From my experience, players in 5e talk about how powerful and awesome the Human is to play, though few do. Supposedly the reason usually comes down to the single feat vs a slew of ability bonuses other Races get for the mechanical power. Case in point is that most polls I’ve seen suggest Human is one of the least played Races. For myself I changed the Variant Human to have a floating +2 and +1 Ability Score Bonus like every other Race, though it still didn’t feel like quite enough. Few people at my table seemed interested in playing one.
With the looming Update, my understanding is that every character gains a single Feat tied into their background, while Humans get two. This makes me wonder about the actual power scale benefit of the Feats, which seems to be confirmed when it’s stated that all Feats will be scaled to the level they can be received at, which both makes sense but also IMO further reduces the interest in playing a Human. Assuming there are no other real changes, would you play a Human, now or ever? Humans have always been my preference for seeing a Fantastical World through a provincials eyes, and also because it fits better into my own preferred aesthetic of a dark and gritty fantasy (a cross between Rothfuss and Martin).
If you were to update the Human to make it more appetizing, what would you change?
How many of you play a Human now? How many of you expect to play a human? Total agreement that the full statistical benefits aren’t really out there yet, so go with your standard preferences for what Races you like and what you know of the mechanical benefits and lack thereof to come.
How different should a non-human player character be? If you're playing a tiefling bard who grew up on the streets before learning to play an instrument from an old musician who gifted them a worn but well-loved lute before they went off into the world seeking their fortune, how different would they really be from a human that had an identical backstory?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Yep 40 different races and they are all the same except for special racial abilities.
Not a single negative in the group. Except for humans who at the best can't see in the dark and at the worst have no other special racial abilities.
How many times have you forgotten what race a fellow character was playing? Or you have even forgot what race your own character is for at least just a few seconds?
That is exactly how bland having all these player races is anymore.
If you want them all to be played the very same way make them all the very same. Whats the negative to playing a non human like a dragon born or tiefling or kobald. And what racial bonuses do they get again?
Balance. It does not seem fair but it is, everyone being equally disappointed is balance. Just about different things.
I think the issue, is that they are Human, and you D&D players are Human, so unless they were mechanically superior (and by a decent bit too), you lose the fantasy of being something else entirely.
Yep 40 different races and they are all the same except for special racial abilities.
Not a single negative in the group. Except for humans who at the best can't see in the dark and at the worst have no other special racial abilities.
How many times have you forgotten what race a fellow character was playing? Or you have even forgot what race your own character is for at least just a few seconds?
That is exactly how bland having all these player races is anymore.
If you want them all to be played the very same way make them all the very same. Whats the negative to playing a non human like a dragon born or tiefling or kobald. And what racial bonuses do they get again?
Balance. It does not seem fair but it is, everyone being equally disappointed is balance. Just about different things.
I'll ask again, how different should non-human characters be? Because I see you complaining, but I'm not seeing you say what you actually want.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I’m looking at the numbers and comparing them to both my experience and simple internet talk. I am extremely suspicious. As stands, one step towards a solution I may take is to give Humans Proficiency in one more Saving Throw of their choice. I don’t even care if it’s “huge,” I’m just so sick of players ignoring the Race.
Edit: I’ve created LFG ads as a DM, and been part of an audience looking for DMs. It’s funny how the poll numbers say EVERYONE plays humans but in those LFGs no one wanted to. I really wish I could delete that poll if I’d known how dishonest it would be.
They already get a free feat at level 1; that's a pretty major boost, and there's a fair number of feats you can spin as something unique/special about your character.
In One D&D we’re already being told those 1st level feats are no where near as powerful / useful as what we’ve come to expect in the current version, so it really doesn’t seem like any kind of major boost at all. Not even in this version as stands. That’s what was discussed already, their comparative weakness against other Racial choices.
It's too early to call just how dramatically "1st level feats only" will change things, but honestly Telekinetic and Telepathic seem like decent fits. Really, until we see a proper list of the new feats, as opposed to the piecemeal entries we've seen so far, we're pretty well in the dark here. That said, it's still getting something every other race has to wait four levels and pass on an ASI to get, so purely by that metric it's a pretty good value.
In this version of the edition, relatively. The human’s still need the same floating ability bonuses as everyone else, and based on both my own judgement and the low interest people have in playing human’s, I don’t think a feat makes up for all the advantages other races get. So, I’m adding one free saving throw proficiency for Humans. I’ll reevaluate the races post update (assuming I sign on) but right now I want balance and it’s obvious the balance is weighted against humans currently.
They acknowledge that different races have different strengths and that trying to define one as better than others, especially based solely on one's own experiences in a small group, is foolhardy.
I'd add: They don't know how to represent other races in game and don't bother trying.
We have already been told that a huge number of ideas in the play test are going to be abandoned because they were so unpopular. We’ve also been told that nothing new is going to be added from this point on so none of us really have a clue what is going to happen. I for one think this is nothing more than a cash grab and won’t be buying any of the new stuff. I will just keep playing the game as it is currently.
Totally fair @Beardsinger. I myself have been bouncing around on it, and I’m certainly not EAGER for it. But is there anything you’d change (if at all of course) about Humans in our current version, either to balance them and/or make them more attractive? I personally believe giving them the same floating ability score bonuses other races have is a requirement (+2, +1 to two Ability Scores of choice, or +1 to three). I’m contemplating giving them a single free saving throw proficiency but I’m not 100% just yet.
My groups have been playing with a free starting feat for a while now, typically starting with characters at 3rd-level as well; this just gives you so much more freedom to establish a character early rather than everyone starting out as a scrub who's terrible at everything. So the addition of a free feat as standard is really just formalising our house-rule.
Limiting these to 1st-level feats makes a lot of sense, as some feats are stronger than others, and represent a lot more specialisation. For example, I have a character that started out with Polearm Master using our houserule and that is definitely way too strong a starting feat in 5e; fortunately we're not a super competitive group and I play the character as a protector so I'm using that boost to benefit whoever needs it most rounds, rather than just going for the glory myself.
Anyway, I think the second feat will still be beneficial for humans; I'm currently playing a variant human in Strixhaven (where the backgrounds all give you a free feat already) and I love being able to have Lucky on top of Strixhaven Initiate. It may be helped by him being a bit sub-optimal, so Lucky is mostly used to help him excel where he's supposed to, or overcome his weaknesses when it's most critical/funny to do so.
I find it hard to say whether I'll play another in OneD&D; I've not had any problems playing my human Wizard, but I have so many non-human character ideas and I'm not sure when I might next get around to playing a human again. That said, there are other ways to play "human" in 5e, as we also have the Dhampir, Hexblood and Reborn lineages, I'm also tempted by the Disembodied race in the 3rd-party Grim Hollow campaign setting, so if we play a Grim Hollow adventure I may be a Disembodied "human", just using the alternative mechanics to represent disaster that left him out of phase with reality.
I do tend to play true races/species quite differently; my dragonborn characters behave differently, have different cultural touchstones and preferences etc. My tiefling character plays into the prejudice against being a half-fiend, over-compensating with bravado and false friendliness and so-on.
A bit rambling I know, but I think there's still plenty of reason to play human mechanically as feats are very good ways to customise your character. Whether you find playing a human interesting is up to you, but there's also no reason your character has to be human even if you use the human race for the mechanics (and vice versa); you could play a tiefling that's actually a human who was cursed/made a deal with a devil without being a Warlock etc. They're building blocks, use them how you like.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
To be honest the only reason to play variant human is the free feat, but it’s just not worth it now with the power creep from the Spell Jammer, Strixhaven, and Krynn backgrounds. The custom background creator lets you start with a feat as well. I think that to be competitive then humans need a couple of skills and a choice of tool proficiency, bonus language or dark-vision 30’ which sounds a lot but Shadar kai, Astral elves and Eladrin already get that and they get to misty step for free and sleep less. They need to be equalised. Giving everyone a free feat in their background boosts everyone rather than narrowing the gap.
They acknowledge that different races have different strengths and that trying to define one as better than others, especially based solely on one's own experiences in a small group, is foolhardy.
I'd add: They don't know how to represent other races in game and don't bother trying.
Where does it say that non-human races have to be played a certain way?
To be honest the only reason to play variant human is the free feat, but it’s just not worth it now with the power creep from the Spell Jammer, Strixhaven, and Krynn backgrounds. The custom background creator lets you start with a feat as well. I think that to be competitive then humans need a couple of skills and a choice of tool proficiency, bonus language or dark-vision 30’ which sounds a lot but Shadar kai, Astral elves and Eladrin already get that and they get to misty step for free and sleep less. They need to be equalised. Giving everyone a free feat in their background boosts everyone rather than narrowing the gap.
What power creep? The Dragonlance, Spelljammer, and Strixhaven backgrounds aren't for general use, they're campaign specific; if your DM allows them for general use then they need to give free feats to other backgrounds as well. These are also becoming the standard so there's no power creep there, all backgrounds will be equal in OneD&D.
I'm also not sure where you're getting the need for so many boosts from? Variant human is still giving you an additional feat beyond what you can normally start with; everyone else has to lose an ability score improvement.
There's no reason to give humans darkvision; if anything Wizards of the Coast need to be removing darkvision from most races that have it, possibly swapping some for "low light vision" instead (only treat dim light as bright, darkness is still darkness), because currently there's no reason to ever put a party in darkness.
Shadar-kai does need a nerf though; they should have sunlight sensitivity, otherwise they're just better Eladrin.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
From my experience, players in 5e talk about how powerful and awesome the Human is to play, though few do. Supposedly the reason usually comes down to the single feat vs a slew of ability bonuses other Races get for the mechanical power. Case in point is that most polls I’ve seen suggest Human is one of the least played Races. For myself I changed the Variant Human to have a floating +2 and +1 Ability Score Bonus like every other Race, though it still didn’t feel like quite enough. Few people at my table seemed interested in playing one.
With the looming Update, my understanding is that every character gains a single Feat tied into their background, while Humans get two. This makes me wonder about the actual power scale benefit of the Feats, which seems to be confirmed when it’s stated that all Feats will be scaled to the level they can be received at, which both makes sense but also IMO further reduces the interest in playing a Human. Assuming there are no other real changes, would you play a Human, now or ever? Humans have always been my preference for seeing a Fantastical World through a provincials eyes, and also because it fits better into my own preferred aesthetic of a dark and gritty fantasy (a cross between Rothfuss and Martin).
If you were to update the Human to make it more appetizing, what would you change?
How many of you play a Human now? How many of you expect to play a human? Total agreement that the full statistical benefits aren’t really out there yet, so go with your standard preferences for what Races you like and what you know of the mechanical benefits and lack thereof to come.
I love how few people play a human character but still play their non humans almost exactly like a human with nothing more than one odd quirk.
How different should a non-human player character be? If you're playing a tiefling bard who grew up on the streets before learning to play an instrument from an old musician who gifted them a worn but well-loved lute before they went off into the world seeking their fortune, how different would they really be from a human that had an identical backstory?
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Yep 40 different races and they are all the same except for special racial abilities.
Not a single negative in the group. Except for humans who at the best can't see in the dark and at the worst have no other special racial abilities.
How many times have you forgotten what race a fellow character was playing? Or you have even forgot what race your own character is for at least just a few seconds?
That is exactly how bland having all these player races is anymore.
If you want them all to be played the very same way make them all the very same.
Whats the negative to playing a non human like a dragon born or tiefling or kobald. And what racial bonuses do they get again?
Balance. It does not seem fair but it is, everyone being equally disappointed is balance. Just about different things.
If you were to adjust the mechanics or such to make the Human more appetizing (while still being human) what would you change?
I think the issue, is that they are Human, and you D&D players are Human, so unless they were mechanically superior (and by a decent bit too), you lose the fantasy of being something else entirely.
I'll ask again, how different should non-human characters be? Because I see you complaining, but I'm not seeing you say what you actually want.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I’m looking at the numbers and comparing them to both my experience and simple internet talk. I am extremely suspicious. As stands, one step towards a solution I may take is to give Humans Proficiency in one more Saving Throw of their choice. I don’t even care if it’s “huge,” I’m just so sick of players ignoring the Race.
Edit: I’ve created LFG ads as a DM, and been part of an audience looking for DMs. It’s funny how the poll numbers say EVERYONE plays humans but in those LFGs no one wanted to. I really wish I could delete that poll if I’d known how dishonest it would be.
They already get a free feat at level 1; that's a pretty major boost, and there's a fair number of feats you can spin as something unique/special about your character.
In One D&D we’re already being told those 1st level feats are no where near as powerful / useful as what we’ve come to expect in the current version, so it really doesn’t seem like any kind of major boost at all. Not even in this version as stands. That’s what was discussed already, their comparative weakness against other Racial choices.
It's too early to call just how dramatically "1st level feats only" will change things, but honestly Telekinetic and Telepathic seem like decent fits. Really, until we see a proper list of the new feats, as opposed to the piecemeal entries we've seen so far, we're pretty well in the dark here. That said, it's still getting something every other race has to wait four levels and pass on an ASI to get, so purely by that metric it's a pretty good value.
In this version of the edition, relatively. The human’s still need the same floating ability bonuses as everyone else, and based on both my own judgement and the low interest people have in playing human’s, I don’t think a feat makes up for all the advantages other races get. So, I’m adding one free saving throw proficiency for Humans. I’ll reevaluate the races post update (assuming I sign on) but right now I want balance and it’s obvious the balance is weighted against humans currently.
I'd add: They don't know how to represent other races in game and don't bother trying.
We have already been told that a huge number of ideas in the play test are going to be abandoned because they were so unpopular. We’ve also been told that nothing new is going to be added from this point on so none of us really have a clue what is going to happen. I for one think this is nothing more than a cash grab and won’t be buying any of the new stuff. I will just keep playing the game as it is currently.
Totally fair @Beardsinger. I myself have been bouncing around on it, and I’m certainly not EAGER for it. But is there anything you’d change (if at all of course) about Humans in our current version, either to balance them and/or make them more attractive? I personally believe giving them the same floating ability score bonuses other races have is a requirement (+2, +1 to two Ability Scores of choice, or +1 to three). I’m contemplating giving them a single free saving throw proficiency but I’m not 100% just yet.
My groups have been playing with a free starting feat for a while now, typically starting with characters at 3rd-level as well; this just gives you so much more freedom to establish a character early rather than everyone starting out as a scrub who's terrible at everything. So the addition of a free feat as standard is really just formalising our house-rule.
Limiting these to 1st-level feats makes a lot of sense, as some feats are stronger than others, and represent a lot more specialisation. For example, I have a character that started out with Polearm Master using our houserule and that is definitely way too strong a starting feat in 5e; fortunately we're not a super competitive group and I play the character as a protector so I'm using that boost to benefit whoever needs it most rounds, rather than just going for the glory myself.
Anyway, I think the second feat will still be beneficial for humans; I'm currently playing a variant human in Strixhaven (where the backgrounds all give you a free feat already) and I love being able to have Lucky on top of Strixhaven Initiate. It may be helped by him being a bit sub-optimal, so Lucky is mostly used to help him excel where he's supposed to, or overcome his weaknesses when it's most critical/funny to do so.
I find it hard to say whether I'll play another in OneD&D; I've not had any problems playing my human Wizard, but I have so many non-human character ideas and I'm not sure when I might next get around to playing a human again. That said, there are other ways to play "human" in 5e, as we also have the Dhampir, Hexblood and Reborn lineages, I'm also tempted by the Disembodied race in the 3rd-party Grim Hollow campaign setting, so if we play a Grim Hollow adventure I may be a Disembodied "human", just using the alternative mechanics to represent disaster that left him out of phase with reality.
I do tend to play true races/species quite differently; my dragonborn characters behave differently, have different cultural touchstones and preferences etc. My tiefling character plays into the prejudice against being a half-fiend, over-compensating with bravado and false friendliness and so-on.
A bit rambling I know, but I think there's still plenty of reason to play human mechanically as feats are very good ways to customise your character. Whether you find playing a human interesting is up to you, but there's also no reason your character has to be human even if you use the human race for the mechanics (and vice versa); you could play a tiefling that's actually a human who was cursed/made a deal with a devil without being a Warlock etc. They're building blocks, use them how you like.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
To be honest the only reason to play variant human is the free feat, but it’s just not worth it now with the power creep from the Spell Jammer, Strixhaven, and Krynn backgrounds. The custom background creator lets you start with a feat as well. I think that to be competitive then humans need a couple of skills and a choice of tool proficiency, bonus language or dark-vision 30’ which sounds a lot but Shadar kai, Astral elves and Eladrin already get that and they get to misty step for free and sleep less. They need to be equalised. Giving everyone a free feat in their background boosts everyone rather than narrowing the gap.
Where does it say that non-human races have to be played a certain way?
Humans are number 1!!!!
What power creep? The Dragonlance, Spelljammer, and Strixhaven backgrounds aren't for general use, they're campaign specific; if your DM allows them for general use then they need to give free feats to other backgrounds as well. These are also becoming the standard so there's no power creep there, all backgrounds will be equal in OneD&D.
I'm also not sure where you're getting the need for so many boosts from? Variant human is still giving you an additional feat beyond what you can normally start with; everyone else has to lose an ability score improvement.
There's no reason to give humans darkvision; if anything Wizards of the Coast need to be removing darkvision from most races that have it, possibly swapping some for "low light vision" instead (only treat dim light as bright, darkness is still darkness), because currently there's no reason to ever put a party in darkness.
Shadar-kai does need a nerf though; they should have sunlight sensitivity, otherwise they're just better Eladrin.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.