Post Tasha's: Are you embracing the optional Character rules? Stats and skills

[esmdev]

To be honest, I liked 2E when a race was a race and a class was a class, and you could pretty much tell who was who and what was what.

That being said, as I am running 5E at the moment, I already accept that the lines on classes are quite blurry. So I took a poll of my players about the new racial options and they mostly voted for using the options. I should note that despite it being available most of the players ended up sticking with the unmodified race. So it didn't really change much.

[Ragnar Tryggvy]

I am also against it. While I enjoy creativity with character creation and the game is to have fun, making a goblin the equivalent to a half-giant just seems to me to just be reducing character race to just another meaningless skin. It isn't about balance, it isn't about fun, it is about not being yelled at for being insensitive in an age of overly sensitive. If openly embraced, this will be the first step, possibly followed by deities being renamed 'Really Power Folk' so as not to offend the religious folks, which they have already made steps to avoid. But, I don't begrudge those that embrace it either. This is a game about having fun. If that is what makes it fun for you, embrace it. It just isn't what makes it fun for me. The racial dynamics are a part of all the fantasy movies and novels I have read and stripping that away just, to me, greatly waters down the fantasy aspect.

[damned]

For me, on one hand it is like saying cats are dogs are cats. That might be true for some but it makes no sense to me. On the other hand it does seem to just make everyone a little bit more powerful which may also appeal to some.

[GunnarGreybeard]

Don't use them and probably never will. Having started with rpgs when D&D was in it's infancy, one thing I always liked about the different races was the uniqueness of each. But then, I have always viewed races in rpgs more as different species rather than what would be considered races which is actually how some rpgs have always referenced them.

[LordEntrails]

Good point Gunnar. Species not ethnicities.

[Olmac1]

Against the player options, for the DM stuff. Don't mess with the races that have been canon since the beginning. I agree with is said, and elf is and elf and a dwarf is a dwarf. There is already enough diversity in them game. Like gunner said, species, not races. That was an awesome statement. The class options are a big power creep. Scrapped. Eberron already has the artificer, that is were it belongs. Doesn't belong in the game I run. I think the book is a 2 out of 5 only because the new DM stuff saved it. Personally I felt I paid too much for it, for what I am going to use.

[Ecks]

For those of you for it, then what's the difference between a dwarf and firblog if they can all start with the same stats and abilities etc?

It's worth noting that the optional rules for customizing your origin in TCoE covers changing Ability Score Increase, Language, Proficiency, and Personality. Other racial traits and abilities aren't changed - hill dwarves still have dwarven toughness, dragonborn still have a breath attack, etc. In terms of just ability scores, both Stout Halflings and Goblins get +2 Dexterity and +1 Constitution, does that mean there is no difference between the two?

The races as presented in the PHB make assumptions about culture and upbringing. What if your dwarf doesn't speak dwarvish or know how to use smith's tools? Still a dwarf. I would guess DMs would mostly already allow changing out languages and proficiencies prior to TCoE if they didn't fit the character a player had in mind, TCoE just gives rules to do that.

As for ASI, I don't think these are really core to playing any particular race. A dwarf is a dwarf because they're a dwarf, not because they have +2 constitution. Most dwarven adventures might be naturally tough, but that doesn't mean all have to adhere to that archetype. Plus, it just means players can play unique race/class combinations without having to sacrifice starting stats. Quite often I see players choose what race to play based only on ASI, now they don't have to.

In terms of mechanics, none of the origin customizations really impact game balance. Being able to start with a 16 in your primary stat regardless of race doesn't really change anything with regards to balance, so if it makes playing the game more fun for players then I'm all for it.

[Olmac1]

That's awesome, if you're any race but human. Stinks of PC. The book should have been called Tasha's Cauldron of Cancellation. Wizards is trying to cancel Dungeons and Dragons canon.

Sorry to say, but the the real world cancel culture is alive and well, even in my escapism game of Dungeons and Dragons.

[spoofer]

That's awesome, if you're any race but human.

Humans too! Humans now can have darkvision, because to anything else would be exclusionistic. We have to make sure that everyone can be anything, after all. You would not want your humans to be unable to see in the dark. That would not be fair at all.

[Zacchaeus]

OK, enough's enough. There's no such word as exclusionistic