Races should just be cosmetic/determine low impact game elements like height and maximum age.
So every race should just be a reskinned human?
Every race is a reskinned human. The roleplaying differences between them, at least in my experiences (which are not the sum total of all experience, obviously) across a number of tables and countries and continents, other races are, mostly, only different from human statistically. If you were make the differences comestic, you would make the drive to play a race not mechanically based, but based on your desire to explore a culture and psychology different from your own. A person who lives for 500 years and one who lives for 80 years should not behave the same.
So the only thing that is different between a Centaur, Harendon, Minotaur, Yuan-ti, and regular human is where the +2/+1 goes? There is no cosmetic differences? I mean horns, 4 legs, bunny ears, forked tongue... Please. That's ridiculous.
If all your race amounts to is a word on a page, then yes, that's the only difference. If you play a minotaur that has human psychology and human motivations and therefore human behaviours, then all of those factors you mentioned are meaningless. They are a human. You just aren't calling them that.
So the only thing that is different between a Centaur, Harendon, Minotaur, Yuan-ti, and regular human is where the +2/+1 goes? There is no cosmetic differences? I mean horns, 4 legs, bunny ears, forked tongue... Please. That's ridiculous.
If all your race amounts to is a word on a page, then yes, that's the only difference. If you play a minotaur that has human psychology and human motivations and therefore human behaviours, then all of those factors you mentioned are meaningless. They are a human. You just aren't calling them that.
And you are claiming that you know for a fact that this is how people are playing their characters, in every single dnd game, around the world......
My hot take is that using one's passion for D&D to get angry about it is wasted time.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider. My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong. I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲 “It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
So the only thing that is different between a Centaur, Harendon, Minotaur, Yuan-ti, and regular human is where the +2/+1 goes? There is no cosmetic differences? I mean horns, 4 legs, bunny ears, forked tongue... Please. That's ridiculous.
If all your race amounts to is a word on a page, then yes, that's the only difference. If you play a minotaur that has human psychology and human motivations and therefore human behaviours, then all of those factors you mentioned are meaningless. They are a human. You just aren't calling them that.
And you are claiming that you know for a fact that this is how people are playing their characters, in every single dnd game, around the world......
The only one who has said that in this conversation is you, not I.
Just because someone expresses an opinion, doesn't mean they are expressing a universal maxim. Remember, you are arguing with me over my opinions about a game. You are the one trying to universalise your experience over my table. I'm not trying to force anything or your table. You called my position ridiculous and now are trying to imply that I need to retract my position-- a position that I have likely formed playing D&D on more continents that you have-- because it doesn't conform to how people play around the world. Yet, by stating such a claim, neither do you play D&D like every game around the world. You do not live up to the standard you set.
How would aarakocra work as a reskinned human? Wings are just decorative?
Or tritons can no longer breath underwater?
Lizardfolk lost their teeth and can no longer bite?
Dragonborn can no longer breath fire?
Making playable species purely cosmetic is an awful idea and takes away a massive part of the game. If everything is just reskinned humans, it's no longer dnd. I'd personally they had a larger mechanical impact, not a smaller one.
How would aarakocra work as a reskinned human? Wings are just decorative?
Or tritons can no longer breath underwater?
Lizardfolk lost their teeth and can no longer bite?
Dragonborn can no longer breath fire?
Making playable species purely cosmetic is an awful idea and takes away a massive part of the game. If everything is just reskinned humans, it's no longer dnd. I'd personally they had a larger mechanical impact, not a smaller one.
Yes. We already have a flightless bird race, we don't need two. I know lazy dms are gonna say "buT flYinG iS unBalancEd" give some enemies a bow and arrow, or fireballs. Pretty simple
It's true that a good DM can work around flight. In my experience though, flight had a far bigger impact OUT of combat than in combat. It doesn't solve everything, as a flying pc can't carry the party anywhere, but flight can solve a good number of obstacles where otherwise people might have to be clever, or put their athletics to the test to reach somewhere, etc. Where a flying pc can just fly over a gap or up to the ceiling etc.
How would aarakocra work as a reskinned human? Wings are just decorative?
Or tritons can no longer breath underwater?
Lizardfolk lost their teeth and can no longer bite?
Dragonborn can no longer breath fire?
Making playable species purely cosmetic is an awful idea and takes away a massive part of the game. If everything is just reskinned humans, it's no longer dnd. I'd personally they had a larger mechanical impact, not a smaller one.
First of all, any race in D&D can bite, they just don't have bite attacks.
If it bothers you so much the idea that you can't have a triton breathe underwater, then just don't allow Triton characters. Problem solved. You aren't even supposed to allow every race of characters and are supposed to pick and choose a handful which are important to your game and setting.
Races aren't a massive part of the game. Doubly so for mechanics. Early D&D didn't even have them as a free-standing option. If you're telling me that a dwarven fighter and a gnomish fighter play massively differently as characters, then I would think you were mistaken. Almost all of the actions you take are going to be determined by your character's class.
Race is not the main course, it is a dash of seasoning.
I agree, and that's why I think characters shouldn't get benefits from race. Because a character who is a reskinned human shouldn't get benefits over other players and instead of policing players for not playing a character who is "elven enough" the solution should be just to remove the problem from the equation. We've play tested it for 50 years, it doesn't work, lets move on.
I agree, and that's why I think characters shouldn't get benefits from race. Because a character who is a reskinned human shouldn't get benefits over other players and instead of policing players for not playing a character who is "elven enough" the solution should be just to remove the problem from the equation. We've play tested it for 50 years, it doesn't work, lets move on.
I think that'll about wrap it up, folks. The spiciest take has been given, and I don't think we're going to see it beaten. Who's got the trophy? Would you bring it over here, please?
Maybe not mechanically accurate. But Halfling barbarians are absolutely terrifying.
Something about a 2-3ft tall roided up pillar man punching you so hard in the knees their caps become shattered projectiles is just, no. I want none of that. In no universe is that okay.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I once knew this fella, Aasimar raised in the Underdark. Was like a brother to me. When he escaped we couldn't take much with us. Poor, emaciated husks of the living we were. 'ts okay though. We survived and made our ways. I'll never forget the way the people from my home looked at us when we walked in the archway. Though, I'm frighteningly certain the feelings they would have, had they but the opportunity ta see us leave." --Manolovo the Traitor, Memoirs of a Scoundrel
How would aarakocra work as a reskinned human? Wings are just decorative?
Or tritons can no longer breath underwater?
Lizardfolk lost their teeth and can no longer bite?
Dragonborn can no longer breath fire?
Making playable species purely cosmetic is an awful idea and takes away a massive part of the game. If everything is just reskinned humans, it's no longer dnd. I'd personally they had a larger mechanical impact, not a smaller one.
First of all, any race in D&D can bite, they just don't have bite attacks.
If it bothers you so much the idea that you can't have a triton breathe underwater, then just don't allow Triton characters. Problem solved. You aren't even supposed to allow every race of characters and are supposed to pick and choose a handful which are important to your game and setting.
Races aren't a massive part of the game. Doubly so for mechanics. Early D&D didn't even have them as a free-standing option. If you're telling me that a dwarven fighter and a gnomish fighter play massively differently as characters, then I would think you were mistaken. Almost all of the actions you take are going to be determined by your character's class.
Race is not the main course, it is a dash of seasoning.
So if I'm understanding you correctly, race is not a major factor in how a character is played? And so your solution to this is to effectively eliminate the race system (which in no way solves the problem you're trying to address) instead of making it more dynamic?? If you get rid of racial abilities/bonuses, you still have the issue you mention of two different Fighters playing the same way.
How would aarakocra work as a reskinned human? Wings are just decorative?
Or tritons can no longer breath underwater?
Lizardfolk lost their teeth and can no longer bite?
Dragonborn can no longer breath fire?
Making playable species purely cosmetic is an awful idea and takes away a massive part of the game. If everything is just reskinned humans, it's no longer dnd. I'd personally they had a larger mechanical impact, not a smaller one.
First of all, any race in D&D can bite, they just don't have bite attacks.
If it bothers you so much the idea that you can't have a triton breathe underwater, then just don't allow Triton characters. Problem solved. You aren't even supposed to allow every race of characters and are supposed to pick and choose a handful which are important to your game and setting.
Races aren't a massive part of the game. Doubly so for mechanics. Early D&D didn't even have them as a free-standing option. If you're telling me that a dwarven fighter and a gnomish fighter play massively differently as characters, then I would think you were mistaken. Almost all of the actions you take are going to be determined by your character's class.
Race is not the main course, it is a dash of seasoning.
So if I'm understanding you correctly, race is not a major factor in how a character is played? And so your solution to this is to effectively eliminate the race system (which in no way solves the problem you're trying to address) instead of making it more dynamic?? If you get rid of racial abilities/bonuses, you still have the issue you mention of two different Fighters playing the same way.
I wish races were more important. I want your character not just to be defined by your class, but more by race (and hopefully backround as well).
It goes how it goes, but I think making races just flavor would eliminate a lot of the fun in D&D and make the game more bland.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
Maybe not mechanically accurate. But Halfling barbarians are absolutely terrifying.
Something about a 2-3ft tall roided up pillar man punching you so hard in the knees their caps become shattered projectiles is just, no. I want none of that. In no universe is that okay.
Make them a path of wild magic barbarian, and imagine they rolled the teleportation ability and are now teleporting around the battlefield as a bonus action. That my friend reduces even veteran dm’s to ‘wtf do I do now?’ Hahaha
How would aarakocra work as a reskinned human? Wings are just decorative?
Or tritons can no longer breath underwater?
Lizardfolk lost their teeth and can no longer bite?
Dragonborn can no longer breath fire?
Making playable species purely cosmetic is an awful idea and takes away a massive part of the game. If everything is just reskinned humans, it's no longer dnd. I'd personally they had a larger mechanical impact, not a smaller one.
First of all, any race in D&D can bite, they just don't have bite attacks.
If it bothers you so much the idea that you can't have a triton breathe underwater, then just don't allow Triton characters. Problem solved. You aren't even supposed to allow every race of characters and are supposed to pick and choose a handful which are important to your game and setting.
Races aren't a massive part of the game. Doubly so for mechanics. Early D&D didn't even have them as a free-standing option. If you're telling me that a dwarven fighter and a gnomish fighter play massively differently as characters, then I would think you were mistaken. Almost all of the actions you take are going to be determined by your character's class.
Race is not the main course, it is a dash of seasoning.
So if I'm understanding you correctly, race is not a major factor in how a character is played? And so your solution to this is to effectively eliminate the race system (which in no way solves the problem you're trying to address) instead of making it more dynamic?? If you get rid of racial abilities/bonuses, you still have the issue you mention of two different Fighters playing the same way.
The problem I am trying to address is that people don't take race seriously, from a roleplaying perspective and the conclusion I've drawn is that if people are going to play characters that are ostenibly different, then eliminating the problem point is better than giving players bonuses for something they aren't doing anything to earn. So if we do eliminate the ability to play other races for mechanical reasons-- eliminate the motivation to choose race/class combinations for mechanical reasons-- then the only motivation that remains is because a player wishes to roleplay a certain race. Therefore, it would reduce the number of people frivilously playing races.
I'm not sure what to say except that my experience is different than yours. My group takes our races very seriously, and it often deeply informs our characters. Moments when we are able to use racial features to reinforce and highlight our racial features are always cool and satisfying.
In our Ghosts of Saltmarsh campaign, for example, the races with water-breathing, swim speeds, and other water-related affinities approach many of the encounters and challenges very differently, and it truly feels like different types of creatures attacking a problem from different angles. While yes, we could do all of this with no mechanical underpinning, by that logic we could also just chuck out the entire rest of the D&D ruleset and play Imagination Funtime with our superior roleplaying skills.
Mechanics give you a touchpoint, they serve as reminders of what you can do, give you ways to highlight your abilities, and ground your words in tangible actions. Yes, we've tried it for 50 years and you know what? It's working insanely well. 5e books are literally breaking all-time records for the industry, and their primary draw is new character options.
The problem I am trying to address is that people don't take race seriously, from a roleplaying perspective and the conclusion I've drawn is that if people are going to play characters that are ostenibly different, then eliminating the problem point is better than giving players bonuses for something they aren't doing anything to earn. So if we do eliminate the ability to play other races for mechanical reasons-- eliminate the motivation to choose race/class combinations for mechanical reasons-- then the only motivation that remains is because a player wishes to roleplay a certain race. Therefore, it would reduce the number of people frivilously playing races.
So by that logic we should eliminate classes too? I've seen plenty of players roleplay their Ranger, or Bard, or even Warlock like a Rogue. How does one exactly earn the bonuses of being a race through roleplay, and how is that different than earning the benefits a particular class provides? If I play an elf character, am I supposed to actually speak Elvish at the table?
If people are having fun playing their Goliath Barbarian or whatever, what about that is frivolous?
I should note I don't mean any of these questions in an attacking sort of way. I'm genuinely trying to understand your stance here, and my questions are meant to be clarifiers to help me do that because as it is I just can't wrap my head around it.
Fresh hot take: D&D would be a better game with a point buy system instead of a "race" system. Assemble your character from different traits as you deem fit within the chargen budget of your game. Different species in the books are simply prebuilt packages of traits that simulate existing Tolkienite species. A DM can enforce "take these prebuilt packages only", they can use the point-buy system to provide their players with a list of custom species for their specific game that would be reasonably-ish interbalanced with each other, or they could open it up for each individual player to assemble a unique character that fits their vision. Games like Savage Worlds handle character generation miles and miles and miles and miles better than D&D; it's time to learn our lesson. Can't wait to see what Ghostfire did in their new book - they promised a point buy replacement for the default D&D "select a race" chargen leg, it's gonna be super juicy to see how they tackled it and figure out what I can backhack into other games.
The problem I am trying to address is that people don't take race seriously, from a roleplaying perspective and the conclusion I've drawn is that if people are going to play characters that are ostenibly different, then eliminating the problem point is better than giving players bonuses for something they aren't doing anything to earn. So if we do eliminate the ability to play other races for mechanical reasons-- eliminate the motivation to choose race/class combinations for mechanical reasons-- then the only motivation that remains is because a player wishes to roleplay a certain race. Therefore, it would reduce the number of people frivilously playing races.
Yeah, you're going wholly off of your personal experience in the game. That is not my experience, and I'm assuming it's not the norm.
It depends on the player. I have one player that really couldn't care about their race most of the time in the game. They're more defined by their overall character concept. (In my Eberron campaign, they're a Firbolg Monk styled like a Pugilist. They care more about the Pugilist theme more than the fact they can speak to plants/animals and come from a distant land that most people have never heard of.) But my other players definitely care about their race. One of them, a Warforged, is so defined by their race that it drove a major character-driven side-quest in the very same Eberron campaign. The same applies to the Goblin Bard in that campaign (defined more by being a descendent of the Dhakaani Empire than the fact that she's a magical music girl), too.
Are they roleplayed fairly similarly to humans? Sure, the people playing them are humans. It's kind of impossible to truly roleplay what a Warforged, Kalashtar, Firbolg, Lizardfolk, Thri-Kreen, or Plasmoid would actually be like. But, perfect is the enemy of good, and coming to the conclusion that because none of us can truly perfectly roleplay any of the non-human species in D&D that they should all just disappear and be replaced by humans in rubber suits mechanically? Yeah, no, that's the wrong conclusion for the whole of the hobby.
Hey, maybe it would work better for your campaigns. Have fun with your Dragonborn without breath weapons, Kalashtar without telepathy, Fairies that can't fly, and Tritons that can't breathe underwater or even see the locations that their race lives (because they don't have darkvision). But my table loves all of that stuff. In my experience, talking with dozens of different people online that play the game, a ton of people love the fact that races are mechanically distinct. Removing that would remove the fun of the game for a lot of people. I would hate to play an Aarakocra that can't fly or an Eladrin that can't teleport. And the game would be worse for a lot of people if that change were ever enacted.
Good job at making a Hot Take that most people disagree with. Hopefully you see now why so many people disagree with it.
If all your race amounts to is a word on a page, then yes, that's the only difference. If you play a minotaur that has human psychology and human motivations and therefore human behaviours, then all of those factors you mentioned are meaningless. They are a human. You just aren't calling them that.
And you are claiming that you know for a fact that this is how people are playing their characters, in every single dnd game, around the world......
My hot take is that using one's passion for D&D to get angry about it is wasted time.
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider.
My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong.
I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲
“It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
The only one who has said that in this conversation is you, not I.
Just because someone expresses an opinion, doesn't mean they are expressing a universal maxim. Remember, you are arguing with me over my opinions about a game. You are the one trying to universalise your experience over my table. I'm not trying to force anything or your table. You called my position ridiculous and now are trying to imply that I need to retract my position-- a position that I have likely formed playing D&D on more continents that you have-- because it doesn't conform to how people play around the world. Yet, by stating such a claim, neither do you play D&D like every game around the world. You do not live up to the standard you set.
How would aarakocra work as a reskinned human? Wings are just decorative?
Or tritons can no longer breath underwater?
Lizardfolk lost their teeth and can no longer bite?
Dragonborn can no longer breath fire?
Making playable species purely cosmetic is an awful idea and takes away a massive part of the game. If everything is just reskinned humans, it's no longer dnd. I'd personally they had a larger mechanical impact, not a smaller one.
Reskinned humans is simply boring.
my name is not Bryce
Actor
Certified Dark Sun enjoyer
usually on forum games and not contributing to conversations ¯\_ (ツ)_/
For every user who writes 5 paragraph essays as each of their posts: Remember to touch grass occasionally
It's true that a good DM can work around flight. In my experience though, flight had a far bigger impact OUT of combat than in combat. It doesn't solve everything, as a flying pc can't carry the party anywhere, but flight can solve a good number of obstacles where otherwise people might have to be clever, or put their athletics to the test to reach somewhere, etc. Where a flying pc can just fly over a gap or up to the ceiling etc.
First of all, any race in D&D can bite, they just don't have bite attacks.
If it bothers you so much the idea that you can't have a triton breathe underwater, then just don't allow Triton characters. Problem solved. You aren't even supposed to allow every race of characters and are supposed to pick and choose a handful which are important to your game and setting.
Races aren't a massive part of the game. Doubly so for mechanics. Early D&D didn't even have them as a free-standing option. If you're telling me that a dwarven fighter and a gnomish fighter play massively differently as characters, then I would think you were mistaken. Almost all of the actions you take are going to be determined by your character's class.
Race is not the main course, it is a dash of seasoning.
I agree, and that's why I think characters shouldn't get benefits from race. Because a character who is a reskinned human shouldn't get benefits over other players and instead of policing players for not playing a character who is "elven enough" the solution should be just to remove the problem from the equation. We've play tested it for 50 years, it doesn't work, lets move on.
I think that'll about wrap it up, folks. The spiciest take has been given, and I don't think we're going to see it beaten. Who's got the trophy? Would you bring it over here, please?
Here's my hottest take...
Kobolds should be a playable race
my name is not Bryce
Actor
Certified Dark Sun enjoyer
usually on forum games and not contributing to conversations ¯\_ (ツ)_/
For every user who writes 5 paragraph essays as each of their posts: Remember to touch grass occasionally
Maybe not mechanically accurate. But Halfling barbarians are absolutely terrifying.
Something about a 2-3ft tall roided up pillar man punching you so hard in the knees their caps become shattered projectiles is just, no. I want none of that. In no universe is that okay.
"I once knew this fella, Aasimar raised in the Underdark. Was like a brother to me. When he escaped we couldn't take much with us. Poor, emaciated husks of the living we were. 'ts okay though. We survived and made our ways. I'll never forget the way the people from my home looked at us when we walked in the archway. Though, I'm frighteningly certain the feelings they would have, had they but the opportunity ta see us leave." --Manolovo the Traitor, Memoirs of a Scoundrel
So if I'm understanding you correctly, race is not a major factor in how a character is played? And so your solution to this is to effectively eliminate the race system (which in no way solves the problem you're trying to address) instead of making it more dynamic?? If you get rid of racial abilities/bonuses, you still have the issue you mention of two different Fighters playing the same way.
I wish races were
more important. I want your character not just to be defined by your class, but more by race (and hopefully backround as well).It goes how it goes, but I think making races just flavor would eliminate a lot of the fun in D&D and make the game more bland.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.Make them a path of wild magic barbarian, and imagine they rolled the teleportation ability and are now teleporting around the battlefield as a bonus action. That my friend reduces even veteran dm’s to ‘wtf do I do now?’ Hahaha
The problem I am trying to address is that people don't take race seriously, from a roleplaying perspective and the conclusion I've drawn is that if people are going to play characters that are ostenibly different, then eliminating the problem point is better than giving players bonuses for something they aren't doing anything to earn. So if we do eliminate the ability to play other races for mechanical reasons-- eliminate the motivation to choose race/class combinations for mechanical reasons-- then the only motivation that remains is because a player wishes to roleplay a certain race. Therefore, it would reduce the number of people frivilously playing races.
I'm not sure what to say except that my experience is different than yours. My group takes our races very seriously, and it often deeply informs our characters. Moments when we are able to use racial features to reinforce and highlight our racial features are always cool and satisfying.
In our Ghosts of Saltmarsh campaign, for example, the races with water-breathing, swim speeds, and other water-related affinities approach many of the encounters and challenges very differently, and it truly feels like different types of creatures attacking a problem from different angles. While yes, we could do all of this with no mechanical underpinning, by that logic we could also just chuck out the entire rest of the D&D ruleset and play Imagination Funtime with our superior roleplaying skills.
Mechanics give you a touchpoint, they serve as reminders of what you can do, give you ways to highlight your abilities, and ground your words in tangible actions. Yes, we've tried it for 50 years and you know what? It's working insanely well. 5e books are literally breaking all-time records for the industry, and their primary draw is new character options.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
So by that logic we should eliminate classes too? I've seen plenty of players roleplay their Ranger, or Bard, or even Warlock like a Rogue. How does one exactly earn the bonuses of being a race through roleplay, and how is that different than earning the benefits a particular class provides? If I play an elf character, am I supposed to actually speak Elvish at the table?
If people are having fun playing their Goliath Barbarian or whatever, what about that is frivolous?
I should note I don't mean any of these questions in an attacking sort of way. I'm genuinely trying to understand your stance here, and my questions are meant to be clarifiers to help me do that because as it is I just can't wrap my head around it.
Fresh hot take: D&D would be a better game with a point buy system instead of a "race" system. Assemble your character from different traits as you deem fit within the chargen budget of your game. Different species in the books are simply prebuilt packages of traits that simulate existing Tolkienite species. A DM can enforce "take these prebuilt packages only", they can use the point-buy system to provide their players with a list of custom species for their specific game that would be reasonably-ish interbalanced with each other, or they could open it up for each individual player to assemble a unique character that fits their vision. Games like Savage Worlds handle character generation miles and miles and miles and miles better than D&D; it's time to learn our lesson. Can't wait to see what Ghostfire did in their new book - they promised a point buy replacement for the default D&D "select a race" chargen leg, it's gonna be super juicy to see how they tackled it and figure out what I can backhack into other games.
Please do not contact or message me.
Yeah, you're going wholly off of your personal experience in the game. That is not my experience, and I'm assuming it's not the norm.
It depends on the player. I have one player that really couldn't care about their race most of the time in the game. They're more defined by their overall character concept. (In my Eberron campaign, they're a Firbolg Monk styled like a Pugilist. They care more about the Pugilist theme more than the fact they can speak to plants/animals and come from a distant land that most people have never heard of.) But my other players definitely care about their race. One of them, a Warforged, is so defined by their race that it drove a major character-driven side-quest in the very same Eberron campaign. The same applies to the Goblin Bard in that campaign (defined more by being a descendent of the Dhakaani Empire than the fact that she's a magical music girl), too.
Are they roleplayed fairly similarly to humans? Sure, the people playing them are humans. It's kind of impossible to truly roleplay what a Warforged, Kalashtar, Firbolg, Lizardfolk, Thri-Kreen, or Plasmoid would actually be like. But, perfect is the enemy of good, and coming to the conclusion that because none of us can truly perfectly roleplay any of the non-human species in D&D that they should all just disappear and be replaced by humans in rubber suits mechanically? Yeah, no, that's the wrong conclusion for the whole of the hobby.
Hey, maybe it would work better for your campaigns. Have fun with your Dragonborn without breath weapons, Kalashtar without telepathy, Fairies that can't fly, and Tritons that can't breathe underwater or even see the locations that their race lives (because they don't have darkvision). But my table loves all of that stuff. In my experience, talking with dozens of different people online that play the game, a ton of people love the fact that races are mechanically distinct. Removing that would remove the fun of the game for a lot of people. I would hate to play an Aarakocra that can't fly or an Eladrin that can't teleport. And the game would be worse for a lot of people if that change were ever enacted.
Good job at making a Hot Take that most people disagree with. Hopefully you see now why so many people disagree with it.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms