that guy was telling his story about. I try to assume online postings are not even close to how people would talk in real life when dealing with edgy stuff. I am pretty sure they spout stuff like that because they would not say it in real life, and even if so, common vernacular everyone is tossing around the Game store? Unless it is at a Klan meeting, nope.
I wonder what the difference between Drow and Nigger Drow is?
Maybe this quote can answer that question:
Quote"When they're not in battle, Nigger Drow spend much of their time resting or dozing. They don't engage in crafting or agriculture to any great extent, or otherwise produce anything of value. They bully weaker creatures into doing their bidding, so they can take it easy. When a superior force tries to intimidate Nigger Drow into service, they will try to escape rather than perform the work or confront the foe. Even when subsumed into a host and drawn into war, Nigger Drow must often be roused from naps and bribed to get them to do their duties. This indolence offers no clue to how vicious the creatures are.
Yup, seems legit.
Quote from: oggsmash;1134425people always leave out the debauchery. Wine, music and orgies all the time. I guess the adventurer types break away from this.
The write-up for elves in Questers of the Middle Realms nailed it though:
QuoteThey look like tall, slim, well-proportioned, attractive humans with slightly pointed ears and a superior attitude. Elves were the first intelligent species created by the gods, and they are immortal. This turned out to be a very bad idea. The elves are not completely adapted to their immortality, so as the years drag on they become desperate for any diversion to chase away the tedium. Most engage in debaucheries of all kinds, and they have a reputation for it.
...
Weaknesses:
Reputation - in social situations where morals or integrity are involved, like getting someone to trust you. (Even other elves. They know what you're like.)
Quote from: tenbones;1134400It's only going to get worse.
Put that on a t-shirt!!!
Quote from: oggsmash;1134424And even that is debatable, as everyone, everywhere, knows full well you can do anything you really want to do, just by wanting to do it a whole lot and working very hard.
I know what you're saying (pro-athletes, etc) , but "working very hard" does achieve success for most professions. There's a lot of truth in the old joke "I'm a great believer in luck. The harder I work, the luckier I get!"
Quote from: Shasarak;1134502I wonder what the difference between Drow and Nigger Drow is?
The presence or absence of dorkass teenagers in the vicinity.
Teens are monsters and no amount of SJW concern trolling is going to change the essential nature of teens loving to say "dangerous" stuff that could shock their moms.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1134442Don't give SJWs an inch or even the satisfaction of rattling your cage even if you end up rejecting their premise later.
Tolkien Elves were better at humans at just about everything but that came from fatelink->world v1.0. When world 1.0 started to suck because of Morgoth introducing 'Fuck Yall' malware elves started to suck as well. Humans were patched in later to sort of fix the system without this flaw even if it mean they had no innate fate ink to world 1.0 and where mortal, and would enter some unknown project of Illuvitar later. The entire question of LOTR was wether the humans would at least patch most of 'Fuck' yall or if the malware would cause world v1.0 to be a bug addled mess until the maneframe fried.
As a patch Job humans were never meant to compete with elves fate link because that would make them susceptible to the same sort of corruption the elves where.
SJWs don't give a shit about all this and want something new to destroy because they hate nuance.
And that's why D&D was meant to be primarily about humans in the first place. Race = class in D&D and level maximums in AD&D were not accidents.
Quote from: Arkansan;1134395(namely the Paizoesque adventure path model).
Except WOTC has not put out any adventure paths yet. All their adventures have been bog standard modules. Several have been of the campaign sort. But sorry. No. That is not an adventure path.
Quote from: VisionStorm;1134402A lot of early art had dark elves depicted as brown skinned, like black people.
er... Where? I have never seen any TSR art with drow as brown skinned. Are you sure yoy arent mixing them up with Valley or Wood elves? I know one of those was once described with a copper, tanned, or brown skin way back?
Quote from: oggsmash;1134418You would think living in your prime for hundreds of years you would pick up a few things.. I guess that is a way to make them smarter without saying they are born smarter. BUT the logical extrapolation from that is they must all be lazy fucks. Otherwise they would the absolute masters of magic, sword fighting, strategy, anything that takes a bit of time to master.
No. The logical extrapolation is that they have a learning plateau just like humans do. Forgotten Realms elves actually struggle to retain knowlege. This is part of what their rest period is spent on. Hanging onto memories.
Long life does not = unlimited learning.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1134537The presence or absence of dorkass teenagers in the vicinity.
Teens are monsters and no amount of SJW concern trolling is going to change the essential nature of teens loving to say "dangerous" stuff that could shock their moms.
Oh so very true. During the onset of homophobia back in the 70-80s was pretty common to see all sorts of wretched behavior from teens. Just to be offensive because they knew it was offensive and would piss someone off.
In another few years all combat will be removed from D&D as it will be seen as regressive. Instead, Adventures will focus on problem solving through talking things out, and making athletics and intelligence checks to get past traps and obstacles. An adventure will involve doing things like settling a land dispute between two Gnomes, walking across a log over a rushing river, and then sliding stones in an appropriate place to open up the passage. The reward will be learning how to live in harmony with the world more, or accepting knowledge on how to fix a problem back home... These will be doled out by the indigenous natives of the area.
Everyone will praise this new edition and say this is what D&D was always meant to be. They'll say it's way more fun than killing things and taking their stuff... and those who want to play the old problematic way are on the wrong side of history.
Quote from: Omega;1134556er... Where? I have never seen any TSR art with drow as brown skinned. Are you sure yoy arent mixing them up with Valley or Wood elves? I know one of those was once described with a copper, tanned, or brown skin way back?
One of my favourites from back in the day
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4573[/ATTACH]
Quote from: Omega;1134555Except WOTC has not put out any adventure paths yet. All their adventures have been bog standard modules. Several have been of the campaign sort. But sorry. No. That is not an adventure path.
You wouldn't know this without access to the DM adventures sent out for Adventurer's League, but most of the adventures are actually just APs being clumped together in one book for the public to buy. They're actually a big series of pieces of an adventure being put out as an AP for the Adventurer's League, and then some more glue and color is added to the big book to flesh things out and format it as more of a cohesive unit.
Quote from: Omega;1134556er... Where? I have never seen any TSR art with drow as brown skinned. Are you sure yoy arent mixing them up with Valley or Wood elves? I know one of those was once described with a copper, tanned, or brown skin way back?
Valley Elves and Wood Elves don't have white hair that I'm aware of. I don't remember most of them cuz it was decades ago, and I lost a bunch of stuff over the years. But I used to have a couple of trading cards with brown skinned dark elves and some books, but I don't remember which. And internet searches are hard, cuz they always bring up unrelated stuff.
This was the only image I could find online from that era, which granted, was one of my favorites. But there used to be more images that don't turn up in searches.
(https://i.warosu.org/data/tg/img/0719/43/1586642129349.jpg)
Quote from: Omega;1134557No. The logical extrapolation is that they have a learning plateau just like humans do. Forgotten Realms elves actually struggle to retain knowlege. This is part of what their rest period is spent on. Hanging onto memories.
Long life does not = unlimited learning.
So one of the most intelligent races in the world of fantasy just spends the first HUNDRED years of their lives (which is longer than most humans live) being entirely useless? And someone presumably supports their useless, unproductive ass throughout all that time, stuck at home for one hundred freaking years taking care of their drooling kid? I don't buy it.
How does this race even manage to survive if their children are so high maintenance it takes them ONE HUNDRED years to start pulling their own weight? This isn't even about different rates of maturity between races at that point. It's about survival of the fittest. It's about being able to compete with other species (intelligent or otherwise) in world with limited resources when your young take an entire freaking century to start fending for themselves.
Even if you want to say that their minds take time to develop, it's still an immense amount of time to struggle with a learning disability that, quite frankly, only exists cuz of game reasons. Because otherwise elves might have to start with at least a few extra skills more than other races, and that's not good cuz "game balance".
And human children, by comparison, are not entirely useless. We learn about a lot of different subjects in school and pick up hobbies on the side that might also teach us a few things. I started learning martial arts when I was like 9 or 10. You're telling me an elf can't pick up a sword* in one hundred years or so, and thar that makes sense?
*OK, bad example. Elves do start proficient with swords (and bows, etc.).. But is that really the ONLY thing elves learn in a century of development? They never pick up a book in all those decades, or pick up a lump of clay and start shaping it into a sculpture or making pottery or something?
In my OD&D game, Elves and Dwarves are NPCs only. Most you meet will have 10HD, packing magic items and ready to kick ass as they've done for hundreds of years. Extremely dangerous nigh-immortals caught in a genocidal war.
Quote from: Omega;1134557No. The logical extrapolation is that they have a learning plateau just like humans do. Forgotten Realms elves actually struggle to retain knowlege. This is part of what their rest period is spent on. Hanging onto memories.
Long life does not = unlimited learning.
I remember hearing (from an Isaac Arthur video I think) that human brains only have about 300 years worth of useable memory space. Plenty for right now, but we'll need an upgrade if we get genuine life extension.
Quote from: Omega;1134556er... Where? I have never seen any TSR art with drow as brown skinned. Are you sure yoy arent mixing them up with Valley or Wood elves? I know one of those was once described with a copper, tanned, or brown skin way back?
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-gr8OnU-e6pQ/XuTSe23CUGI/AAAAAAAAPhI/-3fVsqcXRWA-QZZKuCa1VYhFPHbqGqLigCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/Drow%2BMatriarch.jpg)
Quote from: Orphan81;1134560In another few years all combat will be removed from D&D as it will be seen as regressive.
Was considering positing much the same thought. But then realized this is also nothing new. Theres been alot of RPGs that try to push the focus away from combat and into things like interaction and other endeavors. Over on BGG we had to field the usual complaints that "5e D&D is all about combat because it has so much combat rules and hardly any rules for talking! That means NOTHING else is allowed EVERRRRRRRRR!"
But now we are seeing a renewed push, this time with better SJW brainwashing. Its even popping up more over in the realm of board games. Mostly low level stuff so far. But if this SJW plague isnt curbed I suspect we will see more stringent calls to "make gaming safe! Think of the Children!"
Quote from: Shasarak;1134561One of my favourites from back in the day
I want to say I'd seen an alternate version of that. But cant find it. Hate to say it but they hardly look like drow. More like Valley Elves cosplaying as drow. ahem.
Quote from: Mistwell;1134562You wouldn't know this without access to the DM adventures sent out for Adventurer's League, but most of the adventures are actually just APs being clumped together in one book for the public to buy. They're actually a big series of pieces of an adventure being put out as an AP for the Adventurer's League, and then some more glue and color is added to the big book to flesh things out and format it as more of a cohesive unit.
I could be wrong. But I am pretty sure you have that backwards? The modules come out first and then get sectioned up for AL. Thats how its been for all the ones I've seen.
Quote from: S'mon;1134579I remember hearing (from an Isaac Arthur video I think) that human brains only have about 300 years worth of useable memory space. Plenty for right now, but we'll need an upgrade if we get genuine life extension.
Memory though does not = learning or how far someone can learn. Helps for sure. And its not the capacity, but the use. Otherwise people would have learned from the mistakes of the 90s and we wouldnt have the current SJW iteration for example. I used to teach computer programming way back. There were those who could memorize the code far better than I. But for whatever reason lacked the spark to do anything with it. Dame in the art circles. I know a few folk with encyclopedic knowledge of the arts. But have trouble drawing a stick figure.
Quote from: Omega;1134556er... Where? I have never seen any TSR art with drow as brown skinned. Are you sure yoy arent mixing them up with Valley or Wood elves? I know one of those was once described with a copper, tanned, or brown skin way back?
Look for the original covers of several of R.A. Salvatore's novels, in addition to the already-posted cover of GDQ1-7
Queen of the Spiders.
Quote from: Orphan81;1134560In another few years all combat will be removed from D&D as it will be seen as regressive.
...
Everyone will praise this new edition and say this is what D&D was always meant to be. They'll say it's way more fun than killing things and taking their stuff... and those who want to play the old problematic way are on the wrong side of history.
Nah, combat will still be a thing... it will just be directed at those wicked property owning yeoman as you loot and burn down their farms while receiving rewards from the nearby lord who wants to return all those pesky yeoman to their rightful place as his serfs.
The weapon categories will be clubs, rocks, chains (bike locks optional) and flasks of oil. Poison you can add to the food of the wicked troops the yeomen pay to protect their property from bandits will also be a good-aligned act in the new edition.
Violence will always have its place in D&D, it will just be directed at the "proper" targets.
Quote from: insubordinate polyhedral;1134419Maybe, although adventurers tend to start out on the young side, that whole hero's journey thing. Your dude ends up as Elrond, he has to adventure to get there (to be Tolkienian, again). But "young" by elven standards is still old by human standards, so hopefully they've still had some time to improve themselves.
I've heard it said that elves don't stop nursing for the first 25 years.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1134594Look for the original covers of several of R.A. Salvatore's novels, in addition to the already-posted cover of GDQ1-7 Queen of the Spiders.
Yeah, the cover artists for Salvatore's novels vacillated between making Drizzt dark skinned and weirdly light skinned.
The Thousand Orcs got it right (not surprising, it's a Todd Lockwood piece). But then you look at
Starless Night and you could be forgiven for wondering 'who the fuck is this old guy with the gold skullcap?'.
Cover art in general is something of a sore spot for some authors, since they have varying degrees of control depending on the publisher, etc. There's a reason 'Covers Always Lie' is a trope.
https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/diversity-and-dnd
Hm. Tell me Mr. Crawford, what use is diversity if everyone is the same?
Quote from: mightybrain;1134828https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/diversity-and-dnd
Hm. Tell me Mr. Crawford, what use is diversity if everyone is the same?
Because their devotion to diversity is
literally skin deep.
I guarantee the idea of employing someone with a libertarian or conservative mindset would never, ever occur to them. In their own way, they're as bigoted as any thuggish cop from the 60's who gets his jollies screwing with blacks.
The whole thing kind of rubs me raw because RPGs up until relatively recently have been the solace and refuge for the outcasts, the nerds, the geeks, and the rebels for the most part. It's why I laugh so bitterly at the whole 'white males hate women in gaming'. Motherfucker, PLEASE -- most of us would've committed felonies just to get a girl to talk to us and not treat us like something to scrape off her shoe.
Diversity? You can tell none of these wanking retards ever saw the gag list 'Real Men, Real Roleplayers, Loonies, and Munchkins'. There was always room for different playstyles and by extension, different people. My introduction to D&D was from an Indian friend (dot, not feather). At one point our group was 50/50 guys/girls (which made for some interesting games, I will say. Men and women see things very differently -- viva la difference!).
But somewhere along the way, we became the bad guys. Even though we were the outcasts, willing to take in those who'd been thrown out by the cliques and the popular groups.
Screw them.
Take over and keep the outcasts outcast from their own refuge.
My big early moves away from D&D toward Runequest, Traveller and Arduin (D&D with a different worldview) instilled in me the idea that most any creatures can be PCs and that 'alignment' was mostly relative... whether or not those rules overtly stated such things, it was how I interpreted their approach.
Nothing PC or SJW about it, just that trolls are more interesting if they aren't all the same rampaging sword fodder.
The honorable/sympathetic orcs in Warcraft weren't a new concept to most people, were they?
Quote from: Simlasa;1134841My big early moves away from D&D toward Runequest, Traveller and Arduin (D&D with a different worldview) instilled in me the idea that most any creatures can be PCs and that 'alignment' was mostly relative... whether or not those rules overtly stated such things, it was how I interpreted their approach.
Nothing PC or SJW about it, just that trolls are more interesting if they aren't all the same rampaging sword fodder.
The honorable/sympathetic orcs in Warcraft weren't a new concept to most people, were they?
I started in the early 90s, stuck with D&D and MERP/Rolemaster for fantasy, and I was already picking up on the possibility of 'good orcs' and the like from the general zeitgeist in Dragon Magazine and TSR products. I think a lot of people are projecting their worst assumptions about the past and about other people onto the history and the vast masses of the hobby.
Quote from: mightybrain;1134828https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/diversity-and-dnd
Hm. Tell me Mr. Crawford, what use is diversity if everyone is the same?
I actually had no idea that "Always Chaotic Evil" was a common trope in most people's games. Even Gary Gygax had Leda the Eclavadra (Drow high priestess) clone whose different nurture meant she turned out Good instead of Evil.
I suspect in the future we will have mostly Warcraft-style Orcs too, but personally I'm more on a pig-faced Orc kick right now.
I have the first edition DMG (the one that Jack Chick loved, with the Efreet holding the lady wearing a bikini) and even there it has a section of monsters as PCs and not being evil AS AN INDIVIDUAL. It also said expect to be discriminated against at every turn and have the villagers get the torches and pitchforks if you stroll into town. So the idea of a PC being what they want is not in any way new (1979), but the idea of deciding an entire species/group is new. Now I would have no issue using a perception and degree method and I prefer it for most game I play. But, D&D has alignment, and there are absolutes, and these absolutes are presented from a Human, civilized perspective, and everyone is graded on that curve. So of course barbaric marauders are considered evil. There is no moral relativism.
Quote from: oggsmash;1134852There is no moral relativism.
That is the issue. These changes to the presentation of races in D&D is driven by moral relativism, which is an intrusion into a game that was originally built to include moral absolutes.
Don't these racists understand that if every race gets a positive Int bonus, but the bonuses are not all the same, they're still identifying certain races as dumber than others?
Like how the NYT will run articles saying Jews have the highest IQ, but their heads explode if you point out that makes them smarter than blacks. (And gentiles, of course, but who cares about those slave masters)
Quote from: RandyB;1134859That is the issue. These changes to the presentation of races in D&D is driven by moral relativism, which is an intrusion into a game that was originally built to include moral absolutes.
Not just moral absolutes but tangible ones.
It's one thing to say things like order, chaos, good and evil exist. It's another for them to be defining forces in the universe, just as real as gravity, magic, and the tendency of buttered toast to land butter-side down.
I remember having a similar roundtable discussion with some friends about the afterlife in D&D. It's hard for us in the 'real world' to comprehend this, but just about everyone knows their souls live on* in D&D/PF settings. Heck, people even come back from the dead, and not just 'was in freezing water for 20 minutes' but 'we had to hang an air freshener around his neck because the wizard ran out of gentle repose spells' dead.
* assuming a wizard doesn't trap it, or a daemon doesn't eat it
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1134869Not just moral absolutes but tangible ones.
It's one thing to say things like order, chaos, good and evil exist. It's another for them to be defining forces in the universe, just as real as gravity, magic, and the tendency of buttered toast to land butter-side down.
I remember having a similar roundtable discussion with some friends about the afterlife in D&D. It's hard for us in the 'real world' to comprehend this, but just about everyone knows their souls live on* in D&D/PF settings. Heck, people even come back from the dead, and not just 'was in freezing water for 20 minutes' but 'we had to hang an air freshener around his neck because the wizard ran out of gentle repose spells' dead.
* assuming a wizard doesn't trap it, or a daemon doesn't eat it
Great point! Tangible cosmic absolutes.
Quote from: oggsmash;1134852I have the first edition DMG (the one that Jack Chick loved, with the Efreet holding the lady wearing a bikini) and even there it has a section of monsters as PCs and not being evil AS AN INDIVIDUAL. It also said expect to be discriminated against at every turn and have the villagers get the torches and pitchforks if you stroll into town. So the idea of a PC being what they want is not in any way new (1979), but the idea of deciding an entire species/group is new. Now I would have no issue using a perception and degree method and I prefer it for most game I play. But, D&D has alignment, and there are absolutes, and these absolutes are presented from a Human, civilized perspective, and everyone is graded on that curve. So of course barbaric marauders are considered evil. There is no moral relativism.
Is D&D alignment tied to humans? I think alignment is intended to be universal, not tied to a particular race or culture.
If there's an evil civilized human empire trying to crush all resistance to it (like Iuz), and the PCs are non-human resistance, that fits just as well as civilized humans fighting barbarians. My last D&D campaign had reversed alignment, for example, where orcs and other humanoids were good aligned - and humans and demi-humans were evil. I didn't change any of the alignment rules.
Quote from: jhkim;1134903Is D&D alignment tied to humans? I think alignment is intended to be universal, not tied to a particular race or culture.
If there's an evil civilized human empire trying to crush all resistance to it (like Iuz), and the PCs are non-human resistance, that fits just as well as civilized humans fighting barbarians. My last D&D campaign had reversed alignment, for example, where orcs and other humanoids were good aligned - and humans and demi-humans were evil. I didn't change any of the alignment rules.
It is quite obviously written from a human perspective, humans wrote it. It has to, by default be tied to human culture and behavior. That is why the acts considered evil are the acts real life humans can say are evil. It is why the acts humans consider good, are the acts of good in real life. I am sure if the Drow were real, and had an alignment chart as to what traits were desired (good) they are not going to have themselves written down as evil. So of course it is universal applied, but not with universal perspectives.
And it is why humans are not presented as monolithic representations of alignment. I was not tying civilization to good only, it can of course function as evil, and neutral, but the law does tie to ordered civilization. Again humans can be any alignment "out in the wild" because the entire alignment system is written from a human perspective.
Reality is a whole lot murkier. If an armed band of men were to ride up on a nomadic orc camp and start slaughtering them for their lord to expand his lands, I am pretty sure from the Orc perspective, they are on the side of good. Assuming no prior encounters from these specific groups, Human morality in the now, would also say the Orcs are on the side of right. Especially when the Lord's Men start riding down the orc toddlers running to and fro. I think you can play any humanoid group, kingdom, or race any way you want. But what I see from crawford is not so much saying, hey, make them what ever you want, the book is a guideline. He is pretty clearly setting a line for moral relativism as canon. I say go for it. If it sells great. If it bombs, great.
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1134829But somewhere along the way, we became the bad guys. Even though we were the outcasts, willing to take in those who'd been thrown out by the cliques and the popular groups.
And that hasn't changed. It's the whole point of theRPGsite.
A haven for those who value free speech in hobby that demands no dissent from the dominant narrative.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1134907And that hasn't changed. It's the whole point of theRPGsite.
A haven for those who value free speech in hobby that demands no dissent from the dominant narrative.
Wipes a single tear from his eye.
I don't trust grown men with Tintin haircuts.
Quote from: S'mon;1134851I actually had no idea that "Always Chaotic Evil" was a common trope in most people's games. Even Gary Gygax had Leda the Eclavadra (Drow high priestess) clone whose different nurture meant she turned out Good instead of Evil.
I suspect in the future we will have mostly Warcraft-style Orcs too, but personally I'm more on a pig-faced Orc kick right now.
According to some of the original players if I recall right then once a monster became a player character it could be anything really the player wanted. Good? Bad? Whatever?
I wonder when they'll suggest re-dubbing Lord of the Rings.
Quote from: AragornLegolas, what do you elf eyes see?
Quote from: LegolasThe same as yours, racist!
Quote from: Omega;1135079According to some of the original players if I recall right then once a monster became a player character it could be anything really the player wanted. Good? Bad? Whatever?
Yes, Gronan discussed this. If you had a class, you had magic pixie dust that allowed you to be unique from the rest of your species, but you'd start as a 1HD version of your monster species.
Tunnels & Trolls did this as well back in the 70s, then Palladium Fantasy did it in the 80s. AKA, playing a "good" monster has been around since the earliest days.
Quote from: oggsmash;1134415Well, I guess the intelligence debuff maybe reinforces the idea that intelligence is in any way attributed to genetics. Every educated person knows there is zero genetic effect on intelligence and that implication of any thing else is going to lead to problematic and scientifically false conclusions.
But they did leave the elves as having an intelligence buff.....problematic? Not sure.
These are different
species and the genetic impact on intelligence is real.
Dogs are not as intelligent as humans, more moral and better, sure, but not as intelligent. And the reason is genetic.
Now, let's look at another species, goblins. There is no reason for a game designer not to make them genetically less, or more, intelligent than humans.
Quote from: oggsmash;1134422Joking? Every geneticist worth their salt knows evolution and differences are only up to the upper neck area.
Utter bullshit. I wish I hadn't retired (or weren't so lazy) so I could talk to the genetics authors I used to work with.
Quote from: WillInNewHaven;1135167Utter bullshit. I wish I hadn't retired (or weren't so lazy) so I could talk to the genetics authors I used to work with.
First talk to whoever gives your sarcasm detector maintenance, because it's broken.
Elf privilege
Quote from: mightybrain;1135156I wonder when they'll suggest re-dubbing Lord of the Rings.
Theres allready been calls to make the LOTR reboot more "diverse". They wanted that for the last set of movies. Now they want Gandalf to be a woman, its too "white"... yadda yadda the same damn spiel.
The new Amazon show is going to be more diverse racially, just look at the cast so far.
https://deadline.com/gallery/the-lord-of-the-rings-amazon-studios-cast-photo-gallery/tca_lotr_headshots_danielweyman_by_charlie_carter/
Quote from: Trinculoisdead;1135248The new Amazon show is going to be more diverse racially, just look at the cast so far.
https://deadline.com/gallery/the-lord-of-the-rings-amazon-studios-cast-photo-gallery/tca_lotr_headshots_danielweyman_by_charlie_carter/
Not inherently a bad thing imo for 2nd Age Middle Earth. They could do it well as in Game of Thrones, or poorly as in The Witcher. Random black elves are really annoying but I'm not complaining if they have black Haradrim and Asian Easterlings and they don't have to be all baddies.
Not to flog the horse but despite my better judgement, I just read more pages of that linked forum massive thread than I intended to and it just spiraled out of control. Good grief where to start: Halflings as strong as Minotaurs, every player is the greatest hero ever (even at level 1!?) and far above average, I want to be a super-special case of something so I can be different, please make something optionally good so I can feel like I'm not being oppressive somehow. So, I ask, what's stopping them?
It feels like everyone wants to be spoon-fed and their ideas made canon, when there was nothing, nothing stopping anyone from doing any of these things. Is this a problem with younger players where if the rules don't say you can do it, then too bad? Like a bunch of lost souls who, without some WoC biggie stating it's ok, then one can't? Feels like some desperate form of vindication is required for some of these chuckle-heads so they can feel their ideas were worthy. Is this all clever marketing in WoC's part to brainwash people? The 5e DM's Guide spends a lot of pages talking about creating worlds, doing it yourself and how to go about it. I can't really blame the company as they are trying but apparently falling on deaf ears it seems.
Don't any of these players create their own worlds, campaigns or even simple starting scenarios? It feels like a lot of them are fated to buy the WoC product, play it as told to, rise and repeat. Such a lack of imagination is stunning and takes away one of the best things about being a DM. Freakin' lazy sods.
Once again feels like a fabricated, anticipated victory for a problem that was forcefully materialized out of thin air, whose only purpose is to be struck down with social justice and real-life morality issues, that never had any business being in the hobby in the first place. I'm getting deja-vu again...
Speaking of justice and morality, for those blowing the horn loudly, I think Gygax explained it pretty well reasons for adventurers being inherently travelling mercenaries for hire. The whole idea of players complaining about morale representation and balance for stuff, while playing a game whose main focus is to kick the crap out of things and take their stuff is such a juxtaposition, I just can't get over it. Why kill anything? Why have combat? If one is so worried about everyone's feelings, why spend your time playing a game where combat and eradicating things is the main focus? Everything has a family somewhere that will miss them so might as well hang up the armaments and open a tavern. Wait, one would be assisting murderhobos and by association just as bad. Better to make a farm somewhere and don't complain when monster raze your fields and burn your house down. Heh
On that sword swinging note, I just realised that even the way the 5e rules are setup, combat doesn't even have Encounter Reactions in their step-by-step of actions. In AD&D and before, it is specifically stated that due to a lucky roll, the 'baddies' might actually turn out to be indifferent or even friendly (DM's discretion if required). There are specific tables to roll that indicate how reactions will occur before a sword is drawn, built right into the combat rules.
In 5e, there's some vague mention of interaction and this mechanic is pages before under 'Social Interaction'. In 5e, the notion seems to be you encounter, you are immediately in combat. No wonder everyone goes murderhobo. Wonderful job WoC, taking out a crucial part of the whole combat sequence: You mired and obfuscated the one clear step that could avoid any killing taking place.
Unsurprisingly upon reading further into that accursed forum thread, the one notion everyone seems to love to death is players are so much better than everyone else and special 'cause they're the heroes! That doesn't smack of elitism at all as they look down at the average crowd. Nope, that's all hunky dory for some reason. I guess as long as the player is smarter or better then others all the morality and proper representation delusions goes out the window. Heroes are only heroes if your side you fight on thinks so. Wonder what the monsters call them as they and their buddies gets slaughtered for some XP, coin or territory.
To quote Gary in his 1e DM's Guide to show that there's nothing radical about this modern take:
While this game is loosely based on Feudal European technology, history and myth, it also contains elements from the Ancient Period, parts of more modern myth, and the mythos of many authors as well. Within its boundaries all sorts of societies and cultures can exist, and there is nothing to dictate that their needs be Feudal European.
Seems a reasonable approach to me. Guy had to pick some general type of social historical structure to base the game he made on. Not to mention that 2e had a slew of different worlds and scenarios to suit every whim. Guess some of these posting their views missed the memo and forgot they could change anything, anytime they wanted. Better to wait for the expansions from WoC to solve all their problems. Who needs a library to explore ideas when you will be appeased if you shout loudly enough?
All I can say is good luck WoC on trying to cater to everyone's specificity because that's a fools errand. No doubt you'll make a nice bit of coin being the heroes, slaughtering those bad ideas for some extra coins from the peasant folk. Hah! Good luck adventurers!
Ugh. I'm never going back to that forum. I think it made my brain hurt too much from banging my head on the table.
Funny, I removed all non-physical differences from races in my campaign long ago. More importantly though, I purged the idea cultural differences being ascribed to race. Having special "bow training" or "underground knowledge" in my world is a symptom of where you're from, not your height, the color of your skin or the shape of the your head. An elf that grows up in a underground city will know just as much about "stone" as the dwarves who make up the majority of the population there. To ascribe those qualities to race itself implies that communities are racially pure and isolated -- an assumption that is invariably challenged by players themselves, if not by my own world-building.
Strangely, what I failed to do, is announce my intentions in a grand public missive in order to demonstrate how woke I've become. I know, I'm slackin'.
Sad to see that I now need a protective disclaimer in my game ads. With it clearly spelled out that I am using the traditional evil D&D races as is with no changes whatsoever, absolutely non-negotiable or up for debate. I am not going to rework every evil race to make easily offended SJW rpg gamer feel better. If they still insist on joining perhaps tp "show me the error of ways" they will be asked to leave. Either for an online game or a real table game.
The only good thing is that will mean that older editions will be more popular as it would be too much money and time to change anything they deem problematic in D&D pre-5.
as for that megathread what a waste of my time neither side is trying to understand the other yet the pro SJW side really just wants echo chamber style arguments. Anything and everything they deem racist is and if you say no your racist beyond any shadow of doubt.
I wonder how exciting these new neutered adventures will be in D&D. No evil races everyone is the same cookie cutter character but hey at least they have their preferred pronouns and multiple genders included on the character sheet. So adventures are simply going to be the fantasy version of hobos. We can't explore land as that maybe considered encouraging colonialism. We can't hunt down evil races because even fictional races have evil rights. Mindflayers are not evil just victims of their special needs eating habits.
Ah well D&D had a good run though I think SJWs may well kill it.
My prediction: 6E will be about using the powers of Chaos and Hell to rally the 'dispossessed' humanoid races, overthrow the oppressive Lawful white human order, and establish a revolutionary society.
;)
At this point even before the SJWs poisoned my hobby I was done with the edition train. The only reason for 5e was to get an easier simpler version of D&D to run.
Quote from: sureshot;1135436At this point even before the SJWs poisoned my hobby I was done with the edition train. The only reason for 5e was to get an easier simpler version of D&D to run.
The main reasons I didn't buy into 5E were a) the rising progressivism and b) it didn't seem to offer anything that I couldn't do with a mix of Castles & Crusades and 2E supplements. :)
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1135433My prediction: 6E will be about using the powers of Chaos and Hell to rally the 'dispossessed' humanoid races, overthrow the oppressive Lawful white human order, and establish a revolutionary society.
;)
I'm pretty sure they're already playtesting the LARP version in Seattle. :P
Quote from: sureshot;1135431Sad to see that I now need a protective disclaimer in my game ads. With it clearly spelled out that I am using the traditional evil D&D races as is with no changes whatsoever, absolutely non-negotiable or up for debate. I am not going to rework every evil race to make easily offended SJW rpg gamer feel better. If they still insist on joining perhaps tp "show me the error of ways" they will be asked to leave. Either for an online game or a real table game.
The only good thing is that will mean that older editions will be more popular as it would be too much money and time to change anything they deem problematic in D&D pre-5.
as for that megathread what a waste of my time neither side is trying to understand the other yet the pro SJW side really just wants echo chamber style arguments. Anything and everything they deem racist is and if you say no your racist beyond any shadow of doubt.
I wonder how exciting these new neutered adventures will be in D&D. No evil races everyone is the same cookie cutter character but hey at least they have their preferred pronouns and multiple genders included on the character sheet. So adventures are simply going to be the fantasy version of hobos. We can't explore land as that maybe considered encouraging colonialism. We can't hunt down evil races because even fictional races have evil rights. Mindflayers are not evil just victims of their special needs eating habits.
Ah well D&D had a good run though I think SJWs may well kill it.
Older editions will be more popular only until they stop selling them because they are not PC.
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1135448Older editions will be more popular only until they stop selling them because they are not PC.
True yet unless WOTC suddenly stopped like money and refusing to keep their shareholders happy they will keep selling them as so they keep making money. If they truly do stop selling them then it is the end for Wotc D&D division as far as I'm concerned.
Then again for all we know it amybe WOTC virtue signalling and telling the SJWs what they want to hear rather than doing anything about it.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1135433Lawful white
Is that the new alignment system?
Quote from: sureshot;1135455True yet unless WOTC suddenly stopped like money and refusing to keep their shareholders happy they will keep selling them as so they keep making money. If they truly do stop selling them then it is the end for Wotc D&D division as far as I'm concerned.
Then again for all we know it amybe WOTC virtue signalling and telling the SJWs what they want to hear rather than doing anything about it.
WotC might not want to, but they have bent the knee and now they are expected to keep on bending it and to purify their products of anything anathema to the cult's dogma.
My prediction is they will come to a point where they react, but it might just be too little too late to save their 2 main products (MtG and D&D).
Quote from: Chris24601;1135440I'm pretty sure they're already playtesting the LARP version in Seattle. :P
If the entire staff of WotC doesn't relocate to CHAZ, they are obviously racists. WotC can prove their devotion to BLM right in their own backyard, thus it must be done ASAP.
Somehow we need our Twitter and Reddit warriors to get that trending. RPGPundit?
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1135448Older editions will be more popular only until they stop selling them because they are not PC.
WotC can't do pip snot diddly squat to the OSR.
We are legion! We are...forever!
And free. Free sells really well. Always has, always will.
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1135469WotC might not want to, but they have bent the knee and now they are expected to keep on bending it and to purify their products of anything anathema to the cult's dogma.
My prediction is they will come to a point where they react, but it might just be too little too late to save their 2 main products (MtG and D&D).
I love how WotW is already spreading negative publicity about their products by openly declaring MtG cards racist and replacing their online displays with a note telling the public how racist they are. And the text reads almost like the original card was spreading Neo-Nazi propaganda or something, and they had to take action against these "rAsIsT dEpIcTiOnS" that somehow made it into their catalog unheeded.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1135433My prediction: 6E will be about using the powers of Chaos and Hell to rally the 'dispossessed' humanoid races, overthrow the oppressive Lawful white human order, and establish a revolutionary society.
;)
Considering WOTCs current obsession with demons and devils and inserting them into just about everything... Wouldnt surprise me at all.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1135439The main reasons I didn't buy into 5E were a) the rising progressivism
They had Pundit as a consultant. Mike Mearls, who got shit for not "listening and believing" an accusation of abuse, was the lead designer. I have a hard time believing on day one release of 5e that you didn't "buy into" the edition because of "rising progressivism". Particularly since Pundit was here saying it had a fairly good basis going in, with genuine input from him, and a belief the guys in charge were listening and including some of his ideas in the game.
I can buy people turning away now because they don't like where Jeremy Crawford is headed with the game today, almost 6 years in. But in the first couple years? Naw, having a hard time buying progressivism was the turn-off from buying into the game then.
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1135448Older editions will be more popular only until they stop selling them because they are not PC.
This is an objective rather than subjective question.
It's been answered. This edition is way more popular than past editions. Just full stop, we know this for fact. It's now in public record, under Federal Trade Commission disclosures, could bring down the entire multi-billion dollar Hasbro if they were lying level disclosures (which they wouldn't lie about over such a small part of their company), we KNOW 5e is more profitable and has larger revenue than past editions. We KNOW it's selling more copies of it's core books than past editions. This is not a matter of opinion anymore.
That doesn't make older editions worse of course. And older editions sold at times when the population was smaller, so it's fair to say let's adjust for the size of the population. But older editions simply are not "more popular" than 5e. It's just plain not true. We have tons of objective evidence to demonstrate that. Not just sales declarations, but online game play numbers, convention gaming numbers, mention of editions online, searches for older editions online, bestseller lists, just so many different objective metrics all pointing at the identical answer - older editions are not more popular than 5e.
Quote from: Mistwell;1135540This is an objective rather than subjective question.
It's been answered. This edition is way more popular than past editions. Just full stop, we know this for fact. It's now in public record, under Federal Trade Commission disclosures, could bring down the entire multi-billion dollar Hasbro if they were lying level disclosures (which they wouldn't lie about over such a small part of their company), we KNOW 5e is more profitable and has larger revenue than past editions. We KNOW it's selling more copies of it's core books than past editions. This is not a matter of opinion anymore.
That doesn't make older editions worse of course. And older editions sold at times when the population was smaller, so it's fair to say let's adjust for the size of the population. But older editions simply are not "more popular" than 5e. It's just plain not true. We have tons of objective evidence to demonstrate that. Not just sales declarations, but online game play numbers, convention gaming numbers, mention of editions online, searches for older editions online, bestseller lists, just so many different objective metrics all pointing at the identical answer - older editions are not more popular than 5e.
Do you ever quit being disingenuous?
My comment has a context, meaning IF WotC goes full in woke AND D&D fails in popularity, THEN older editions will be more popular.
If you read what I was answering to you know this and are just a lying scumbag.
If you didn't read what I was answering to then you're just dumb.
Quote from: Mistwell;1135538They had Pundit as a consultant. Mike Mearls, who got shit for not "listening and believing" an accusation of abuse, was the lead designer. I have a hard time believing on day one release of 5e that you didn't "buy into" the edition because of "rising progressivism". Particularly since Pundit was here saying it had a fairly good basis going in, with genuine input from him, and a belief the guys in charge were listening and including some of his ideas in the game.
I can buy people turning away now because they don't like where Jeremy Crawford is headed with the game today, almost 6 years in. But in the first couple years? Naw, having a hard time buying progressivism was the turn-off from buying into the game then.
First of all, I've never particularly liked Pundit or trusted his judgment. Second, we were already seeing the explicit celebration of alternative sexuality and the anger at anyone who dared express qualms about it when the Basic Set was released. It wasn't a deal-breaker, but it was a strike against the game, and since I owned five versions of D&D and two variations already, 5E failed to offer enough to make me feel that the investment was worthwhile.
Quote from: Mistwell;1135538I can buy people turning away now because they don't like where Jeremy Crawford is headed with the game today, almost 6 years in. But in the first couple years? Naw, having a hard time buying progressivism was the turn-off from buying into the game then.
5e lost me as a player during the playtest because I couldn't find a reason to play that game as it offered me nothing as a GM or player that I can't get from other RPGs, but WotC lost me as a customer when they went full retard, which occurred mostly after 2016 with the TDS virus. But the dumb was rumbling in WotC during 4e, just nowhere like today as the Overton Window has shifted so much in the past 4 years.
As for 5e sales and popularity, I consider that a long term boon for the OSR.
One of the things that really bums me out is this feeling that I can pretty much write off any chance of a Kamigawa D&D book or a 5e update for Arabian Adventures. I mean, if everything is racist now, how do those get made?
Quote from: Almost_Useless;1135550One of the things that really bums me out is this feeling that I can pretty much write off any chance of a Kamigawa D&D book or a 5e update for Arabian Adventures. I mean, if everything is racist now, how do those get made?
They don't, is the short answer. MaRo admitted that Kamigawa is the most-requested "return to" set even prior to Theros, i.e. before shit really hit the fan, and WotC wouldn't do it. If you want Kamigawa in 5e or anywhere else, DIY. The bad news is, the lore novels are pretty bad. But if you can slog through them, or just lean on the cards, I suspect the payoff is worth it. (And I volunteer as tribute to help you test any content. :D )
Quote from: Spinachcat;11355485e lost me as a player during the playtest because I couldn't find a reason to play that game as it offered me nothing as a GM or player that I can't get from other RPGs, but WotC lost me as a customer when they went full retard, which occurred mostly after 2016 with the TDS virus. But the dumb was rumbling in WotC during 4e, just nowhere like today as the Overton Window has shifted so much in the past 4 years.
I am not really one for blanket boycotts. Mostly I just buy the stuff that interests me.
If you want to buy things from true creatives then you just have to accept that you are going to be getting at least some amount of crazy mixed up in it. Thats just the way that it works.
If WotC produces something I really want, I would buy it off eBay. That's how I deal with Paizo or Green Ronin. But other than Paizo's really excellent cardboard figures for convention travel, I haven't seen anything worth my money. Then there's the issue of me being the GM. Why would I want to promote the work of people who hate me? Especially when I can just run something else, equal or better, created by people who don't hate me?
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1135542Do you ever quit being disingenuous?
My comment has a context, meaning IF WotC goes full in woke AND D&D fails in popularity, THEN older editions will be more popular.
If that was your context, you appear to have wanted people to read your mind. You didn't SAY anything like those things. You appeared to be speaking in present-tense, and as the entire thread is present-tense, I have no idea why you thought there was some obvious implied "If" in any of what you said. At least, not how I read it. Have you considered the possibility you didn't communicate what you meant to communicate?
Quote from: Spinachcat;11355485e lost me as a player during the playtest because I couldn't find a reason to play that game as it offered me nothing as a GM or player that I can't get from other RPGs
Sure that's a legit complaint for when it was released.
Quotebut WotC lost me as a customer when they went full retard, which occurred mostly after 2016
I mean, really? Are you really saying you were a still an active customer in 2015? I think they lost you before that happened.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1135547First of all, I've never particularly liked Pundit or trusted his judgment. Second, we were already seeing the explicit celebration of alternative sexuality and the anger at anyone who dared express qualms about it when the Basic Set was released.
This? (From the 2015 version before they removed the consultants names)
QuoteYou don't need to be confined to binary notions of sex
and gender. The elf god Corellon Larethian is often seen
as androgynous, for example, and some elves in the
multiverse are made in Corellon's image. You could also
play a female character who presents herself as a man,
a man who feels trapped in a female body, or a bearded
female dwarf who hates being mistaken for a male.
Likewise, your character's sexual orientation is for you
to decide.
Its just stating the obvious rather than leaving it implied. Some blew up over it due to other virtue signalling back then. But when you look at it, its just another case of using alot of words to say very little. "Anythings possible"
Lets not forget that some versions of TSR era games had chargen examples of players creating characters opposite their gender.
Quote from: Mistwell;1135574I mean, really? Are you really saying you were a still an active customer in 2015? I think they lost you before that happened.
I was an active 4e customer, then a 5e internal playtest DM, then not a 5e customer, but I was open to seeing what else WotC might produce. Before WotC went full retard, I would have bought 5e Star Frontiers or 5e Gamma World or 5e Planescape if they were good games. Now, they'd have to be great games...and I'd buy them secondhand. Same with any of WotC's boardgames or cardgames.
But considering where we are today in the culture war, I am looking at my DMing choices. AKA, if I am going to promote someone else's work, why should I ever promote someone who hates me? Especially since this isn't 1980 with a dozen RPG choices on the market. It's 2020 and I have a gazillion choices, old and new.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1135583I was an active 4e customer, then a 5e internal playtest DM, then not a 5e customer, but I was open to seeing what else WotC might produce. Before WotC went full retard, I would have bought 5e Star Frontiers or 5e Gamma World or 5e Planescape if they were good games. Now, they'd have to be great games...and I'd buy them secondhand. Same with any of WotC's boardgames or cardgames.
But considering where we are today in the culture war, I am looking at my DMing choices. AKA, if I am going to promote someone else's work, why should I ever promote someone who hates me? Especially since this isn't 1980 with a dozen RPG choices on the market. It's 2020 and I have a gazillion choices, old and new.
My timeline and game interests are different, but otherwise, this is where I'm at.
When I started seriously working with my own game design again (as opposed to fiddling with them in spare moments), it never crossed my mind that the driving force to finish it would be, "Have a game I like that isn't made by someone that hates me." Don't get me wrong. The main reason to do it is to have a game that does something a little different than what I can buy, so that I can more easily run the kind of game that I want. Which has nothing to do with anyone else, except insomuch as no one else is producing a game to match my rather niche tastes. But a reason for wanting it done (wanting to have it) and the motivations to work hard and finish it, don't always line up 100%.
I want to own a game where if it is screwed up, the screw ups are my own fault, and thus can be fixed by me with my priorities and my sensibilities. If you want something done right, do it yourself.
Quote from: Mistwell;1135573If that was your context, you appear to have wanted people to read your mind. You didn't SAY anything like those things. You appeared to be speaking in present-tense, and as the entire thread is present-tense, I have no idea why you thought there was some obvious implied "If" in any of what you said. At least, not how I read it. Have you considered the possibility you didn't communicate what you meant to communicate?
Maybe, because as I say in that comment you're quote mining, I'm responding to someone? As in their comment is what provides the context?
But do go ahead and keep on being a disingenuous twat. I'm done with you.
Edited to add the proof you're quote mining my comment because you're a disingenuous twat:
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1135542Do you ever quit being disingenuous?
My comment has a context, meaning IF WotC goes full in woke AND D&D fails in popularity, THEN older editions will be more popular.
If you read what I was answering to you know this and are just a lying scumbag.
If you didn't read what I was answering to then you're just dumb.
Second edit to add the context:
https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?42208-Jeremy-Crawford-on-D-amp-D-Races-Going-Forward&p=1135448&viewfull=1#post1135448 (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?42208-Jeremy-Crawford-on-D-amp-D-Races-Going-Forward&p=1135448&viewfull=1#post1135448)
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1135610it never crossed my mind that the driving force to finish it would be, "Have a game I like that isn't made by someone that hates me."
It's absolutely crazy that we've gotten here!
I wish I loved DCC or C&C because those publishers seem to just want to please customers and build a positive fan community. Palladium won't fall to this ideological nonsense, but the company barely exists and the fanbase has crumbled. Which is a damn shame because the Palladium Open House conventions are some of the absolute best RPG events I've attended.
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1135610I want to own a game where if it is screwed up, the screw ups are my own fault, and thus can be fixed by me with my priorities and my sensibilities. If you want something done right, do it yourself.
Exactly. I enjoy the writing & design process and I've enjoyed basic layout in the past so its not a burden. Of course, getting players for a new game is an obstacle, but handing out a free book to everybody in your group works wonders. Merry Christmas, this is our next campaign!
Quote from: Spinachcat;1135669It's absolutely crazy that we've gotten here!
I wish I loved DCC or C&C because those publishers seem to just want to please customers and build a positive fan community. Palladium won't fall to this ideological nonsense, but the company barely exists and the fanbase has crumbled. Which is a damn shame because the Palladium Open House conventions are some of the absolute best RPG events I've attended.
I couldn't get into DCC for some reason. C&C I keep going back to run because I have a ton of stuff for it, it's quick and easy to get characters together and the game started, but it doesn't scratch the itch nearly as well as Old Palladium, WFRP (1st or 2nd), or Alternity does for the wife and I.
Quote from: Mistwell;1134249Jeremy Crawford's comments on the direction races are taking going forward in D&D (https://www.enworld.org/threads/wotcs-jeremy-crawford-on-d-d-races-going-forward.672716/).
The short of it: They're slowly heading towards treating all things which are labeled "humanoid" to drop Intelligence debuffs and the mandatory evil alignment, like orcs, drow, and Vistani (which is a gypsy analogue in Ravenloft) as being on their radar for some changes that recognized a wider range of morality, or "Any creature with the Humanoid type should have the full capacity to be any alignmnet, i.e., they should have free will and souls."
They will likely also reclassify some "humanoids" in the monster manual like Gnolls to be "Fiends" and keep the mandatory evil alignment, as that aspect is directly sourced from "spawned hyenas who fed on demon-touched rotten meat". Maybe similar for minotaurs. But if a particular setting does not use that type of origin story for something like gnolls, it might keep them as humanoid but without the mandatory evil alignment.
I don't have to buy the new version. I LIKE MY ORCS EVIL! If orcs aren't evil, you don't get to kill them as often and take their treasure!
In the next version of D&D, the only villains allowed in the game will white heterosexual males from male dominated, colonial societies. There will, therefore, be no need for a Monster Manual. Wizards of the Coast will instead publish Danathar's Guide to Diversity, in which a great many "progressive" societies are detailed, but you'll ever only need to read exactly one of them because they'll all be precisely identical. At lower levels, the game will be about killing all the aforementioned white males and taking their stuff. At epic levels, it'll be about finding Progressives that transgress the Grand and Blessed Church of Purity in some extremely minor way, and utterly destroying their lives.
Quote from: SavageSchemer;1135732In the next version of D&D, the only villains allowed in the game will white heterosexual males from male dominated, colonial societies. There will, therefore, be no need for a Monster Manual. Wizards of the Coast will instead publish Danathar's Guide to Diversity, in which a great many "progressive" societies are detailed, but you'll ever only need to read exactly one of them because they'll all be precisely identical. At lower levels, the game will be about killing all the aforementioned white males and taking their stuff. At epic levels, it'll be about finding Progressives that transgress the Grand and Blessed Church of Purity in some extremely minor way, and utterly destroying their lives.
Epic.
Quote from: SavageSchemer;1135732In the next version of D&D, the only villains allowed in the game will white heterosexual males from male dominated, colonial societies. There will, therefore, be no need for a Monster Manual. Wizards of the Coast will instead publish Danathar's Guide to Diversity, in which a great many "progressive" societies are detailed, but you'll ever only need to read exactly one of them because they'll all be precisely identical. At lower levels, the game will be about killing all the aforementioned white males and taking their stuff. At epic levels, it'll be about finding Progressives that transgress the Grand and Blessed Church of Purity in some extremely minor way, and utterly destroying their lives.
Now, now. I'm sure they'll allow you to fight elves and angels. And you'll need stats for your goblin, demonic and diabolic allies, too. :)
Welp, I'm officially never supporting Wizards of the Coast ever again
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1136116Now, now. I'm sure they'll allow you to fight elves and angels. And you'll need stats for your goblin, demonic and diabolic allies, too. :)
No they won't, well maybe angels, because they have been contacted by "neo pagans" in regards to the representation and stats of elves, dwarves, etc...
I wish I was kidding.
Edited to add:
In the same conversation where they say that they also say this will be in 6e.
So 6e confirmed in the works, any bets as to how woke will it be?
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1136124So 6e confirmed in the works, any bets as to how woke will it be?
So woke that it kills the line and they'll blame the hateful white males for not buying books that say white males are evil and need to die.
I'll further predict that they go even more crazy when the Paizo/Pathfinder phenomenon repeats; only this time the draw will be that the company/system that's close enough to 5e is apolitical and only talks about game mechanics.
Quote from: Chris24601;1136149So woke that it kills the line and they'll blame the hateful white males for not buying books that say white males are evil and need to die.
I'll further predict that they go even more crazy when the Paizo/Pathfinder phenomenon repeats; only this time the draw will be that the company/system that's close enough to 5e is apolitical and only talks about game mechanics.
Then it's gonna be some company other than Paizo/Pathfinder to do it this time around, cuz they changed the term for "Races" to "Ancestry" in their current edition, cuz the word "race" is problematic. And they just released a statement about their next upcoming adventure path apologizing that characters get to play as detectives working for the city watch in it, cuz obviously all cops are bad now, cuz BLM, so the only conceivable reason for policing is to be a fascist, not to stop a string of murders going on.
Is there even a solid 5e alternative right now?
Quote from: Chris24601;1136149So woke that it kills the line and they'll blame the hateful white males for not buying books that say white males are evil and need to die.
I'll further predict that they go even more crazy when the Paizo/Pathfinder phenomenon repeats; only this time the draw will be that the company/system that's close enough to 5e is apolitical and only talks about game mechanics.
My friend hopes this is cyclical and believes a push back will happen; 7th edition may end up OK.
I played 1st edition primarily for many years. If they make game decisions based on politics I will vote with my wallet. I have a long memory and can outlast this 'movement.'
I think if WotC release a shitty 6e I'll continue my 5e campaigns to their natural conclusions then play OSR and Mini Six. Maybe I'll just play 1e/OSRIC for the next 20 years. Never have to worry about Culture War bollocks that way. I have a gorgeous good-hearted girlfriend, great friends, a son who loves me and a kickass lawyer. We may be in a new Dark Age but I think I'll be ok.
Quote from: VisionStorm;1136150Then it's gonna be some company other than Paizo/Pathfinder to do it this time around, cuz they changed the term for "Races" to "Ancestry" in their current edition, cuz the word "race" is problematic. And they just released a statement about their next upcoming adventure path apologizing that characters get to play as detectives working for the city watch in it, cuz obviously all cops are bad now, cuz BLM, so the only conceivable reason for policing is to be a fascist, not to stop a string of murders going on.
That's why I said "Paizo/Pathfinder PHENOMENON" It won't be Paizo/PF this time, but there will be some other company that sees the market opportunity of appealing to those who feel excluded by the new edition and goes after it.
QuoteIs there even a solid 5e alternative right now?
Was there a solid alternative to the impending 4E in 2007?
I've brought up the debacle of Arcanis trying write its own system before (and being very bad at math), but the only reason they even tried in the first place was because when news of 4E and the GSL came out, they didn't want to be stuck selling supplements to a system that you could only get the core books for in a used bookstore. They felt they needed to build their own system then because 3e was done and buried and they didn't want to be stuck with 4E's GSL (the truly funny thing in hindsight was that if WotC hadn't ditched the OGL for the GSL and pulled Paizo's license for Dragon and Dungeon magazines, Pathfinder would have been a 4E setting... WotC literally created their own worst enemy).
There was no obvious contender to 4E at that point. I was actually involved in the game industry at the time doing ancillary products and none of the insiders at the time thought Pathfinder was going to be anything but a niche product for a few disgruntled holdouts. No one in their wildest dreams in 2007 when 4E was announced thought Pathfinder would be outselling D&D in just a few years.
Essentially, there won't be a solid alternative until there's a NEED for a solid alternative.
I can also see the prospect of history repeating itself with a GSL type move for 6e too; only this time it will be done as a means to limit the "problematic" material that third-parties can produce using the core of their super-woke game rather than 4E's move to try and capture more of the market in a bid to reach major brand status at Hasbro. SJWs are bad at learning from history; mostly because they keep tearing it down and rewriting it to fit their narrative.
Quote from: Lord Hobie;1135005I don't trust grown men with Tintin haircuts.
This made me belly laugh.
Quote from: S'mon;1136190I think if WotC release a shitty 6e I'll continue my 5e campaigns to their natural conclusions then play OSR and Mini Six. Maybe I'll just play 1e/OSRIC for the next 20 years. Never have to worry about Culture War bollocks that way. I have a gorgeous good-hearted girlfriend, great friends, a son who loves me and a kickass lawyer. We may be in a new Dark Age but I think I'll be ok.
You are living the dream man
Quote from: Slambo;1136274You are living the dream man
I'm also off work sick with back/pelvis pain inflammation & fatigue (typing this lying flat), but on Monday my lovely amazing girlfriend is getting a swimming pool installed at her new house so I can get better!!! :cool: :cool: :cool: (No, no one else can have her!) :p
Quote from: S'mon;1136278I'm also off work sick with back/pelvis pain inflammation & fatigue (typing this lying flat), but on Monday my lovely amazing girlfriend is getting a swimming pool installed at her new house so I can get better!!! :cool: :cool: :cool: (No, no one else can have her!) :p
Okay so slightly less of the dream but you can buy a new pelvis and back wmits 2020 cybernetics should be avalible soon. Just mind the humanity cost.
Quote from: Slambo;1136309Okay so slightly less of the dream but you can buy a new pelvis and back wmits 2020 cybernetics should be avalible soon. Just mind the humanity cost.
Thanks for that! :D
Quote from: Almost_Useless;1135550One of the things that really bums me out is this feeling that I can pretty much write off any chance of a Kamigawa D&D book or a 5e update for Arabian Adventures. I mean, if everything is racist now, how do those get made?
They get made by third party publishers using the OGL. Like always.
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1136124In the same conversation where they say that they also say this will be in 6e.
So 6e confirmed in the works, any bets as to how woke will it be?
They do not say they are working on 6e.
Link or STFU.
Quote from: Mistwell;1136551They do not say they are working on 6e.
Link or STFU.
So sure of yourself... Roll for sanity and suck my dick.
Quote from: Mistwell;1136551They do not say they are working on 6e.
2024 is the 50th anniversary and 5e will be 10 years old. Perfect time for new corebooks to be sold.
Whether these 50th anniversary corebooks is just reprints, a cleaned up 5e or a new 6e remains to be seen. Doubtful we'll hear about an external playtest before 2023 and internal silence will be important to keep 5e selling in the meantime. No reason to announce early and create lameduck years for your sales.
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1136555So sure of yourself... Roll for sanity and suck my dick.
I am positive you have no link, no evidence, absolutely zero behind your claim. I am positive you will never provide such a link here. And I am positive you're trying to cover for having just been caught in a blatant lie and worried you won't be able to weasel your way out of it.
Prove me wrong.
Quote from: Spinachcat;11365682024 is the 50th anniversary and 5e will be 10 years old. Perfect time for new corebooks to be sold.
Whether these 50th anniversary corebooks is just reprints, a cleaned up 5e or a new 6e remains to be seen. Doubtful we'll hear about an external playtest before 2023 and internal silence will be important to keep 5e selling in the meantime. No reason to announce early and create lameduck years for your sales.
There sure could be one then. But that's not what I am responding to. I am responding to him saying, "In the same conversation...6e confirmed in the works..." Which is him fibbing for attention. That would be massive news, plastered all over the place, if they confirmed in a public video that they are working on 6e. They didn't though. And I want to watch GeekyBugle squirm about being caught in that fib and trying to weasel out of it. I expect his primary method of trying to weasel out of it is to go on the offense, attacking me personally and not providing a link to anything. Because if the attention is on me, it's not on him supporting his claim.
I hope you and Geeky have great fun in your quest for thread dominance.
Please make sure to provide LOLZ and perhaps even battle by posting dank and spicy memes.
Fight!
Quote from: Spinachcat;11365682024 is the 50th anniversary and 5e will be 10 years old. Perfect time for new corebooks to be sold.
Whether these 50th anniversary corebooks is just reprints, a cleaned up 5e or a new 6e remains to be seen. Doubtful we'll hear about an external playtest before 2023 and internal silence will be important to keep 5e selling in the meantime. No reason to announce early and create lameduck years for your sales.
And look how convenient it is that Mike Mearls has stepped down to take a new "mystery" position.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1136593I hope you and Geeky have great fun in your quest for thread dominance.
Please make sure to provide LOLZ and perhaps even battle by posting dank and spicy memes.
Fight!
Nah, let him cook in his own juices.
Quote from: Shasarak;1136605And look how convenient it is that Mike Mearls has stepped down to take a new "mystery" position.
Wait? He is off D&D again? When?
Quote from: Omega;1136704Wait? He is off D&D again? When?
There is a small thread about it:
Mearls (officially) out as D&D manager. Ray Winninger is in. (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?41988-Mearls-(officially)-out-as-D-amp-D-manager-Ray-Winninger-is-in)
Quote from: Shasarak;1136741There is a small thread about it:
Mearls (officially) out as D&D manager. Ray Winninger is in. (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?41988-Mearls-(officially)-out-as-D-amp-D-manager-Ray-Winninger-is-in)
And then he came back.
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1136756And then he came back.
The title of that thread should probably be adjusted to add that part.
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1136756And then he came back.
Although no one seems quite sure what he's doing beyond 'working on the tabletop side of D&D again,' so it's not impossible that he's working on the early development of 6th Edition.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1136784Although no one seems quite sure what he's doing beyond 'working on the tabletop side of D&D again,' so it's not impossible that he's working on the early development of 6th Edition.
I am praying that this is true but not perhaps for the same reason that others might.
As they are working to sanitize the game, I am ready to make a clean break. A new edition would clearly demarcate my line of no more purchases. Additionally, I believe this will be their new (4th edition "moment") where they alienate the actual buyers. At that point they might finally "get woke" to what paying fans want.
My friend believes the pendulum will swing back.
For my part, I have been reading various forums and see people who are pushing to make orcs and drow "slightly misunderstood" are also the same people that talk about pirating or sharing codes for online services. Their numbers do not equate to implied purchasing power as I hope WOTC will find out.
Sorry for the tangent.
On a slightly related note, Ryo Mizuno, author of the manga/anime Record of the Lodoss War, made a tweet expressing concern, based on the episode of Community that was recently memory holed, that the entire concept of dark elves might soon be considered racist resulting in his old manga getting the same treatment. This, of course, is the logical conclusion of the entire "evil races" line of thinking we are seeing today.
https://twitter.com/rayforcegame/status/1277189790857756672
Quote from: hedgehobbit;1136826On a slightly related note, Ryo Mizuno, author of the manga/anime Record of the Lodoss War, made a tweet expressing concern, based on the episode of Community that was recently memory holed, that the entire concept of dark elves might soon be considered racist resulting in his old manga getting the same treatment. This, of course, is the logical conclusion of the entire "evil races" line of thinking we are seeing today.
https://twitter.com/rayforcegame/status/1277189790857756672
Hold onto your old books, friends. It will get worse before better.
It's sad. Gygax made some cool stuff. The terminally sensitive will break all of our toys if allowed. What's next?
I am kicking myself for not having Benny Hill or Monty Python on DVD set now, and I have been trying to get my (legal) .pdfs of TSR/WW stuff. But yeah, DriveThruRPG without competition or an iron clad commitment to keep content up is worrisome. Speculative market for my precious box sets will only get worse from here. :(
But that also makes the bargain hunting all the more keen! :) Buy physical copies and store spare .pdfs in thumbdrives for your fireboxes! :p
Quote from: hedgehobbit;1136826On a slightly related note, Ryo Mizuno, author of the manga/anime Record of the Lodoss War, made a tweet expressing concern, based on the episode of Community that was recently memory holed, that the entire concept of dark elves might soon be considered racist resulting in his old manga getting the same treatment. This, of course, is the logical conclusion of the entire "evil races" line of thinking we are seeing today.
https://twitter.com/rayforcegame/status/1277189790857756672
I guess Goblin Slayer is basically Hitler at this point.
Quote from: hedgehobbit;1136826On a slightly related note, Ryo Mizuno, author of the manga/anime Record of the Lodoss War, made a tweet expressing concern, based on the episode of Community that was recently memory holed, that the entire concept of dark elves might soon be considered racist resulting in his old manga getting the same treatment. This, of course, is the logical conclusion of the entire "evil races" line of thinking we are seeing today.
https://twitter.com/rayforcegame/status/1277189790857756672
Wait til they discover "Good Guys Wear Black", 'Batman', and 'Darth Vader' are all white guys dressed in black.
So now any negative connotation to the physical appearance of "darkness" in any association with 'negativity' even as an objective truth "Black Holes are singularities from which light can't escape" - are all racist.
Thanks WotC. How many corollaries of this insanity will fundamentally change D&D ultimately by this logic?
No more Ninja in Kara-tur? Can't have black pajamas on assassins.
No more Duergar? Evil slave-economy dark-skinned dwarves.
No more Jolly Roger flags... that black background is offensive.
No more Spelljammer. Too much black in space where evil shit lives.
No more Necromancy. Too much edgelord black robes, and black-colored spell-effects.
No more Evards Black Tentacles? Clearly racist and allusion to the enslavement of Africans from centuries ago.
No more Evil. Because you know... we're all on a spectrum.
No more Anti-Paladins - see above.
No more Negative Plane in fact. It's always portrayed as dark.
No more Shadowvar. Shades.Prolly throw Wraiths and Spectres in there too.
this is kinda fun!
Quote from: Warpiglet;1136827Hold onto your old books, friends. It will get worse before better.
It's sad. Gygax made some cool stuff. The terminally sensitive will break all of our toys if allowed. What's next?
If they have their way then the next step is to make possession of these "problematic" materials illegal.
Quote from: hedgehobbit;1136826On a slightly related note, Ryo Mizuno, author of the manga/anime Record of the Lodoss War, made a tweet expressing concern, based on the episode of Community that was recently memory holed, that the entire concept of dark elves might soon be considered racist resulting in his old manga getting the same treatment. This, of course, is the logical conclusion of the entire "evil races" line of thinking we are seeing today.
https://twitter.com/rayforcegame/status/1277189790857756672
Yeah I bought the blue ray series real quick when I heard about that. Get physical copies while you still can people.
Honestly, if it gets to the point where they are censoring things like this to the point where owning them is illegal, man, we might as well just have our civil war. Until then, there are enough people to keep the old spirit alive I think. SJWism was basically almost dead, at the very least quiet, until this recent current salvo we're experiencing.
Quote from: tenbones;1136935No more Ninja in Kara-tur? Can't have black pajamas on assassins.
How about they just remove the book altogether?
https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?42271-Now-they-are-coming-for-your-old-rulebooks
Quote from: Omega;1136941If they have their way then the next step is to make possession of these "problematic" materials illegal.
And of course all those illegal materials will need to be collected. Then burned.
Hmmm, where have we seen that before?
Pretty soon this "cultural war" is just going to be "war".
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1135433My prediction: 6E will be about using the powers of Chaos and Hell to rally the 'dispossessed' humanoid races, overthrow the oppressive Lawful white human order, and establish a revolutionary society.
;)
So just like real life.
Quote from: Omega;1136941If they have their way then the next step is to make possession of these "problematic" materials illegal.
It was a pleasure to burn. It was a special pleasure to see things eaten, to see things blackened and changed. With the brass nozzle in his fists, with this great python spitting its venomous kerosene upon the world, the blood pounded in his head, and his hands were the hands of some amazing conductor playing all the symphonies of blazing and burning to bring down the tatters and charcoal ruins of history. With his symbolic helmet numbered 451 on his solid head, and his eyes all orange flame with the thought of what came next, he flicked the igniter and the house jumped up in a gorging fire that burned the evening sky red and yellow and black. He strode in a swarm of fireflies. He wanted above all, like the old joke, to shove a marshmallow on a stick in the furnace, while the flapping pigeon-winged books died on the porch and lawn of the house. While the books went up in sparkling whirls and blew away on a wind turned dark with burning.
Quote from: ZetaRidley;1136993Honestly, if it gets to the point where they are censoring things like this to the point where owning them is illegal, man, we might as well just have our civil war. Until then, there are enough people to keep the old spirit alive I think. SJWism was basically almost dead, at the very least quiet, until this recent current salvo we're experiencing.
Those people were for sure networking and emailing and just waiting for any trigger they could find. It is what they do 24/7. Expanding unemployment to people who have never had a job and sending out stimulus checks just created a super easy way to fund "protesting".
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1137003How about they just remove the book altogether?
https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?42271-Now-they-are-coming-for-your-old-rulebooks
... yeah even my idiotic sarcasm is fodder for their "genius".
Quote from: Omega;1135211Theres allready been calls to make the LOTR reboot more "diverse". They wanted that for the last set of movies. Now they want Gandalf to be a woman, its too "white"... yadda yadda the same damn spiel.
Isn't that basically cultural appropriation?
Quote from: Jfrog;1137322Isn't that basically cultural appropriation?
Only when they want it to be.
Today its "inclusion!"
Tomorrow its "tokenism!"
And the day after its "appropriation and blackfacing or blacksplotation!!!!!!!!"
And then some new hallucination.
Same with RPGs and other games. You are damned if you do. Damed if you dont. Damned if you fix it. Damned if you fixed it better. and so on ad nausium.
Quote from: S'mon;1134851I actually had no idea that "Always Chaotic Evil" was a common trope in most people's games. Even Gary Gygax had Leda the Eclavadra (Drow high priestess) clone whose different nurture meant she turned out Good instead of Evil.
I suspect in the future we will have mostly Warcraft-style Orcs too, but personally I'm more on a pig-faced Orc kick right now.
Al-Qadim also was a setting where orcs, goblins etc mixed freely with the standard D&D races in the cities.
Most of these 'critics' seem to be attacking cliches that are more in their own minds rather than in the game itself. No one is forcing anyone to play super vanilla D&D.
Maybe we can save Oriental Adventures through reverse psychology? Japan's history of war crimes against civilian populations and China's ongoing human rights abuses mean they need to be cancelled as cultural influences. OA should be dropped so D&D can be protected from such harmful influences.
Half the SJW cult think that China's human rights abuses are either just and right because its what they do to people too. Or they dismiss it as just nasty rumors spread by toxic white males to discredit poor helpless China! Think of the heathen Chinese!
Quote from: SavageSchemer;1137030Pretty soon this "cultural war" is just going to be "war".
That is pretty silly talk. We got through the Vietnam war, I doubt we're going to fall apart over pop culture hysteria.
Quote from: Rhiannon;1137563That is pretty silly talk. We got through the Vietnam war, I doubt we're going to fall apart over pop culture hysteria.
Except that politics is downstream from culture. And this goes a bit deeper than just pop culture hysteria. You've got people who absolutely believe -- believe like Alex Jones believes in chemtrails -- that we must expurgate every trace of 'problematic' material, past and present, from our lives. Even if it defies logic or reality.
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1137566Except that politics is downstream from culture.
That actually sounds a lot like the Marxist-Leninist line on the Superstructure to me and history has proven it to be nonsense.
The far left were far more extreme in the 60s and 70s, many have forgotten that and believe it was all about hippies but the Weathermen, Black Liberation Army, Symbionese Liberation Army and FALN were all active and killing people at the time. There was far left and far right terrorists in Europe as well. Most of the mass shootings in the US recently have been far right extremists.
Today's street fighting between far right and left needs to be cracked down on but it is no where near what we saw back then.
Crawford has followed this up with a post on alignment. (https://www.enworld.org/threads/wotcs-jeremy-crawford-talks-d-d-alignment-changes.673029/)
I think it's safe to say that we're shaping up for a 'more enlightened' 5.5 at least.
Quote from: Rhiannon;1137563That is pretty silly talk. We got through the Vietnam war, I doubt we're going to fall apart over pop culture hysteria.
Then take a nice walk in any city where this "pop culture hysteria" has taken root. Or try to buy legitimately any game they have, or will get removed and if possible erased.
As I have said before: I really hope they go ahead with a 5.5 or a 6 or whatever.
It will be a clear line for me. I can happily move forward with what I have.
I would also like the experiment to fail and see them "bring back" devils and demons again (figuratively) after they see sales decline.
Realistically though, the dip in sales will probably just be seen as an inevitable regression to the mean after 5e sold like hot cakes. I doubt they go broke after getting woke and hence bet this wussification is here to stay...
Quote from: Rhiannon;1137563That is pretty silly talk. We got through the Vietnam war, I doubt we're going to fall apart over pop culture hysteria.
Common misconception is that which does not kill you makes you stronger. Sometimes it just beats you down and makes you weaker for the next ordeal. After enough of them, well.......
Quote from: Warpiglet;1137587.
I would also like the experiment to fail and see them "bring back" devils and demons again (figuratively) after they see sales decline.
Not sure what you mean here, there are lots of Demons and Devils in 5e.
Quote from: Warpiglet;1137587As I have said before: I really hope they go ahead with a 5.5 or a 6 or whatever.
It will be a clear line for me. I can happily move forward with what I have.
I would also like the experiment to fail and see them "bring back" devils and demons again (figuratively) after they see sales decline.
Realistically though, the dip in sales will probably just be seen as an inevitable regression to the mean after 5e sold like hot cakes. I doubt they go broke after getting woke and hence bet this wussification is here to stay...
I find it interesting that a company would be willing to say "Yup, we had this wildly successful and profitable thing going. Now let's do the complete opposite, that should be even more profitable." You would think it would never happen in a rational organisation... but it inevitably does, and most companies
do not even learn from it after their plans crash and burn.
The goal of SJW's isn't to solve racial problems, but to create them. That is why appeasement never works, because the more you bow down to them and give them what they want, the more racism they have to find. Does that mean that none of the specific topics that they bring up are completely without basis? No, not necessarily. Maybe there are certain aspects of some piece of fiction that could be legitimately be called racist, usually in some trivially minor way. Is it a little bit racist that in World of Warcraft that humans have European style architecture while Trolls have a Jamaican accent and Central American pyramids? Maybe slightly, but does that actually hurt anybody? No, not at all. Is the depiction of orcs in fantasy in any way responsible for black people being poorer than whites or them getting killed by police? No, those things are far more the result of black people's behavior and the conditions created by left wing policies which reign supreme in big cities.
Finding or imagining micro-aggressions is just the way that left wing extremists wage their culture war, it is the casus belli for their war on whites, America, and Western civilization itself.
So, as we see the fantasy (and sci-fi, RPG, geeky, etc.) community bend over backwards to address these imagined evils, expect to see the SJW's become even more extreme and find even more outlandish things to be outraged over.
I'm beginning to think that depiction of orcs in my next fantasy setting needs to be scrawny pasty-faced humanoids. They are androgynous, with little observable sexual dimorphism beneath their cultural attire of black hoods and masks. A variety of clubs and chains are their racial weapons of preference. Their language sounds like shrieking gibberish to outsiders. They regularly work as mercenaries for evil overlords who pay them to make swarm attacks on cultural landmarks of the overlord's enemies and generally incite terror in the populace in preparation for conquest.
Too on the nose?
Quote from: Chris24601;1137807I'm beginning to think that depiction of orcs in my next fantasy setting needs to be scrawny pasty-faced humanoids. They are androgynous, with little observable sexual dimorphism beneath their cultural attire of black hoods and masks. A variety of clubs and chains are their racial weapons of preference. Their language sounds like shrieking gibberish to outsiders. They regularly work as mercenaries for evil overlords who pay them to make swarm attacks on cultural landmarks of the overlord's enemies and generally incite terror in the populace in preparation for conquest.
Too on the nose?
Orcs are savages that want to tear down civilization even if doing so means that they all eventually starve. I think you are onto a good idea!