How the game promotes Fantasy Kitchen Sink

[Dr.Samurai]

Which I have no problem with. But the fact that there's a few non generic humanoid Races hardly changes anything.

A few huh?

Bird people, at least two (more if you count MTG)
Angel people
At least three different types of goblinoids
Centaurs
Minotaurs
Hippo people
Elephant people
Doppelganger people
Dragon folks
Reborn, Dhampir (and vampires if you include MTG)
Fairies and Tritons and Firbolg
Elemental people
Ugly greenish yellow desiccated people (who would ever play these though?)
Frog people!
Rabbit people!
People with... hex... blood or something
Lizard people
Little lizard dog people
Goat folk
Lion folk
Little cat folks
Devil people
Turtle people
Snake people (and SNAKE people if you include MTG)
Robot people

If WotC made "anthropomorphic squirrel" or wemics it would hardly be out of place. In fact, it seems odd it's not already there. I'm not sure how this isn't trending toward kitchen sink, especially if the sentiment is "NPCs are more interested in all these monstrous races, not scared or suspicious...". Every campaign setting is "cosmopolitan".

[Catullus64]

A kitchen sink is a fully-stocked kitchen.

If you're making a pie, the trick is to choose the right tools, not dirty everything in the kitchen.

No matter what my wife says.

I'll see your analogy and raise you another. A cookbook with lots and lots of good recipes is a good cookbook. A cookbook the bulk of which is dedicated to describing ingredients is not.

Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft, a book I have myriad problems with, was actually trending in the right direction with its writeups on horror genres, clumsy though many of them were. The 'flavors of fantasy' section in the DMG, which tries something similar, is well due some reinforcement, and I hope it gets new attention in the 2024 re-works of the core rulebook.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

A few huh?

Yep, a few. First of all, I already made it clear earlier that the idea that it's better for the published info to be limited to make people who want limited games happy is nonsense compared to publishing everything with interest and expecting DMs to cater their world. Second of all, we're talking at this point just Volo/Mordenkainen, not every splatbook printed.

Third.. Well, let's look at your list and how you paint them vs the reality.

Bird people. Yep, that's a non-standard humanoid. Who is perfectly at home in worlds like Hyrule. But I'll give you a point.

Angel people completely humanoid save when they show off powers. In line with the Angels in Supernatural and ultimately don't hurt the idea of a "normal" world.

Goblinoids. Part of the standard D&D setting, date back to before Tolkien. Not super strange or out of place in a "Normal" world.

Centaurs. Part of Standard D&D settings and books dating back to Mythology. Not super strange or out of place in a "normal" world.

Minotaurs. Repeat from Centaurs.

Hippo people. Not in MotM

Elephant people. Not in MotM

Doppelganger people. Of all the things to complain don't fit in a "normal" world, people that blend in perfectly?

Dragon folks. I'll give you this. 2 points so far.\

Reborn, Dhampir. Altered people, are humanoid or non-humanoid as the race they came from, non-issue for this debate. Also not in MotM

Fairies. Small humanoids, if you're fine with Halflings and Gnomes, you don't get to have issue here.

Tritons. Sea folk who other than blue tinged skin look normal, how is this out of place in a fantasy setting "normal" world?

Firbolg. I point you to the Ogier of Wheel of Time. It's not out of place or vastly different from a normal humanoid.

Elemental people. You didn't list Tieflings and complain about them, so you don't get to complain here either.

Ugly greenish yellow desiccated people. I have no idea who you mean, is this the Gith? They're a standard D&D race and have been in the game since 2nd Edition, this isn't opening the kitchen sink, this is continuing to build lore on a long standing trope. Are you going to complain about Orcs as well?

Frog people. Not in MotM

Rabbit people. Three points.

People with... hex... blood or something Same as the Reborn and Dhampir, not out of the norm and not in MotM.

Lizard people. Standard race since the start of D&D.

Little lizard dog people. Standard race since the start of D&D

Goat folk. Is this Satyr? Standard of Greek Mythology and not out of place in a Fantasy world.

Lion folk. Not in MotM

Little cat folks. 5 points.

Devil people. Oh, you did include the tieflings. Alright. Still not sure how they're out of place in a standard fantasy world.

Turtle people. 6 points.

Snake people look completely normal and aren't out of place in a standard fantasy world.

Robot people. Not in MotM.

So, you have 6 out of 39 total races in the PHB + MotM. Not sure how that's forcing weirdness. You did mention 8 races unique to specific worlds, of course only 5 of them were odd and each is appropriate for the world they come from.

Again, how is this Kitchen Sink? Between 76% and 84% of the races are perfectly "normal" for generic vanilla fantasy stories. The other 16%-76% are all almost all uniquely suited to the worlds they appear in.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

I'll see your analogy and raise you another. A cookbook with lots and lots of good recipes is a good cookbook. A cookbook the bulk of which is dedicated to describing ingredients is not.

Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft, a book I have myriad problems with, was actually trending in the right direction with its writeups on horror genres, clumsy though many of them were. The 'flavors of fantasy' section in the DMG, which tries something similar, is well due some reinforcement, and I hope it gets new attention in the 2024 re-works of the core rulebook.

But which books are ones with the bulk being ingredients? I don't see any. Xanathar's and Tasha's have new PC options up front, then tons of other rules and options that apply to the game as a whole. MotM has 32 out of 288 pages that are races.

[LibraryOgre]

I'll see your analogy and raise you another. A cookbook with lots and lots of good recipes is a good cookbook. A cookbook the bulk of which is dedicated to describing ingredients is not.

Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft, a book I have myriad problems with, was actually trending in the right direction with its writeups on horror genres, clumsy though many of them were. The 'flavors of fantasy' section in the DMG, which tries something similar, is well due some reinforcement, and I hope it gets new attention in the 2024 re-works of the core rulebook.

I don't agree with that analogy, because it assumes that the rules are a cookbook, not an ingredients list.... they are the fully stocked kitchen, which the cook will use to create a dish.

The cookbook was inside you all along. Do you want robots? Sprinkle in some warforged. How about dragon people with boobs? Add a dash of dragonborn. Don't want your dragon people to have boobs? Take out the boobs.

[Catullus64]

I don't agree with that analogy, because it assumes that the rules are a cookbook, not an ingredients list.... they are the fully stocked kitchen, which the cook will use to create a dish.

The cookbook was inside you all along. Do you want robots? Sprinkle in some warforged. How about dragon people with boobs? Add a dash of dragonborn. Don't want your dragon people to have boobs? Take out the boobs.

If this cooking analogy can hold any more weight, I'm a pretty good cook, but recipes are how I learned to do that. If you follow a recipe enough times, sure, you can develop your own understanding of how to better it. You'll become a good cook much faster that way than by throwing stuff together.

Putting together a setting, campaign, or individual adventure is often a question of restraint. You can throw in anything, so it's a question of what don't you include. So yeah, I would prefer the recipe book to the kitchen pantry.

[LibraryOgre]

If this cooking analogy can hold any more weight, I'm a pretty good cook, but recipes are how I learned to do that. If you follow a recipe enough times, sure, you can develop your own understanding of how to better it. You'll become a good cook much faster that way than by throwing stuff together.

Putting together a setting, campaign, or individual adventure is often a question of restraint. You can throw in anything, so it's a question of what don't you include. So yeah, I would prefer the recipe book to the kitchen pantry.

I mean, recipes are modules and campaign settings... here's how to set up ingredients. And they can make things so much easier! In my library games, with a very fluid gaming group, I mostly run a combination of B2/T1... Keep on the Borderlands and Village of Hommlet. I stick it in the Realms. It's the refrigerator soup of gaming, combining all of those pre-made recipes into one meal that the players eat.

If someone wants to flavor that dish with a warforged, or with a warlock, or other ingredients that I haven't foreseen, that doesn't have to ruin the meal.

[Dr.Samurai]

Yep, a few. First of all, I already made it clear earlier that the idea that it's better for the published info to be limited to make people who want limited games happy is nonsense compared to publishing everything with interest and expecting DMs to cater their world. Second of all, we're talking at this point just Volo/Mordenkainen, not every splatbook printed.

Interesting. You defined "Kitchen Sink" in part as "throwing in every D&D splatbook", but now you're saying we're limiting our conversation to two splats. So you've defined your way into a rhetorical victory, congratulations...

Third.. Well, let's look at your list and how you paint them vs the reality.

"The reality" here meaning "how Pixel_Kitsune thinks races fit into settings".

As an example, you say that goblinoids have always existed and are not out of place in a "normal" world. That's an interesting way to describe it. You fail to mention that they were always adversaries. That the meta has been shifting, lore has been shifting, player options have been shifting. You refer to Tolkein, as if goblinoids would be a suitable player race where you can, as was previously mentioned, walk into a hamlet and have someone say "oh wow, I've heard of your kind before but never knew you were around here, you're just like us". If a goblin walked up to some village in Rohan he'd be dead before he could say "Hello fellow that's just like me, how are you doing neighbor?"

So this is not a "Dr.Samurai vs Reality" thing. It's a "Dr.Samurai pointing out Reality" thing. Snake people are "completely normal"... AS VILLAINS lol. The yuanti are monsters, with evil cults dedicated to them.

Shifting things so that every race can now walk into a tavern and order a drink at one of the tables without so much as a Huh? from any of the patrons is a shift toward kitchen sink. Uniting all of the campaign settings into a multiverse is a shift toward kitchen sink, especially when you include MTG settings.

What would it take for you to consider us moving toward kitchen sink? Because you mentioned splatbooks and a handful of weird races, and I just quoted a bunch from different splatbooks but they don't seem to meet our criteria.

[Tanarii]

How is that the Kitchen Sink?

The PHB was already trending race kitchen sink, including Dragonborn and Tiefling and optional Drow.

Volos makes it a full blown fantasy race kitchen sink menagerie if it's allowed in full.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

Interesting. You defined "Kitchen Sink" in part as "throwing in every D&D splatbook", but now you're saying we're limiting our conversation to two splats. So you've defined your way into a rhetorical victory, congratulations...

There's two aspects of discussion there. The idea that there's too much in the game as a whole and that there's too much in Adventurer's league. You'll further note that I acknowledge both figures and point out that about a quarter of the total races don't fit into "Humanoid with a different hat."

I find it funny that you claim I didn't address the entirety of the line versus the AL status when I acknowledge both numbers at the end, suggesting you didn't read so much as skim.

"The reality" here meaning "how Pixel_Kitsune thinks races fit into settings".

As an example, you say that goblinoids have always existed and are not out of place in a "normal" world. That's an interesting way to describe it. You fail to mention that they were always adversaries. That the meta has been shifting, lore has been shifting, player options have been shifting. You refer to Tolkein, as if goblinoids would be a suitable player race where you can, as was previously mentioned, walk into a hamlet and have someone say "oh wow, I've heard of your kind before but never knew you were around here, you're just like us". If a goblin walked up to some village in Rohan he'd be dead before he could say "Hello fellow that's just like me, how are you doing neighbor?"

And a game could be made dealing with that. People were sketchy of Nott in Wildemount. Just because you CAN be a race that's not standard bog human doesn't mean it's easy automatically. But that's the DM's job, not the game ruleset. Much like the decision of what races to allow in the first place.

So this is not a "Dr.Samurai vs Reality" thing. It's a "Dr.Samurai pointing out Reality" thing. Snake people are "completely normal"... AS VILLAINS lol. The yuanti are monsters, with evil cults dedicated to them.

Yuan-ti pure bloods can blend in, they always could, so no, no reason you can't play one in the rest of society.

Shifting things so that every race can now walk into a tavern and order a drink at one of the tables without so much as a Huh? from any of the patrons is a shift toward kitchen sink. Uniting all of the campaign settings into a multiverse is a shift toward kitchen sink, especially when you include MTG settings.

I love that so far your arguments all stem around "But they used to be always evil XP fodder and now they're not and that's bad." Kind of not the best approach to take all things considered.

But really, "Uniting all campaign settings into a multiverse is a shift towards kitchen sink"? What shift. D&D has been a Multiverse where EVERYTHING is there since at least 2nd Edition. Do you not remember Planescape and Spelljammer? Or how Lord Soth or Vecna got stuck in Ravenloft, or how the Githyanki tried to invade Darksun? There's been crossovers forever, it's not new. So unless your argument is that D&D has promoted this for decades and you now want to argue it...

What would it take for you to consider us moving toward kitchen sink? Because you mentioned splatbooks and a handful of weird races, and I just quoted a bunch from different splatbooks but they don't seem to meet our criteria.

The closest thing they could do to move towards kitchen sink would be to throw open AL type scenarios to allow everything no matter what and trying to suggest the game was supposed to be run that way. As stands they have a large number of books with different OPTIONS and then trust the DM who is supposedly running and creating the story to pick and choose what works for their story.

I've mentioned my spouse's Zelda themed game that only has Elves, Halflings, Aarakokra, Tritons and Goliaths. I've run Darksun games that absolutely do not have most of the fantastic races and are missing some of the regular ones too... I don't allow Loxadon in my Eberron game and I've never seen a Leonin outside of Theros so far...

The closes thing 5e is going to have to Kitchen Sink is SpellJammer and it's SUPPOSED to be Kitchen Sink Fantasy in Space.

The PHB was already trending race kitchen sink, including Dragonborn and Tiefling and optional Drow.

Volos makes it a full blown fantasy race kitchen sink menagerie if it's allowed in full.

Drow are elves, Dragonborn and Tieflings are a little bit outside generic Tolkien but not outside of fantasy as a general fiction. And again, you're talking 2/3 races out of 9/14, So again, around a quarter.

[Psyren]

I mean, recipes are modules and campaign settings... here's how to set up ingredients. And they can make things so much easier! In my library games, with a very fluid gaming group, I mostly run a combination of B2/T1... Keep on the Borderlands and Village of Hommlet. I stick it in the Realms. It's the refrigerator soup of gaming, combining all of those pre-made recipes into one meal that the players eat.

If someone wants to flavor that dish with a warforged, or with a warlock, or other ingredients that I haven't foreseen, that doesn't have to ruin the meal.

Agreed. Modules and setting locales are the tools (recipes) to make you a better cook faster through focused repetition. Expecting WotC (the supermarket) to only stock the ingredients (splat) to make a given recipe is not only unrealistic, it would make the entire supermarket worse.

[Pex]

Just because something is published does not mean it has to be used. The extremes are DMs who going into specific detail of what is and is not allowed, the circumstances in which a thing may only ever exist in the game, and diktats if you use this you must do this and may never do that and DMs who allow anything and everything that was officially published and even 3rd party homebrew is allowed on a case by case basis. Good restrictive DMs have rich worlds of culture and wonder to explore, and what the PCs do have great impact. Bad restrictive DMs only allows PCs to do what they the DM wants and self-righteously dismiss anyone who disagrees with them. Good anything goes DMs have fantastical worlds of wonder and can adapt whatever the players throw into the mix into a Narrative of Concept players couldn't dream of. Bad anything goes DMs have no campaign structure, just throw encounters at the players and see what happens. Nothing the PCs do matter.

[Amnestic]

I
Shifting things so that every race can now walk into a tavern and order a drink at one of the tables without so much as a Huh? from any of the patrons is a shift toward kitchen sink. Uniting all of the campaign settings into a multiverse is a shift toward kitchen sink, especially when you include MTG settings.

What would it take for you to consider us moving toward kitchen sink? Because you mentioned splatbooks and a handful of weird races, and I just quoted a bunch from different splatbooks but they don't seem to meet our criteria.

Didn't we already have the multiverse with Planescape (Sigil)/Spelljammer? Didn't we already have friendly goblins and orcs and drow and whatnot in Eberron and also FR and also elsewhere? These aren't new developments. Eberron's two decades old and I think Planescape is almost twice that.

It's hard for me to say that they're 'moving towards' a Kitchen Sink when the examples given predate 5e's release by many years and at least one edition.

[Psyren]

Bad anything goes DMs have no campaign structure, just throw encounters at the players and see what happens. Nothing the PCs do matter.

I don't think the first part is inherently bad, nor necessarily leads to the second.

Rather, I'd say a "bad anything goes DM" is either one who only pretends to allow anything and then devotes significant time to invalidating the players' choices ("Sure you can be an Aarakocra!" *all fights are indoors with 5'-10' ceilings*), or one whose permissiveness impacts their ability to design and run meaningful challenges. ("Sure you can be an Aarakocra!" *All fights are outdoors against melee foes who can't do anything to hurt that player, causing them to steal the spotlight in every fight.*)

Throwing totally random encounters at the players might actually be preferable, as at least some of them will probably emphasize the weaknesses of a given player at any given time, provided you're using appropriate challenge ratings.

[Catullus64]

Didn't we already have the multiverse with Planescape (Sigil)/Spelljammer? Didn't we already have friendly goblins and orcs and drow and whatnot in Eberron and also FR and also elsewhere? These aren't new developments. Eberron's two decades old and I think Planescape is almost twice that.

It's hard for me to say that they're 'moving towards' a Kitchen Sink when the examples given predate 5e's release by many years and at least one edition.

My sense (informed by an admittedly imperfect knowledge of the history) is that it's more of a cyclical process within editions, dictated by the ramping up of content releases. At least as far as concerns the WoTC editions of the game.

When a new edition is released, it generally has more focus because the number of options included in the core books is necessarily limited. This was especially noticeable for 5e, which marketed itself as being in many ways a return to fundamentals. More character options get released over the years because those tend to be very popular. Without a DM pushing directly against it to curate his or her own setting, the kitchen-sinkification sets in again.

Of course I think that sort of DM curation is good where possible, but it's not equally possible at all tables. It's a luxury at pretty much any kind of open-to-the-public table, which includes but is not limited to AL. And even at some private tables it's a source of conflict, because I think the game still under-emphasizes that this curation of elements should be a normal part of every game. Everyone is ok with it until their favorite toy is taken off the table.

5th Edition is still nowhere near the overwhelming torrent of bloat that characterized 3.5. I hope you'll note that I've tried to abstain from any language indicating that this is somehow a catastrophic trend that will ruin D&D forever. But it is a trend that I observe nevertheless. And the effects of the cycle do have knock-on effects in subsequent editions; Dragonborn and Tieflings are both enshrined as core races now.

[LibraryOgre]

The PHB was already trending race kitchen sink, including Dragonborn and Tiefling and optional Drow.

Just a personal preference, but I like the new variety. AD&D had three flavors of short, two flavors of willowy, and one of ugly. Two of the short ones were resistant to poison, all three resistant to magic. One short and one willowy were naturally sneaky. Most of them saw in the dark exactly the same way. Heck, how many people are "I don't see a point to gnomes"? While they're one of my favorite races, in AD&D they don't have a mechanical point to existing, save that they let short people be one kind of wizard, and talk to animals.

4e and later (some earlier, but usually optionally) you have variety. I don't like the homogenization of tiefling appearances and abilities, but "person with demon blood" is a neat story element, if you want it to be. "Dragon People" has a neat bit of variety. And they've worked to differentiate the "standard" races, as well.

Agreed. Modules and setting locales are the tools (recipes) to make you a better cook faster through focused repetition. Expecting WotC (the supermarket) to only stock the ingredients (splat) to make a given recipe is not only unrealistic, it would make the entire supermarket worse.

There's something to say for the big supermarket v. the small local market approaches, but if I want kimchi, I'm gonna go to the Korean market, not Kroger. But if I want to shop for the next couple weeks, it's probably gonna be at Kroger. (I'd say HEB, but all y'all're heathens from forsaken lands, not Texas).

[Psyren]

Just a personal preference, but I like the new variety. AD&D had three flavors of short, two flavors of willowy, and one of ugly. Two of the short ones were resistant to poison, all three resistant to magic. One short and one willowy were naturally sneaky. Most of them saw in the dark exactly the same way. Heck, how many people are "I don't see a point to gnomes"? While they're one of my favorite races, in AD&D they don't have a mechanical point to existing, save that they let short people be one kind of wizard, and talk to animals.

4e and later (some earlier, but usually optionally) you have variety. I don't like the homogenization of tiefling appearances and abilities, but "person with demon blood" is a neat story element, if you want it to be. "Dragon People" has a neat bit of variety. And they've worked to differentiate the "standard" races, as well.

And just to add - Dragonborn being a core race now makes perfect sense, dragons are integral to the game's very identity/brand.

There's something to say for the big supermarket v. the small local market approaches, but if I want kimchi, I'm gonna go to the Korean market, not Kroger. But if I want to shop for the next couple weeks, it's probably gonna be at Kroger. (I'd say HEB, but all y'all're heathens from forsaken lands, not Texas).

Kroger owns Harris Teeter now so I feel camaraderie by proxy

[KorvinStarmast]

My sense (informed by an admittedly imperfect knowledge of the history) is that it's more of a cyclical process within editions, dictated by the ramping up of content releases. At least as far as concerns the WoTC editions of the game.

TSR bloated also. If you are making money on book sales, bloat is bound to happen. That's where (IMO) settings and adventures are the better product for keeping bloat in check ... but I am not the Hasbro/WoTC marketing wiz, am I? No, just a customer.

5th Edition is still nowhere near the overwhelming torrent of bloat that characterized 3.5.

It's bloating, and I hope that they can curtail it.

And just to add - Dragonborn being a core race now makes perfect sense, dragons are integral to the game's very identity/brand.

But Tieflings not so much.
As to HEB: thumbs up from here. (Their Central Market brand is the only milk we've bought for about five years).

[Psyren]

It's bloating, and I hope that they can curtail it.

It's nowhere near PF1 which was still loved. MOAR!

At the very least we could use some flavor of archetype or ACF system where you can swap out subclass features for either other subclass features or feats.

[Amechra]

So... D&D is generally a kitchen-sink-y kind of game — it always has been.

The problem with 5e is that it doesn't have any of the really weird and wacky stuff that makes a kitchen sink fun. This is partially a result of their much saner release schedule — the writers aren't churning out a book a month, so you don't get stuff like the sourcebook for deserts giving you SAND MERMAIDS and CYBORGS POWERED BY SPACE CRYSTALS as player options (Sandstorm for 3.5 was an... interesting... book).

At the same time, though, I get the real sense that WotC is playing it safe (outside of books where they know they have a market, like the MtG settings). Which is a bit frustrating, if I'm completely honest.

[LibraryOgre]

TSR bloated also. If you are making money on book sales, bloat is bound to happen. That's where (IMO) settings and adventures are the better product for keeping bloat in check ... but I am not the Hasbro/WoTC marketing wiz, am I? No, just a customer.

This is, IIRC, something that TSR ran into... modules are great, but only DMs buy them. Setting books are better, but they're a fragmented market (I'm not buying anything for Spelljammer, for example). Core books, with some setting material, are for everyone, and those contribute to bloat.

[Catullus64]

So... D&D is generally a kitchen-sink-y kind of game — it always has been.

The problem with 5e is that it doesn't have any of the really weird and wacky stuff that makes a kitchen sink fun. This is partially a result of their much saner release schedule — the writers aren't churning out a book a month, so you don't get stuff like the sourcebook for deserts giving you SAND MERMAIDS and CYBORGS POWERED BY SPACE CRYSTALS as player options (Sandstorm for 3.5 was an... interesting... book).

At the same time, though, I get the real sense that WotC is playing it safe (outside of books where they know they have a market, like the MtG settings). Which is a bit frustrating, if I'm completely honest.

That's very insightful, and something I didn't know I was grappling with until you said it.

I've played games that are built for the kitchen sink, which embrace and structure themselves around their disjointed weirdness. D&D is still fundamentally a game of adventure fantasy in worlds coded like the real historical-mythological past, and the kitchen-sinkiness implied by its sheer breadth of options feels at odds with that.

[Dr.Samurai]

I love that so far your arguments all stem around "But they used to be always evil XP fodder and now they're not and that's bad." Kind of not the best approach to take all things considered.

I'm not saying it's "bad". But you can't say there isn't a shift when clearly there has been and continues to be one. I started in 3rd edition. My PHB did not include drow as a playable race, or dragonborn or tieflings. Now it does.

And I'm not sure why this wouldn't continue further.

Shifters and changelings and warforged were Eberron races in 3rd edition, until they were included in MM 3.

Genasi, goliaths, and Aarakocra were all in the Companion for Princes of the Apocalypse. Now they're in Monsters of the Multiverse.

Do I think when Plasmoids appear in Spelljammer that they will only ever be in Spelljammer games and supplements? No, I don't.

This will continue to occur, and it should, for business reasons. But why claim that it isn't happening?

As to your insinuation, I'll confirm it for you... I am the last person to wring my hands over the depiction of make-believe creatures in a fantasy tabletop game so... take that for what you will, I'm sure it will be in the worst way possible

[Pixel_Kitsune]

I'm not saying it's "bad". But you can't say there isn't a shift when clearly there has been and continues to be one. I started in 3rd edition. My PHB did not include drow as a playable race, or dragonborn or tieflings. Now it does.

Tieflings were added in 2nd edition Planescape. Drow were around since 2E as well. As of Eberron the idea of not all evil everything exists, which was in 2004 in 3.X. Nothing new happening now. Dragonborn were essentially in both Darksun and Dragonlance under different names.

As to your insinuation, I'll confirm it for you... I am the last person to wring my hands over the depiction of make-believe creatures in a fantasy tabletop game so... take that for what you will, I'm sure it will be in the worst way possible

No insinuation, saying it's a bad stance to take. If you think the concern is the idea of those poor make believe creatures vs the idea that it sets a precedent for stereotyping and behavior, then you're not looking at the Nuance. As for taking it the worst way, without going further into the discussion than is smart here, no, I have no idea which way I would take it. It is, at best, a stance made from a certain level of privilege and misunderstanding, but that's not automatically bad.

[Dr.Samurai]

Tieflings were added in 2nd edition Planescape. Drow were around since 2E as well. As of Eberron the idea of not all evil everything exists, which was in 2004 in 3.X. Nothing new happening now. Dragonborn were essentially in both Darksun and Dragonlance under different names.

I think you're missing the part where we're pointing out that they are now in the PHB. In the core books. That's the shift. No one is claiming these races never existed before now or weren't even playable before now.

I forgot to speak to the multiverse bit earlier that you and Amnestic pointed out.

I don't think the settings/lore were as unified as they are being made now. Elves in Eberron are not a part of Corellon Larethian, and drow are not related to Lolth in any way. But now they are. (I should note someone didn't think this was the case so this may be a wrong take based on faulty memory, but I thought 5E was meshing everything together so that what's true for one setting/world is true for the others, even if it doesn't seem that way. So elves in Eberron may not know they come from Corellon, and the name is completely unknown on that world, but they still are.)

No insinuation, saying it's a bad stance to take. If you think the concern is the idea of those poor make believe creatures vs the idea that it sets a precedent for stereotyping and behavior, then you're not looking at the Nuance. As for taking it the worst way, without going further into the discussion than is smart here, no, I have no idea which way I would take it. It is, at best, a stance made from a certain level of privilege and misunderstanding, but that's not automatically bad.

Yes yes yes, my position is not nuanced, I come from a place of privilege, you are smarter and more thoughtful than the people that don't see things your way, etc etc.

Not very compelling in the least, but doesn't make it any less commonplace these days . Keep fighting the good fight against fantasy races on behalf of people like me. I can feel my life improving in real time .

[PhoenixPhyre]

I'm someone who likes having lots of races.

But I'm also someone who doesn't want those races in core necessarily. Races are so thoroughly tied to settings (or should be, IMO, to make both setting and race consistent and coherent) that races should be, by default, setting-restricted with only the most generic options in core. And then have lots of racial variants, extra races, and general racial customization in setting-specific books.

And the whole multiverse thing should be shot out of a canon-cannon into the sun and forgotten. Except in setting-specific books like planescape/spelljammer. There should be no expectation or concept that an elf in FR is in any way related to (mythologically or cosmologically or anything) to an elf in Eberron or anywhere else. But that's my opinion, and I realize the devs have gone all in on the "everything is actually one setting and no you can't make any distinctions beyond purely cosmetic ones in published works" model. It still irks me.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

I think you're missing the part where we're pointing out that they are now in the PHB. In the core books. That's the shift. No one is claiming these races never existed before now or weren't even playable before now.

Not super relevant though. Also, the 5e PHB sets it up with Dwarf, Elf, Hafling and Human as the "normal" races with Dragonborn, Gnomes, half bloods and Tieflings are the less common side. Again, an option existing at all is not a bad thing or a demand for use.

I don't think the settings/lore were as unified as they are being made now. Elves in Eberron are not a part of Corellon Larethian, and drow are not related to Lolth in any way. But now they are. (I should note someone didn't think this was the case so this may be a wrong take based on faulty memory, but I thought 5E was meshing everything together so that what's true for one setting/world is true for the others, even if it doesn't seem that way. So elves in Eberron may not know they come from Corellon, and the name is completely unknown on that world, but they still are.)

Yes they were. Notice all your examples are Eberron. Eberron WAS separate from the rest of the cosmology, on purpose, to keep it as a distinct and different animal. So yes, Eberron was completely different. Everything else connected. Kara Tura, Forgotten Realms, Al'Qadim and a few others were all one planet, Spelljammer connected all the Prime worlds, Planescape connected the rest. Even DarkSun and Ravenloft became places you could get to if through great challenge.

Yes yes yes, my position is not nuanced, I come from a place of privilege, you are smarter and more thoughtful than the people that don't see things your way, etc etc.

Not very compelling in the least, but doesn't make it any less commonplace these days . Keep fighting the good fight against fantasy races on behalf of people like me. I can feel my life improving in real time .

I literally said I wasn't getting into it and stated I didn't automatically assume the worst. And you respond with snide quips and insults. And you specifically again make a claim that no one has ever made (that we're fighting the good fight for fantasy races).

I'm letting this part go, I'd recommend you choose the same.

[Dr.Samurai]

I'm someone who likes having lots of races.

But I'm also someone who doesn't want those races in core necessarily. Races are so thoroughly tied to settings (or should be, IMO, to make both setting and race consistent and coherent) that races should be, by default, setting-restricted with only the most generic options in core. And then have lots of racial variants, extra races, and general racial customization in setting-specific books.

And the whole multiverse thing should be shot out of a canon-cannon into the sun and forgotten. Except in setting-specific books like planescape/spelljammer. There should be no expectation or concept that an elf in FR is in any way related to (mythologically or cosmologically or anything) to an elf in Eberron or anywhere else. But that's my opinion, and I realize the devs have gone all in on the "everything is actually one setting and no you can't make any distinctions beyond purely cosmetic ones in published works" model. It still irks me.

I think this is where I'm at too. Thank you for saying it so well.

The canon-cannon made me laugh

[KorvinStarmast]

It's a "Dr.Samurai pointing out Reality" thing. Snake people are "completely normal"... AS VILLAINS lol. The yuanti are monsters, with evil cults dedicated to them.

That is their best fit into D&D.

Races are so thoroughly tied to settings (or should be

Still agree.

And the whole multiverse thing should be shot out of a canon-cannon into the sun and forgotten.

Legendary item or artifact?

[PhoenixPhyre]

Legendary item or artifact?

Depends on the setting. Some settings need them to be Common, just to handle the constant yeeting (see, I can do hip lingo like them kids!) of canon due to constant retcons. Others, they're more Artifact (owned by the over-gods and used at their sole pleasure).