We can make hat creative leap, but not everyone can and beginners especially. I get that that is what you would like but I’m sorry to say it’s very unlikely to see the light of day in D&D. If ( and it’s a big if I grant) the New PHB comes our in the spring then it’s already set and they are just working on finishing touches and printing/distrobution. If that is true then we are getting pretty much what we saw in UA 6-8 - a some what revised and updated 2014 PHB with Xanther’s and Tasha’s included in the updates - sad.
I think they should have examples of races and then have a list of abilities to mix so that you can build whatever you want
In general RPG design terms that's an option, but it really doesn't work for when you're trying to design "races/species" because how exactly are we supposed to consider dwarves or orcs or halflings to be of a type when you can literally have an orc and a halfling with identical traits which are both completely different from what a corresponding member of what should be the same race has?
There are real world humans of all different shapes and sizes, and they’re all still human.
Can you really not make the creative leap that would explain why an orc might have Stout resistance rather than Powerful build. Why a Halfling might Surprise attack and not Lucky. Why an Elf Has Relentless Endurance but not the traditional elvish long life, trance and elvish weapon training?
No, I really can't make the leap as to why one elf is going to live for centuries and another only gets a single century tops or why one trances while the other sleeps normally when both longevity and trancing are cornerstones of D&D elves. I've seen systems where there's a limited degree of mix and match options per race to allow for some customization, but a single pool of traits everyone picks from just means players are going to tend towards a core handful of optimal picks, even when they're not actively min-maxing.
There are real world humans of all different shapes and sizes, and they’re all still human
Right, and there's two problems with applying that logic here: 1) This is not the real world, it's a fantasy RPG, and 2) humans are all a single species; the various races of D&D are all separate species. Saying they should all be ultimately homogenous because humans are is a non-sequitur.
Humans, Halflings, Half-orcs, Half-elves, Gnomes, Dwarves, Dragonborn, Tieflings, and Aasimar. I leave out full Elves because I prefer elves to be more mysterious, powerful and ethereal beings that don't even count as humanoids. If you still want to play Legolas, be a Half-elf.
It's worth asking whether things need to be mechanically different. Would it really be losing anything important if you said "Goblins: treat as Halflings"?
I... struggle to imagine why anyone would want this approach. Mechanically distinct races/species are fun, not overly difficult to design (consider how many new species we've gotten since Tasha's, compared to how many new subclasses), and clearly there is fiscal demand for them judging by them being the main selling points (for players, anyway) from MotM and SJ. For these two specifically, even with the ASI and speed differences no longer being a factor, there are many mechanically distinct builds you can make to synergize/capitalize on their strengths. For example, I'd be much likely to go with halfling for my monk or rogue than goblin to avoid the redundancy between Nimble Escape and Cunning Action/Monk's Discipline.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
We can make hat creative leap, but not everyone can and beginners especially. I get that that is what you would like but I’m sorry to say it’s very unlikely to see the light of day in D&D. If ( and it’s a big if I grant) the New PHB comes our in the spring then it’s already set and they are just working on finishing touches and printing/distrobution. If that is true then we are getting pretty much what we saw in UA 6-8 - a some what revised and updated 2014 PHB with Xanther’s and Tasha’s included in the updates - sad.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
There are real world humans of all different shapes and sizes, and they’re all still human.
No, I really can't make the leap as to why one elf is going to live for centuries and another only gets a single century tops or why one trances while the other sleeps normally when both longevity and trancing are cornerstones of D&D elves. I've seen systems where there's a limited degree of mix and match options per race to allow for some customization, but a single pool of traits everyone picks from just means players are going to tend towards a core handful of optimal picks, even when they're not actively min-maxing.
Right, and there's two problems with applying that logic here: 1) This is not the real world, it's a fantasy RPG, and 2) humans are all a single species; the various races of D&D are all separate species. Saying they should all be ultimately homogenous because humans are is a non-sequitur.
Humans, Halflings, Half-orcs, Half-elves, Gnomes, Dwarves, Dragonborn, Tieflings, and Aasimar. I leave out full Elves because I prefer elves to be more mysterious, powerful and ethereal beings that don't even count as humanoids. If you still want to play Legolas, be a Half-elf.
I... struggle to imagine why anyone would want this approach. Mechanically distinct races/species are fun, not overly difficult to design (consider how many new species we've gotten since Tasha's, compared to how many new subclasses), and clearly there is fiscal demand for them judging by them being the main selling points (for players, anyway) from MotM and SJ. For these two specifically, even with the ASI and speed differences no longer being a factor, there are many mechanically distinct builds you can make to synergize/capitalize on their strengths. For example, I'd be much likely to go with halfling for my monk or rogue than goblin to avoid the redundancy between Nimble Escape and Cunning Action/Monk's Discipline.