In your opinion, what are the worst/most boring races in 5e?

[supergoji18]

While I understand that roleplaying has a lot to do with selecting a race, I can't help but feel that there are some races that got the short end of the stick when it came to giving them traits. I have been looking over races recently and noticed that there are some races that have tons of features that make them fun and interesting to play, but then there are those races that have so little to offer that you may forget you were a race other than human.

I want to get the playground's opinion on this though, because I am planning to do some setting-specific homebrewing regarding races in my setting. I want to make all the races equally fun to play, but I don't want to give a race too much and make them overpowered. So what races do you feel are the worst/most boring in 5e?

Edit: After seeing the responses, I've started to make some homebrew variants of the races most commonly voted on this list. Here is a list of what I have so far:

Goliath (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?555874-Reimagined-Races-Part-1-Goliath&p=22984855#post22984855)

[Nidgit]

Dragonborn seems inherently cool but is easily the weakest of the PHB races. You get a once-per-day small AoE that scales poorly, and resistance to one damage type. That's it. It feels like WotC ran out of ideas when it comes to what defines a dragon race and just kind of gave up. At least give them an extra +1 to CON or CHA!

Humans are always the least interesting to me, flavorwise. It often feels like you're sacrificing another facet to define by picking one to play.

[supergoji18]

Dragonborn seems inherently cool but is easily the weakest of the PHB races. You get a once-per-day small AoE that scales poorly, and resistance to one damage type. That's it. It feels like WotC ran out of ideas when it comes to what defines a dragon race and just kind of gave up. At least give them an extra +1 to CON or CHA!

Humans are always the least interesting to me, flavorwise. It often feels like you're sacrificing another facet to define by picking one to play.
Maybe they did know and they just thought it would be overloaded if they did. Or they saved it for the Lizardfolk. Pretty much everything the Lizardfolk has, the Dragonborn should also have.
But to give the current dragonborn some credit, its once per short or long rest, not once per day. So its slightly more impactful.

And yeah, humans tend to get the short end of the stick when it comes to features. I'm trying to think of ways to make them more interesting outside of "here's a free feat." Maybe a regional adaptation, like arctic or desert?

[Potato_Priest]

Personally, I think that a free feat is the most interesting thing humans could get, since it does a good job representing the humans’ ambitious specializarion.

Tabaxi feel pretty flat to me. They get some good features, but none of them really scream “cat” to me as much as they scream “rogue”.

[supergoji18]

Tabaxi feel pretty flat to me. They get some good features, but none of them really scream “cat” to me as much as they scream “rogue”.
What would, in your opinion, make them feel more like cats?

[Aett_Thorn]

What would, in your opinion, make them feel more like cats?

Innate ability to push things off high spaces, with bonuses if those things are fragile.

Needs 18 hours of sleep per day.

Hates water.

Personality changes minute by minute.

[sophontteks]

I second the dragonborn. They are a core race, yet it really doesn't feel like they put the work in to make them on par with the other core races.

[Cybren]

Worst race is halfling. See: all the halfling art

[jaappleton]

Worst race is halfling. See: all the halfling art

I repressed all the Halfling artwork. Such massive, out of proportion heads... Nightmare fuel.

[FelineArchmage]

Humans hands down - at least flavor wise. Mechanically - if you're playing with the variant human - the free feat is awesome. But in a made-up world with so many other options for race, you choose the one that already exists? Boooooring. I don't think I've made a human yet for 5e.

[Cybren]

Humans hands down - at least flavor wise. Mechanically - if you're playing with the variant human - the free feat is awesome. But in a made-up world with so many other options for race, you choose the one that already exists? Boooooring. I don't think I've made a human yet for 5e.

i've always found this a spurious argument, especially since 90% of the races in D&D are star trek style Humans In Makeup

[supergoji18]

Worst race is halfling. See: all the halfling art


I repressed all the Halfling artwork. Such massive, out of proportion heads... Nightmare fuel.

You mean this art?
https://media-waterdeep.cursecdn.com/avatars/thumbnails/6/256/420/618/636271789409776659.png

:smalltongue:

[The Jack]

I really dislike volo's hobgoblin and orc. Moreso the hob because they're a favourite of mine, but the orc's got nothing going for it. The hobgoblin was -this is absolutely perfect for wizard to the sacrifice of everything else- and the orc...

The Hobgoblin aught to be much more like the Dwarf. The more I thought about it, the more perfect it was. Return the 30 speed, change the weapons and tool choices, nerf or remove the poison resistance and it's near perfect. stonecunning can go too.


The Orc, well, it's just a bad dude. Grab the half orc, give it a version of powerful build that's maybe less powerful, then maybe tack on sunlight sensitivity or disadvantage with knowledge rolls.

[sophontteks]

You mean this art?
CENSORED

:smalltongue:

Posting vulgar images like that HAS to break the forum rules.
One of my players are playing halfing. He doesn't have the book. He asked if he could see it and I tore it away before he could.

I saved his life that day.

If I ever saw something like that IRL I would set it on fire as afast as possible. Things scarier then that weird Leprechaun that murdered people.

[Foxhound438]

Innate ability to push things off high spaces, with bonuses if those things are fragile.

Needs 18 hours of sleep per day.

Hates water.

Personality changes minute by minute.

you forgot "can't decide whether to be inside or outside"

I would honestly like to see dragonborn re-done. Keep the resistance, bin the breath attack, give something else. A natural weapon (claw/fang) would be good, since there's no race that offers those with a strength bonus as far as I remember, and then throw in darkvision or something.

[trctelles]

Personally, I would never play a gnome. To me, they are all tied to Wizard class. I can't wrap my brain around a gnome being anything else, and I don't like wizards that much (I know they are great, I just don't like them).

Gnomes look much more like NPCs than players to me.

[Willie the Duck]

i've always found this a spurious argument, especially since 90% of the races in D&D are star trek style Humans In Makeup

And for those of us who grew up with all the material that was the literary influences of D&D, one recognizes that Tolkien was the only one that seemed to need non-human protagonists. And character background and backstory are the knobs I get to turn now that I used to use character race for. So, although I've played many races and classes in 5e, I could also play 100 (non-variant) human Champion fighters or Thief rogues in a row without any of them feeling the same. :smallbiggrin:


I really dislike volo's hobgoblin and orc. Moreso the hob because they're a favourite of mine, but the orc's got nothing going for it. The hobgoblin was -this is absolutely perfect for wizard to the sacrifice of everything else- and the orc...

The Hobgoblin aught to be much more like the Dwarf. The more I thought about it, the more perfect it was. Return the 30 speed, change the weapons and tool choices, nerf or remove the poison resistance and it's near perfect. stonecunning can go too.

The Orc, well, it's just a bad dude. Grab the half orc, give it a version of powerful build that's maybe less powerful, then maybe tack on sunlight sensitivity or disadvantage with knowledge rolls.

The hobgoblin and goblin are interesting choices for the Volo's author. Hobgoblin gains advantages that are only really good for playing one class... very off brand to normal hobgoblins, but the off brand choice you'd expect (most hobgoblins are fighters or rogues, but the exceptions should be wizard, as they are the 'thinking' humanoid). Goblin is pretty much good for any class except the goblin standard (rogue). Both of them seem very meta-gamey.

The orc, well, is just a worse incarnation of orc than a half-orc is. They clearly felt they had run out of design space.

[supergoji18]

I would honestly like to see dragonborn re-done. Keep the resistance, bin the breath attack, give something else. A natural weapon (claw/fang) would be good, since there's no race that offers those with a strength bonus as far as I remember, and then throw in darkvision or something.
Then they would just be worse lizardfolk. The breath weapon is pretty necessary for their identity in my opinion. But I think they do need something more to flesh them out a bit.

[Kyrinthic]

But to give the current dragonborn some credit, its once per short or long rest, not once per day. So its slightly more impactful.

And yeah, humans tend to get the short end of the stick when it comes to features. I'm trying to think of ways to make them more interesting outside of "here's a free feat." Maybe a regional adaptation, like arctic or desert?

Even on a short rest 2d6 in a 15' cone is not impactful, its rarely worth the action even if it was unlimited, and adding another few d6s (at a slower progression than even cantrips) doesnt help. The dragonborn will need to fit 3 people into that cone just to be worth not just swinging a sword instead for the action, and it gets worse past Tier 1. I played with a guy that had a dragonborn barbarian, he really just wanted to breath fire. But you know, 11 damage, save for half to 3 enemies vs hitting two of them for ~12 damage, its pretty much never the good choice, and thats if you can managed to get 3 enemies to fit into a 15' cone.

Overall Dragonborn really get so vastly worse than other races it isnt even close.

Humans mechanically are fine, no other race gives the level of versatility for variant humans feat, skill, and language choice gives. Non-variant humans shouldn't even be a thing, but they would also rank up there for bland. I dont know anyone who has played a human without it being a variant.

Some people feel they are boring RP wise, but really humans have by far the most interesting mix of RP options with all the flavors of humanity out there. something like Sword Coast Adventures Guide really help bring this to life. Most other races have only one normal flavor, humans have a great many.

[sophontteks]

Personally, I would never play a gnome. To me, they are all tied to Wizard class. I can't wrap my brain around a gnome being anything else, and I don't like wizards that much (I know they are great, I just don't like them).

Gnomes look much more like NPCs than players to me.

Every Gnome when they are recruited into an adventuring group...

Are you naturally intelligent?
Yes
Then you are a Wizard!
But I've spent most of my life studying military tactics at the academy
Yeah. you are a Wizard!
Isn't there any other class which would better cater to my expertise?
No, no there is not
But it just feels like intelligence would be a useful thing for anyone.
Shut up and put this robe on

[Ralanr]

I second the dragonborn. They are a core race, yet it really doesn't feel like they put the work in to make them on par with the other core races.

Imo probably due to fear of 4e hate backlash.


Thematically I find elves rather boring as their flaws tend to be basic arrogance that comes from being superior if they are even presented with flaws (high elves in particular). And they all more or less have the same build! Say what you want about dwarves, at least you’ll find a fat one or a muscle bound one. All elves are drawn as basically drawn as models.

Surely there are ugly and fat elves.

[TheCleverGuy]

This may sound odd, but I'm not really all that drawn to the Elves. I'm new to the game, and have only ever actually played a Dwarf character, but in looking through the books and thinking about all the different race/class combinations, I've never really though "this class would be a good one to use an Elf character with." I mean, obviously Rangers, Druids, and Wizards would all be perfectly fine and even powerful as an Elf, but I dunno, an Elf in any of those classes just doesn't seem as interesting a character as a Halfling or Gnome would be.

[sophontteks]

Imo probably due to fear of 4e hate backlash.


Thematically I find elves rather boring as their flaws tend to be basic arrogance that comes from being superior if they are even presented with flaws (high elves in particular). And they all more or less have the same build! Say what you want about dwarves, at least you’ll find a fat one or a muscle bound one. All elves are drawn as basically drawn as models.

Surely there are ugly and fat elves.
Ugly elf babies are discarded 300 style. The rumour is that some survived and thats how dwarves came to be.

[mephnick]

I'd say the most boring race to me is the tiefling. Nothing about it sparks my imagination outside of edgy characters. Even if you make the nicest, most down to earth PC ever, you're still relying on the "yeah, but I look like a Devil!" to make that contrast interesting. Yawn. They seem so out of place and don't fit the same kind of fantasy the other races do.

[Nidgit]

The main difference between gnomes and dragonborn, aside from gnomes actually having a useful ability, is that dragonborn problems are a result of a poor race chassis while gnome problems come from poor class availability. Add in an arcane half-caster or psionic/mystic classes and gnomes will be severely less limited.

Dragonborn could at least get cooler racial feats to offset their base levels of lame.

[white lancer]

Dragonborn at least should have had Darkvision. IIRC all dragons and the half-dragon have Darkvision, so I don't understand why Dragonborn don't. But then, I think 5e's distribution of Darkvision is really wonky (and overly generous) anyway--it would make way more sense for Dragonborn than for Half-Elves and Elves IMO.

I pretty much never wind up playing Elves, but it's mostly for flavor reasons--the fact that they're so long-lived makes me think their perspective should be warped in such a way that I don't find interesting for adventurers. Mechanically they seem fine to me, though.

Mechanically, outside of Dragonborn, I can't see myself ever wanting to play a Kenku. Not being able to talk is crazy in a game like D&D. And I'm AFB, but I also remember thinking Lizardfolk were kinda lame, though I could see selecting them in specific campaigns for flavor reasons (though in "normal" campaigns I'd shy away from most of the races in Volo's).

[Davrix]

Dragonborn easily. It just feels so lack luster all around and as one of the races without darkvision it doesn't feel like their racial offer enough of a bonus to offset it.


Also I hate the variant human extra feat as I feel it personally offers the human more power than any other race in the game for many builds. and generally just a big power boost in general.

[Ralanr]

Ugly elf babies are discarded 300 style. The rumour is that some survived and thats how dwarves came to be.

I’d believe it. It even helps explain why the two races don’t like each other.

[sophontteks]

I'd say the most boring race to me is the tiefling. Nothing about it sparks my imagination outside of edgy characters. Even if you make the nicest, most down to earth PC ever, you're still relying on the "yeah, but I look like a Devil!" to make that contrast interesting. Yawn. They seem so out of place and don't fit the same kind of fantasy the other races do.
I thought the same thing and avoid them because of it. But then something changed my mind:
Thaumaturgy

All Tieflings innately know thaumaturgy. What does this mean? It means all of them can basically act like they are possessed at will and just in general be super duper creepy and scary whenever they want. The idea behind these racial spells is that they are an innate ability, and this is a really cool innate ability that fleshes the whole 'part demon' thing out perfectly IMO.

And besides, what a perfect cantrip for a charisma-based race to have. Its Amazing for Paladins, Bards, and Warlocks alike. Its a different kind of charisma. Its like in Lord of the Rings when the Elf woman goes all crazy on Frodo. Yeah, anyone who can do that at will gets all the cool points.

[Tanarii]

Tiefling and Dragonborn. Because they're so emo, edgy, special snowflake, whatever you want to call it. (Dark elf too but theyre optional.)

Gnomes are by far the awesomest race. 5e made gnomes cool the same way 3e made halflings cool.

[quinron]

I find half-elves incredibly dull in every edition, but I've really come to hate the 5e version. They're basically better than standard human in every respect unless your class has 3 or more core stats, none of which are Charisma. I get that their whole schtick is that they lack their own place in the world, but trying to implement that mechanically just results in an unfocused chassis that doesn't fit any class all that well, like in 3.5, or something so customizable that it robs humans of what is supposed to be their defining trait, versatility.

And yeah, Vuman mitigates these complaints, but WotC keep (spuriously) claiming that games with feats (let alone Vumans) are the exception rather than the rule, which means anyone optimizing their race/class combo is almost always going to pick half-elf over human.

[Ralanr]

Tiefling and Dragonborn. Because they're so emo, edgy, special snowflake, whatever you want to call it. (Dark elf too but theyre optional.)

Gnomes are by far the awesomest race. 5e made gnomes cool the same way 3e made halflings cool.

Wait how are Dragonborn edgy?

Snowflake sure, but edgy?

[Tanarii]

Wait how are Dragonborn edgy?

Snowflake sure, but edgy?
It's all the same mentality.

[Ralanr]

It's all the same mentality.

I mean...no I don’t get it. Can you please explain?

[Luccan]

I don't care for Goliaths. They're just big wild dwarves. I havent looked at Firbolgs recently, but I recall not liking their Disney-level friendliness. I'm not happy with Kobolds and Orcs mechanically, Kobolds get shoved into coward/comic relief rolls from their's and Orcs are just worse than other races, including their half-blood offspring. Both are also the only races to receive a minus to a stat, which seems to fly in the face of 5e's player race design philosophy.

I like pretty much everything else to some degree, though I've yet to hit on a Tabaxi character idea and I'm not sure I have the know-how to pull off a Kenku.

[sophontteks]

I think he means they are a very corny overdone trope. Very much different from the more down to earth races like elves that live a thousand years perfectly beautiful.

[Tanarii]

I havent looked at Firbolgs recently, but I recall not liking their Disney-level friendliness.They've definitely fallen a long was from their AD&D roots.

[The Jack]

Nah I get him. Edgelords and snowflakes are two extremes of the same line of thought. Both crave attention and don't know nuance.

On other notes.
I'd never let someone play a yuan ti or the wind-bird person with flight. I dislike the firbolg.
Dragonborn strike me as something good for an NPC, and Half-dragonhood strikes me as a really cool blessing that's either earned by the player or a powerful trait born into someone that needs to be an npc. I'll allow dragonborn but I dislike them.


A certain character of mine thinks Tieflings would make good exotic slaves, that they wouldn't ever be given the same rights as "people" given their infernal ties. This is a character who makes a lot of sense. Aasimar are a risky existence that'd cause even some neutral people to feel threatened;their active divine link makes them dangerous. Still, one should venerate Aasimar for a favourable appearance, and place tieflings below or at a distance for a favourable appearance. Aasimar may make great slaves if you've got no stock in celestial intervention or live in an evil society. Strange colors and positive charisma modifiers make them beautiful servants/slaves that'll impress others.
- I don't think players should play Tieflings unless they want a hard time.

[Luccan]

Personally, I think if you want to get rid of edginess or snowflake tendencies inherent to some races (when played poorly), you should probably just cut it all back to humans. Maybe allow dwarves and halflings. I like gnomes, but in this case, tossing elves makes them the fey-type characters, so they've gotta go. But really, I don't have a problem with anyone playing particular races, there are just some I don't like for myself.

[PandaPhobia]

Dragonborn seems inherently cool but is easily the weakest of the PHB races. You get a once-per-day small AoE that scales poorly, and resistance to one damage type. That's it. It feels like WotC ran out of ideas when it comes to what defines a dragon race and just kind of gave up. At least give them an extra +1 to CON or CHA!

Humans are always the least interesting to me, flavorwise. It often feels like you're sacrificing another facet to define by picking one to play.

Sure, they don't get many special abilities, but they went all out with the nationalities section, and there is that +1 to all stats, so humans usually make for well rounded characters, which is kind of the point of the humans in D&D

[sophontteks]

Nah I get him. Edgelords and snowflakes are two extremes of the same line of thought. Both crave attention and don't know nuance.

On other notes.
I'd never let someone play a yuan ti or the wind-bird person with flight. I dislike the firbolg.
Dragonborn strike me as something good for an NPC, and Half-dragonhood strikes me as a really cool blessing that's either earned by the player or a powerful trait born into someone that needs to be an npc. I'll allow dragonborn but I dislike them.


A certain character of mine thinks Tieflings would make good exotic slaves, that they wouldn't ever be given the same rights as "people" given their infernal ties. This is a character who makes a lot of sense. Aasimar are a risky existence that'd cause even some neutral people to feel threatened;their active divine link makes them dangerous. Still, one should venerate Aasimar for a favourable appearance, and place tieflings below or at a distance for a favourable appearance. Aasimar may make great slaves if you've got no stock in celestial intervention or live in an evil society. Strange colors and positive charisma modifiers make them beautiful servants/slaves that'll impress others.
- I don't think players should play Tieflings unless they want a hard time.

I think tieflings would thrive dead center in the heart of nobility. Oh sure, the common man is likely to shout "Burn the witch!!!" at the first opportunity, but the nobility, ever seeking an advantage in the cutthroat games of politics they play, would hardly be so prude not to accept help from some...unconventional sources. And where would these tieflings come from if not from dealings between infernals and the nobility themselves? Who else would have the power and the reason to mingle with demons so intimately?

And the Tieflings would then be protected by their name. Shamed, sure, but still quite useful and there is something to be said for the ease in which one could alter their identity in order to hide their outward appearance from those who would seek them harm. Such a creature should find no shortage of work in the top of society. Oh, sure, they are hated and mistrusted, but hate, mistrust, and deceit are in no short supply among the nobility.

I have several good tiefling ideas I wish to run.
A tiefling glamor bard. Sinfully gorgeous. Oddly well accepted, even among the highest and most devout company. Its as if people do not see his/her true form. Enticing people to sin through unnaturally gorgeous looks? Sign me up.

A tiefling Paladin, many archtypes work here. Born noble and cast off, he still retains some status (knight variant), but was nonetheless cast off to avoid being (rightfully) accused of mingling with demons. He was forced to swear oath to an order of paladins. The distrust of their race only strengthens their resolve to uphold the only family that has truely accepted them, even if they were likely paid quite well for accepting them into the order.

And of course the Infernal warlock will never get old :P. I'm a demon who works under a bigger demon and has a pet demon under me. Power hungry? Absolutely. Evil? No, not necessarily. Such a person could treat their friends quite well and simply not hold the morals of a society who wouldn't accept them in high regard. Sure they are hated, but...roll intimidation.

[Nifft]

I think tieflings would thrive dead center in the heart of nobility. Oh sure, the common man is likely to shout "Burn the witch!!!" at the first opportunity, but the nobility, ever seeking an advantage in the cutthroat games of politics they play, would hardly be so prude not to accept help from some...unconventional sources. And where would these tieflings come from if not from dealings between infernals and the nobility themselves? Who else would have the power and the reason to mingle with demons so intimately?

There was a 4e Tiefling background thing about how the ancient decadent Tiefling Empire was this sprawling, decadent thing that collapsed under the force of its own wickedness (and/or dragon attacks) -- so in our game, some of the ruins we'd go explore would be keyed to attack non-Tieflings.

I loved that lore detail. Tieflings as fallen nobility makes them feel a bit like Melnibonian Elves, and those were some awesome elves.

[Lombra]

Hill dwarves are probably the less intreasting to me. Just a little extra HP and a slower speed, nothing impressive really.

[Ralanr]

There was a 4e Tiefling background thing about how the ancient decadent Tiefling Empire was this sprawling, decadent thing that collapsed under the force of its own wickedness (and/or dragon attacks) -- so in our game, some of the ruins we'd go explore would be keyed to attack non-Tieflings.

I loved that lore detail. Tieflings as fallen nobility makes them feel a bit like Melnibonian Elves, and those were some awesome elves.

I'm currently using Tieflings as a majority of the upper class for a gothic horror campaign I'm running for my friends. So far I'm liking it, though my friends haven't had oppertunity to abuse it yet.

[Tanarii]

Personally, I think if you want to get rid of edginess or snowflake tendencies inherent to some races (when played poorly), you should probably just cut it all back to humans.Tried that for a spin-off campaign once. What I got was Vlad Shadowbane, the human Vengeance Paladin, who's parents were murdered by Vampires and wanted revenge. No joke.

[KorvinStarmast]

So what races do you feel are the worst/most boring in 5e? Tiefling. Firbolg. Kenku.

And I'll stop there, because I fear that I am feeding a real buzz kill kind of thread, and maybe should not.

[Luccan]

Tried that for a spin-off campaign once. What I got was Vlad Shadowbane, the human Vengeance Paladin, who's parents were murdered by Vampires and wanted revenge. No joke.

I mean, you can't stop edgy characters. You can just get rid of those races that allow for it more easily. Although a Vengeance Paladin has vengeance right in the name, I'm not sure how you avoid edginess with that.

[Ralanr]

Tried that for a spin-off campaign once. What I got was Vlad Shadowbane, the human Vengeance Paladin, who's parents were murdered by Vampires and wanted revenge. No joke.

On a scale of 1 to 10, how edgy did you play him?

[Tanarii]

On a scale of 1 to 10, how edgy did you play him?The player played him as fairly standard edgy fare. Chaotic Good murderhero with a penchant for stabbing surrendered enemies once they gave up the info the players wanted. (And who admittedly deserved it.)

Edit: Actually, IMX that's pretty standard for ALL players, not just edgy ones. :smallbiggrin:

[CantigThimble]

In my experience, the most boring characters tend to be Drow, Dragonborn and Tieflings. It's not that the races are inherently boring, it's just that when people pick them their personality tends to be little more than "I'm unjustly an outcast from society" or "Look at this quirky thing about what I am!" It's not impossible that they could be done well, but more often than not picking an 'interesting' race is an excuse to play a boring or one-note character.

[Tanarii]

relevant
http://goblinscomic.com/comic/07112005

[2D8HP]

...I'll stop there, because I fear that I am feeding a real buzz kill kind of thread, and maybe should not.


Totally not a buzzkil man!

Maybe a bringdown, bummer, and mellow-harsher though.

Also there's no more VILE act than sarcasm, except using bluetext to flaunt your sin!!!

I'm totally against both.

[Akolyte01]

Half elves and half orcs don't make any sense. If the races can interbreed successfully the races would blend together very swiftly. Unless it's implied they are sterile??

[sophontteks]

Tiefling. Firbolg. Kenku.

And I'll stop there, because I fear that I am feeding a real buzz kill kind of thread, and maybe should not.

No way man, this is fun. I'm enjoying myself trying to show off how Tieflings can be more then their trope and we all know that the races in 5e are a bit one-dimensional. No buzzkill here my friend.

[supergoji18]

It seems to me the hate for the edgy/snowflake races isn't due to their features but instead due to the way players tend to roleplay them.

Meanwhile, most here seem to agree the dragonborn is the worst when it comes to actual gameplay.

[charlesrwest]

Web dm railed about how gnomes are basically second rate halflings. I've always found them to make awesome psions/mystics though (3.5/UA). It provides a very Oa feel.

The racial feats for dragon born weren't bad. Flight without concentration is awesome.

[Beechgnome]

Innate ability to push things off high spaces, with bonuses if those things are fragile.

Needs 18 hours of sleep per day.

Hates water.

Personality changes minute by minute.

I would let Tabaxi have option to use Dex instead of Str to determine jump distances. I've used that as part of a racial feat. It would work well with their dash ability and Dex bonus.

[Luccan]

Web dm railed about how gnomes are basically second rate halflings. I've always found them to make awesome psions/mystics though (3.5/UA). It provides a very Oa feel.

The racial feats for dragon born weren't bad. Flight without concentration is awesome.

That was their first episode that annoyed me.

As for dragonborn, yeah that's great, but aarakocra. It's nice, but its also at the of all other feats or ASIs

[Jerrykhor]

Innate ability to push things off high spaces, with bonuses if those things are fragile.

Needs 18 hours of sleep per day.

Hates water.

Personality changes minute by minute.

You left out the most important part: Reduced falling damage taken by... a lot.

[mephnick]

That was their first episode that annoyed me.


Me too. Gnomes are way better than halflings. Better mechanical features and more interesting.

[KorvinStarmast]

I mean, you can't stop edgy characters. You can just get rid of those races that allow for it more easily. You can get rid of edgy players / edge lords easily, though. Been there. Done that. (Had to deal with all of the 'goths' back when that was the fad).

All you have to do is establish that you don't allow that in your campaign. Invite the edgelords to embrace that persona in another campaign.

If you can't do that, why are you the DM?

(Trade secret as DM: you can also co-opt the edge lord and make them your assistant DM. They run the monsters for you, against the players. It can work ... some people lack the social skills to be a productive member of the party)

[Tanarii]

It seems to me the hate for the edgy/snowflake races isn't due to their features but instead due to the way players tend to roleplay them. More about the kinds of players that commonly choose to play them. But yes, my comment was not about the race's lore or what it's good at.

I mean, I wouldn't blink if a player showed up with a Dragonborn Paladin of Bahamut or a Tiefling Infernal Warlock. That's like playing a halfling rogue, or dwarf warrior, or elven warrior-Mage, a half Orc barbarian, or a half elf bard. It's so 'normal' you're actually going to be forced to immerse yourself in either the game or the character's personality. :smallamused:

[MaxWilson]

Dragonborn seems inherently cool but is easily the weakest of the PHB races. You get a once-per-day small AoE that scales poorly, and resistance to one damage type. That's it. It feels like WotC ran out of ideas when it comes to what defines a dragon race and just kind of gave up. At least give them an extra +1 to CON or CHA!

As a DM, I would have zero hesitation about letting dragonborns have a 5-6 recharge on their breath weapon. (Another option I've offered to players in the past is to use it as a bonus action, once per short rest.) If you're going to sacrifice darkvision and resistance to poison and whatnot (or a feat) in order to be a dragonborn, the least I can do as DM is to let you actually feel like a dragon. It's not as if the dragonborn breath weapon is a very powerful use of an action in the first place.

[Pex]

Normal human. +1 to all ability scores is not a racial feature. You don't care about three of the +1s. A fourth depends on your value of Constitution. The other two are your class prime and secondary if any. If the secondary is Constitution, such as a heavy armor wearing fighter, then you only care about two. You get diddly squat of anything else. No darkvision. No resistance. No spell. No advantage on something. No dice reroll. It's aesthetically annoying that races that get +2 to an ability score are 99% of the time only classes that use that score, but that's a different topic. A human can be anything, but you get nothing from your race.

[the secret fire]

Not a fan of dwarves. They're pretty good mechanically, but I just don't care for the aesthetic. Squat, beer-swilling dudes who like to get their hands dirty...not my cup of tea. Sounds to me like a race of fantasy plumbers, and the bearded ladies don't sit well with me. I've never actually seen a female dwarf at a table in over 20 years of playing D&D, and while I understand why no one would want to play one, it troubles me that they are by default a freak show. Dwarves fall into a sort of uncanny valley for me, I guess...close enough to human in culture and appearance that I just can't ignore their grossness like I can for other fantasy races.

Tabaxi can take a hike. Again, not bad mechanically, but I am wary of furries. Playing an anthropomorphic cat seems like a license to just spend all day doing douchey cat things...next gen Kinder, and I hated the Kinder. I love cats, but I would love them a lot less if they were six feet tall and could talk.

Dragonborn seem much too exotic to be a core race.

Tiefling and Aasimar fly the freak flag a bit too high for me. Drow are too pigeonholed in the lore. Unless you're playing an evil campaign (where they have real potential), it's difficult to come up with a concept that isn't derivative of that famous and annoying drow ranger. No thanks.

[Chaosvii7]

Worst? Aarakocra. The at-will flight is coveted among powergamers, but unusable in most of the cases that they'd want it.

Most boring? Kenku. Everyone I play with personally fawns over them like they're the coolest race with the best lore, but nothing about them interests me.

[CircleOfTheRock]

Ugly elf babies are discarded 300 style. The rumour is that some survived and thats how dwarves came to be.
No, no; that's where goblins came from :smalltongue:

[KorvinStarmast]

Meanwhile, most here seem to agree the dragonborn is the worst when it comes to actual gameplay. I can't agree on that, since I am in a group with a dragonborn paladin who is pretty solid and excellent as our melee leader and all around good guy.


Most boring? Kenku. Everyone I play with personally fawns over them like they're the coolest race with the best lore, but nothing about them interests me. They are beyond lame, and I am often puzzled at why they exist in the game. where did they first catch on? They seem to me like a bad case of Heckle and Jeckle. (http://www.cartoonbucket.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Confused-Heckle-And-Jeckle-bd9060103.jpg)

[2D8HP]

Not a fan of dwarves. They're pretty good mechanically, but I just don't care for the aesthetic. Squat, beer-swilling dudes who like to get their hands dirty...not my cup of tea. Sounds to me like a race of fantasy plumbers....


:annoyed:

As someone who is a plumber in real life I must say.....

.....yeah that's a fair cop.


:redface:



...I don't think that I've ever played a demi-human PC that wasn't a "human-in-a-suit", and most of my PC's wind up as "typical Dwarves" because their player (me) likes ale, is grumpy, and blue-collar, despite my never playing Dwarves....



If you were a Dwarf, would your childhood ambition to be a gelatinous cube jockey?



I like ale, have short legs (but a long torso), work with my hands and back not with words, and I'm grumpy, so I'm not sure there's any "if" about it....

[Mith]

I can't agree on that, since I am in a group with a dragonborn paladin who is pretty solid and excellent as our melee leader and all around good guy.

They are beyond lame, and I am often puzzled at why they exist in the game. where did they first catch on? They seem to me like a bad case of Heckle and Jeckle. (http://www.cartoonbucket.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Confused-Heckle-And-Jeckle-bd9060103.jpg)

While they are not my favourite PC race, I like them as NPCs as archivists and spies.

[Quoxis]

I'd say the most boring race to me is the tiefling. Nothing about it sparks my imagination outside of edgy characters. Even if you make the nicest, most down to earth PC ever, you're still relying on the "yeah, but I look like a Devil!" to make that contrast interesting. Yawn. They seem so out of place and don't fit the same kind of fantasy the other races do.

I played with a sorcadin player once. His character was described as just above standard height, seemingly muscular, but every inch of his body including his head being covered by plate armor with decorative spikes on it and black-ish horns on the helmet, Skyrim-style. He used to cast darkness to hide in, then jump out and smite away.
After the game (one shot), he gave away that his character was a Tiefling, while most of the players had assumed it was a human. The horns weren’t on the helmet, the helmet consisted of two pieces that could be fixed around the horns. Nice twist, and not once did he fall out of his role of a „normal“ human.

Regarding races... meh.
Some of them are mechanically uninteresting (gnomes because the int boost predetermines them to be wizards, dragonborn for reasons that have been repeated tens of times), some are difficult to correctly rp and don’t reward me enough to bother playing one (kenku, tabaxi, lizardfolk), some have plain boring flavor to them (triton, firbolg) or, as opposed to the former, might hog playtime with their flavor bullcrèpe (Aasimar)...
As you can see i‘m not particularly thrilled by Volo‘s guide.

[Tanarii]

(gnomes because the int boost predetermines them to be wizards,Why on earth would anyone make a gnome wizard when AT is right there? Far more thematic. (Rock Gnome EKs are awesome too.)

[Quoxis]

Why on earth would anyone make a gnome wizard when AT is right there? Far more thematic. (Rock Gnome EKs are awesome too.)

I have seen at least 3 gnomes played by other people - guess which class. Not classes, class. Singular.
Hint: not eldritch knight, not even arcane archer or trickster.

[supergoji18]

I can't agree on that, since I am in a group with a dragonborn paladin who is pretty solid and excellent as our melee leader and all around good guy.Its impossible for paladins to be useless. You could sit in the back, take a nap, and your auras will still save your allies from a lot of pain.

But to give credit where credit is due, the Dragonborn's ability score bonuses have perfect synergy with the paladin, so they do make great paladins.

[Dr. Cliché]

Never had much interest in Dwarves or Orcs.

I'm not a fan of Halflings or Shifters, mainly due to their art. Halflings just look grotesque. With a Shifter, I'd prefer to play someone more normal-looking who can take on a more beastial appearance at times. However, all the art I've seen makes them look like the offspring of an orc and a bear, which doesn't interest me.

Dragonborn seem like they should be a fun race, but there's something about them that always turns me off. Maybe its because their pictures always make them look like some of Shredder's henchmen from an old episode of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. :smalltongue:




All Tieflings innately know thaumaturgy. What does this mean? It means all of them can basically act like they are possessed at will and just in general be super duper creepy and scary whenever they want.

:smallbiggrin:


I think tieflings would thrive dead center in the heart of nobility. Oh sure, the common man is likely to shout "Burn the witch!!!" at the first opportunity, but the nobility, ever seeking an advantage in the cutthroat games of politics they play, would hardly be so prude not to accept help from some...unconventional sources. And where would these tieflings come from if not from dealings between infernals and the nobility themselves? Who else would have the power and the reason to mingle with demons so intimately?

And the Tieflings would then be protected by their name. Shamed, sure, but still quite useful and there is something to be said for the ease in which one could alter their identity in order to hide their outward appearance from those who would seek them harm. Such a creature should find no shortage of work in the top of society. Oh, sure, they are hated and mistrusted, but hate, mistrust, and deceit are in no short supply among the nobility.

I like this idea. A variation would be to have the Tieflings themselves be the nobility. Possibly they weren't always such, but deals with dark powers have consequences. Naturally, they regard their new forms as being far better than their old ones - something for the lower classes to aspire to.

[mephnick]

gnomes because the int boost predetermines them to be wizards

Eh, I like having a decent Int regardless of what I'm playing. I've played one and seen many and none of them were wizards. The secondary +1 isn't that important.

[Daphne]

I find Kenku's mimicry annoying, that's the only race I actually would never play. I also never got what was the point of Gnomes.

[Dr. Cliché]

I find Kenku's mimicry annoying, that's the only race I actually would never play. I also never got what was the point of Gnomes.

They're for players who want to play a small race but who don't like big, hairy feet.

[ZorroGames]

You mean this art?
https://media-waterdeep.cursecdn.com/avatars/thumbnails/6/256/420/618/636271789409776659.png

:smalltongue:

Hypercephalic baby heads. Sigh. Well, art is interpretative.

Fortunately I buy halfling miniatures for war games that do not suffer from that trait. Heads that big should +1 IN as a bonus.

If I knew how to color that last sentence blue I would.

[ZorroGames]

Ugly elf babies are discarded 300 style. The rumour is that some survived and thats how dwarves came to be.

Cue rimshot.

[Dr. Cliché]

I'm sure everyone is getting fed up of that halfling picture, so let me treat you all to a different one:

https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/forgottenrealms/images/f/f7/Halfling_PHB5e.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20140921190436

[ZorroGames]

Tiefling and Dragonborn. Because they're so emo, edgy, special snowflake, whatever you want to call it. (Dark elf too but theyre optional.)

Gnomes are by far the awesomest race. 5e made gnomes cool the same way 3e made halflings cool.

My wife thanks you for this comment.

[ZorroGames]

relevant
http://goblinscomic.com/comic/07112005

Just recovering from the flu, should not laugh that hard...

[Quoxis]

Eh, I like having a decent Int regardless of what I'm playing. I've played one and seen many and none of them were wizards. The secondary +1 isn't that important.

You played one, yet you don’t know they get a +2 to Int? Let me roll insight on that...
Jokes aside: maybe it’s bias from personal experience, but when i see a gnome, i assume they’re an annoyingly quirky wizard, because all gnomes i‘ve seen so far were. Of course i‘m talking ingame gnomes, those on my grannies lawn don’t care much about magic it seems - oh wait, would a gnome druid be a literal garden gnome?

[ZorroGames]

Getting to the OP, I think it is the player more than the race. While I am lazy and play Mountain Dwarf the most, I enjoy Hill Dwarf, Gnomes, Variant Humans and even my singular standard human. Yet my Tier 2 Earth Genasi is the grind for me to play of all my characters.

Go figure...

[ZorroGames]

You played one, yet you don’t know they get a +2 to Int? Let me roll insight on that...
Jokes aside: maybe it’s bias from personal experience, but when i see a gnome, i assume they’re an annoyingly quirky wizard, because all gnomes i‘ve seen so far were. Of course i‘m talking ingame gnomes, those on my grannies lawn don’t care much about magic it seems - oh wait, would a gnome druid be a literal garden gnome?

Nope. My gnomes like killing threats “the old fashioned way” as Fighters, Rogues, Rangers, thinking about Barbarian next...

Besides there are always lots of redundant full-casters around it seems.

[Pex]

I find Kenku's mimicry annoying, that's the only race I actually would never play. I also never got what was the point of Gnomes.


They're for players who want to play a small race but who don't like big, hairy feet.

Cynically, also for players who want to be malcontent jerks but aren't playing a rogue.

Seen it. :smallfrown:

[Armored Walrus]

Any race is boring, in the wrong player's hands. Conversely, any race is cool in the right player's hands.

That being said, generally, I dislike dragonborn. They just seem too cartoony to me.

[No brains]

One good way to mix it up with Tieflings is to call them satyrs. Whether it's a case of them impersonating them, being called them, or actually being them, their hooves fit pretty nicely into satyr shoes. In that case, it's not about being a dark edgelord, but being a bright annoyance.

[ZorroGames]

I'm sure everyone is getting fed up of that halfling picture, so let me treat you all to a different one:

https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/forgottenrealms/images/f/f7/Halfling_PHB5e.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20140921190436

Though better the head is still disproportionately large for an adult. Or so my artist friends keep telling me. My response is, “What have you had published lately?”

[JackPhoenix]

IThematically I find elves rather boring as their flaws tend to be basic arrogance that comes from being superior if they are even presented with flaws (high elves in particular). And they all more or less have the same build! Say what you want about dwarves, at least you’ll find a fat one or a muscle bound one. All elves are drawn as basically drawn as models.

Surely there are ugly and fat elves.

Ever heard of Mialee?

[Luccan]

Ever heard of Mialee?

I mean, she wasn't attractive, but neither were most of the other 3.5 iconics, IMO. Even the bards. She was also still really slim.

[Luccan]

Cynically, also for players who want to be malcontent jerks but aren't playing a rogue.

Seen it. :smallfrown:

That sucks. Since Gnome pranks are supposed to be harmless (at least in 3.5), I always imagined they do things like illusion your manly fighter's armor pink.

[MrStabby]

I like halflings as a concept - enough like a human for the other players to associate with, a lot of depth, background and lore to set them apart. There are a lot of concepts that work for them. Same for gnomes, if a little less so.

Going to pile on the dragonborn as well. There is just nothing fun there. What can you pull off that you couldn't with another race (for the mechanical perspective)? On the flavour side, they seem to be loosely defined by not being human rather than really having much character of their own. I can't really approve of the "rare" races in a setting - being visibly different seems to be a cry for attention based on appearances ranger than character.

[iTreeby]

Personally, I would never play a gnome. To me, they are all tied to Wizard class. I can't wrap my brain around a gnome being anything else, and I don't like wizards that much (I know they are great, I just don't like them).

Gnomes look much more like NPCs than players to me.
Forest gnomes make good druids because they can actually talk to some animals in order out of animal form. They also make great paladins because of the magic resistance. In most cases yuan-ti are better picks though, that brings me to my pick.

Yuan-ti bore me to tears.

[Ralanr]

Forest gnomes make good druids because they can actually talk to some animals in order out of animal form. They also make great paladins because of the magic resistance. In most cases yuan-ti are better picks though, that brings me to my pick.

Yuan-ti bore me to tears.

“Talk”

More like sign language for simple messages.

[smcmike]

I’ll join the pile-on against Dragonborn and Teiflings. I don’t like their tone, which is both edgy and cartoony in comparison with other PHB races, and the mechanics are lacking too.

I’m not personally a huge fan of any small race, but mostly because I find it hard to take them seriously. Maybe just a lack of imagination on my part. The mechanics are fine.

On the other hand, if you are going with a cartoony sort of maximum diversity setting, I start liking Dragonborn and Teiflings more, and would throw in a defense of some of the other punching bags on this thread: I like the Disney cartoonishness of 5e Firbolgs for that sort of tone, and think Kenku could work well too.

[Ralanr]

Honestly I wish Dragonborn had a more Roman theme.

I feel they’d rock togas very well.

[DnDegenerates]

Depending on setting or which region of the existing settings, humans can potentially be the most or least boring.

The pretty or fanboy races can be so cookie cutter that they're as boring as can be. Typical elves, aasimar, or tieflings for example. A character who tacks on a tortured past or search to find the truth of their birth is normally on the meh side, if I'm going to over generalize.


However a brilliantly roleplayed or opposite take on any race can be fun for all.

I had a most wonderful time playing an elf with clipped ears who masqueraded as a human.

Goblin/Kobold adventurers can make a very amusing addition to your standard party. I've had great experiences with players that rocked them.

Props to someone who can either take their race and make something unique from it, or play their races cultural differences to a T.

There's a Goliath Tempest cleric who is so fluid in their characters roleplay, that people swear that they're playing a crazy imbued barbarian of some kind rather than a caster.

In short. Roleplay makes the character. Not the race. Not the build.

You'll remember someone more for how they played their character than merely what race it was.

[MrStabby]

Honestly I wish Dragonborn had a more Roman theme.

I feel they’d rock togas very well.

Is that the xanthars redemption paladin look?

[ZorroGames]

Depending on setting or which region of the existing settings, humans can potentially be the most or least boring.

The pretty or fanboy races can be so cookie cutter that they're as boring as can be. Typical elves, aasimar, or tieflings for example. A character who tacks on a tortured past or search to find the truth of their birth is normally on the meh side, if I'm going to over generalize.


However a brilliantly roleplayed or opposite take on any race can be fun for all.

I had a most wonderful time playing an elf with clipped ears who masqueraded as a human.

Goblin/Kobold adventurers can make a very amusing addition to your standard party. I've had great experiences with players that rocked them.

Props to someone who can either take their race and make something unique from it, or play their races cultural differences to a T.

There's a Goliath Tempest cleric who is so fluid in their characters roleplay, that people swear that they're playing a crazy imbued barbarian of some kind rather than a caster.

In short. Roleplay makes the character. Not the race. Not the build.

You'll remember someone more for how they played their character than merely what race it was.

Give that poster a cheroot! Exactly.

[Ali_face]

I think that the issue with Gnomes being boring is that the surrounding game mechanics dont support the race much.

Gnomes have ~3 legit class options; Wizard, Rogue (AT), and Dex Fighter (EK). The First two are good choices, the last is something doable but is definitely sub-optimal.

The game suffers from the glaring omission of an INT based 1/2 caster, and even Rogues (AT) make little use of their INT score outside of spell saves. Perception is just a better skill to have for a skill monkey than Investigation. An Ideal Rogue is a DEX/wis/cha build which lines up better with Halflings, Elves, and other +2 Dex races. Theres a reason INT is the 5E dump stat that CHA used to be in 3.5E

Humans are, by design, ultimately boring... and without using the Optional Feat rule are utterly outclassed by Half-Elves. But at least with the Feat, the "versatility" of the race allows players to build favorably around that boring nature.

Fully agree, that when it comes to the core races, that Dragonborn and Gnomes are the worst, mechanically.

Edge-Lords come in all races and classes from Humans (Aragorn, Sturm, Raistlin, Elric, etc), to Elves (every Elf from the Shannara Chronicles), to Dwarves (Thorin), to the endless D'rizzt clones, to Saiyans (Vegetta). Edge-Lordness comes from how a character is played, more than from the race or class they choose to play. The bench of fictional Edge Lords to draw character inspiration from is endless (I blame Byron and the invention of the Anti-Hero as a literary trope).

Calling any race a Snowflake is dumb af. Everyone wants to feel unique, deriding people for wanting to feel like the unique hero of their story is just as pointless in DnD as it is in politics. We all want to feel special, and in a world we get to make up in our heads... who does it harm that we get to engineer it so that we are? Is there a degree of shallowness to base your uniqueness on the skin you wear? sure... but again, who does it harm and why is it part of a discussion about the weakness of a race in a fantasy game?

[Ralanr]

Is that the xanthars redemption paladin look?

Yes. Looks dang fine in it.

[EvilAnagram]

I’ll join the pile-on against Dragonborn and Teiflings. I don’t like their tone, which is both edgy and cartoony in comparison with other PHB races, and the mechanics are lacking too.

I’m not personally a huge fan of any small race, but mostly because I find it hard to take them seriously. Maybe just a lack of imagination on my part. The mechanics are fine.

On the other hand, if you are going with a cartoony sort of maximum diversity setting, I start liking Dragonborn and Teiflings more, and would throw in a defense of some of the other punching bags on this thread: I like the Disney cartoonishness of 5e Firbolgs for that sort of tone, and think Kenku could work well too.

It seems odd to complain about the mechanics of Tieflings. Their resistance not withstanding, having extra spells greatly frees up the choices of charisma-based casters.

[Willie the Duck]

Edge-Lords come in all races and classes from Humans (Aragorn, Sturm, Raistlin, Elric, etc), to Elves (every Elf from the Shannara Chronicles), to Dwarves (Thorin), to the endless D'rizzt clones, to Saiyans (Vegetta). Edge-Lordness comes from how a character is played, more than from the race or class they choose to play. The bench of fictional Edge Lords to draw character inspiration from is endless (I blame Byron and the invention of the Anti-Hero as a literary trope).

Calling any race a Snowflake is dumb af. Everyone wants to feel unique, deriding people for wanting to feel like the unique hero of their story is just as pointless in DnD as it is in politics. We all want to feel special, and in a world we get to make up in our heads... who does it harm that we get to engineer it so that we are? Is there a degree of shallowness to base your uniqueness on the skin you wear? sure... but again, who does it harm and why is it part of a discussion about the weakness of a race in a fantasy game?

Yes, I think supposedly grown adults (https://local.theonion.com/two-hipsters-angrily-call-each-other-hipster-1819568370) in the year 2018 should probably think twice about worrying too much about people being 'edge lords' or 'snowflakes.'

I think the real problem with making entire races not be boring is that any shared traits that one could ascribe to an entire race (and feel in any way believable) are usually not the kind of things that can feel eternally fresh. Elves start out as otherworldly and mysterious (and beautiful). Then you subvert that and have them be arrogant and believe they are eternally beautiful, but be ugly on the inside. And then... what exactly? One day's cool is the next days hokey.

[the secret fire]

I blame Byron and the invention of the Anti-Hero as a literary trope.

Achilles is the original anti-hero, though Odysseus and Agamemnon probably deserve some credit here, as well. Simply put, the western anti-hero is as old as western fiction, itself. Byron might have applied eye liner to the trope, but he hardly invented it. There is no "blame" to be apportioned here; individualism is a cornerstone of western culture. The problem arises when the archetype is done by idiots, but that is equally true of every archetype.

[Ralanr]

Achilles is the original anti-hero, though Odysseus and Agamemnon probably deserve some credit here, as well. Simply put, the western anti-hero is as old as western fiction, itself. Byron might have applied eye liner to the trope, but he hardly invented it. There is no "blame" to be apportioned here; individualism is a cornerstone of western culture. The problem arises when the archetype is done by idiots, but that is equally true of every archetype.

Byron was more responsible for the Byronic hero than the anti-hero.

I hate Byronic heroes. Their entire problem is that they refuse to change despite being stuck in their suffering and somehow that gets them attraction from everyone.

[smcmike]

It seems odd to complain about the mechanics of Tieflings. Their resistance not withstanding, having extra spells greatly frees up the choices of charisma-based casters.

They are the only PHB race with no physical bonus. That makes them a bit narrow, I think.

[ZorroGames]

I think that the issue with Gnomes being boring is that the surrounding game mechanics dont support the race much.

Gnomes have ~3 legit class options; Wizard, Rogue (AT), and Dex Fighter (EK). The First two are good choices, the last is something doable but is definitely sub-optimal.

The game suffers from the glaring omission of an INT based 1/2 caster, and even Rogues (AT) make little use of their INT score outside of spell saves. Perception is just a better skill to have for a skill monkey than Investigation. An Ideal Rogue is a DEX/wis/cha build which lines up better with Halflings, Elves, and other +2 Dex races. Theres a reason INT is the 5E dump stat that CHA used to be in 3.5E

Humans are, by design, ultimately boring... and without using the Optional Feat rule are utterly outclassed by Half-Elves. But at least with the Feat, the "versatility" of the race allows players to build favorably around that boring nature.

Fully agree, that when it comes to the core races, that Dragonborn and Gnomes are the worst, mechanically.

Edge-Lords come in all races and classes from Humans (Aragorn, Sturm, Raistlin, Elric, etc), to Elves (every Elf from the Shannara Chronicles), to Dwarves (Thorin), to the endless D'rizzt clones, to Saiyans (Vegetta). Edge-Lordness comes from how a character is played, more than from the race or class they choose to play. The bench of fictional Edge Lords to draw character inspiration from is endless (I blame Byron and the invention of the Anti-Hero as a literary trope).

Calling any race a Snowflake is dumb af. Everyone wants to feel unique, deriding people for wanting to feel like the unique hero of their story is just as pointless in DnD as it is in politics. We all want to feel special, and in a world we get to make up in our heads... who does it harm that we get to engineer it so that we are? Is there a degree of shallowness to base your uniqueness on the skin you wear? sure... but again, who does it harm and why is it part of a discussion about the weakness of a race in a fantasy game?

Funny I think limiting races to particular classes is pretty ignorant. Better? Maybe, if the player is.

[white lancer]

Wait, how broad of a definition of "edgelord" are we using, given that we're now applying it to characters like Aragorn?

"Edgelord" as a term seems to be similar to "Mary Sue," in that it loses a lot of its meaning given that everyone uses it to mean something different.

[AvatarVecna]

Dragonborn, for being so rarely used for both their fluff and their mechanics that I straight-up forgot they were a core race until I saw people complaining about them in this thread. Say what you will about standard Human, a slight bonus to every attribute can make your point-buy go much further. Say what you will about gnomes, they're quirky and at least vaguely useful for a couple classes by mechanics and fluff. Say what you will about Tieflings being edgelords, at least they're mechanically useful. Dragonborn is just ugh from beginning to end.

[Ali_face]

Yes, I think (edited for post issues) supposedly grown adults[/URL] in the year 2018 should probably think twice about worrying too much about people being 'edge lords' or 'snowflakes.'

I think the real problem with making entire races not be boring is that any shared traits that one could ascribe to an entire race (and feel in any way believable) are usually not the kind of things that can feel eternally fresh. Elves start out as otherworldly and mysterious (and beautiful). Then you subvert that and have them be arrogant and believe they are eternally beautiful, but be ugly on the inside. And then... what exactly? One day's cool is the next days hokey.

Fully agreed, the realm of topics and points of argument we can discuss re: the worst/ most boring races in 5E are myriad... and something being a "Snowflake" or "Edge-Lord" shouldn't be on that list.

Elves and other classic fantasy races have a history built over decades of fiction and gaming. Regardless of how mechanically/ flavor wise they are presented in 5E specifically, any player's impression of them will be influenced by that lengthy history. Newer races like Dragonborn, Warforged, Goliath, Etc don't benefit from that history and therefore are more often played as stereotypes than they are as unique takes on the race. If these new races also have weak game mechanics that players cant build around or build against, it leads to cookie cutter characters.

Halflings are still viewed as "hobbits" by many gamers despite being re-tooled as less obnoxious Kender since the release of 3E (almost 20 years ago). I dont think it can be overstated how much of an influence fictional history has on player's perceptions of how a race could/ should be played.


Achilles is the original anti-hero, though Odysseus and Agamemnon probably deserve some credit here, as well. Simply put, the western anti-hero is as old as western fiction, itself. Byron might have applied eye liner to the trope, but he hardly invented it. There is no "blame" to be apportioned here; individualism is a cornerstone of western culture. The problem arises when the archetype is done by idiots, but that is equally true of every archetype.


Byron was more responsible for the Byronic hero than the anti-hero.

I hate Byronic heroes. Their entire problem is that they refuse to change despite being stuck in their suffering and somehow that gets them attraction from everyone.

You're both right, I meant specifically the "Edge-Lord" style of anti-hero since the Byronic Hero was created... I was being more glib than specific in my terminology.

Though this is an interesting discussion for another thread; I was always under the impression that the Grecko-Roman definition of the Anti-Hero was originally a hero of common stock like Paris, or Thersites. I've seen papers describing Achilles as an anti-hero by modern definitions of the term, though classically I thought he was always viewed as a tragic hero in his original presentation.

[the secret fire]

I hate Byronic heroes. Their entire problem is that they refuse to change despite being stuck in their suffering and somehow that gets them attraction from everyone.

Does this not describe Achilles quite well?

[Ralanr]

Does this not describe Achilles quite well?

I’ll admit I’m not well versed in Achilles as a character. All I know is that he could only die by his heel and fought in the Trojan war.

[the secret fire]

Though this is an interesting discussion for another thread; I was always under the impression that the Grecko-Roman definition of the Anti-Hero was originally a hero of common stock like Paris, or Thersites. I've seen papers describing Achilles as an anti-hero by modern definitions of the term, though classically I thought he was always viewed as a tragic hero in his original presentation.

This is a good point. Shifting cultural values make many of the ancient Greek heroes seem more "anti" today than they were probably understood to have been in the time of Homer, before westerners saw right and wrong through the lens (however darkly) of Christian ethics.

[Tanarii]

They're for players who want to play a small race but who don't like big, hairy feet.Magical small races without big hairy feet.

Unfortunately there is still a fsction of players who tries to ruin them for everyone by playing them as Krynnish Tinker Gnomes with WoW-like squeaky & snnoying voices.

[the secret fire]

I’ll admit I’m not well versed in Achilles as a character. All I know is that he could only die by his heel and fought in the Trojan war.

tl;dr - Achilles' name likely means something like "sorrowful soldier" in ancient Greek. He was made aware of a prophecy which stated that he would either gain glory and die young, or live a long and uneventful life. In spite of the prophecy, and because he was an angry, brooding, prideful jerk, he chose the former, killed Hector before the gates of Troy, and then was killed by Paris.

[Ali_face]

Funny I think limiting races to particular classes is pretty ignorant. Better? Maybe, if the player is.

You're always welcome to create characters against type, thats a design space that a lot of players (including myself, currently playing a Rock Gnome Paladin (OotA)) enjoy.

But there is a fundamental difference between creating a character that breaks the mold of their Race by willingly accepting non optimal choices and a game system that doesn't support those choices.

I like to think about it in tiers, most "against the type" characters should at least be tier 2 in functionality, otherwise they will be a liability to the rest of the party... my Gnome Paladin is tier 3 at best, with a Halfling version of the same exact character being tier 2 and a Half-Elf/ Elven version being tier 1. In both of those other cases, Id still be playing against type for those races, but can do so in a way that still leads to a functional character that doesn't bog my party down.

Simply put, from a mechanical perspective, the game doesn't currently support INT based races outside of Wizards, and barely supports INT based Rogues/ Fighters.

This makes any race that gets INT/x stat array inherently weaker when playing most classes outside of Wizard.

[Ralanr]

So what you’re saying is...we need the mystic ASAP.

[MaxWilson]

Simply put, from a mechanical perspective, the game doesn't currently support INT based races outside of Wizards, and barely supports INT based Rogues/ Fighters.

This makes any race that gets INT/x stat array inherently weaker when playing most classes outside of Wizard.

You could make a strong argument for the necessity of warlocks, being a class that's all about secret lore learned from your patron, to be Int-based instead of Cha-based. This would also mostly eliminate the Warlock 2 dip as a thing for bards/sorcerers/paladins, at the cost of making it more of a thing for wizards. Still, wizards have less incentive to dip warlock than sorcerers with metamagics (Quickened Agonizing Eldritch Blast x2) and sorcery points do (accumulating warlock slots => sorcery points => sorcerer slots for multiple short rests in a row), and more reason to be excited about gaining high-level spells, so I doubt not that the total number of Warlock 2 dips would fall.

Gnomish warlocks would then become a thing.

[Ralanr]

Gnomish warlocks would then become a thing.

“I am evil. STOP LAUGHING!”

Though honestly Veigar would probably be a Wizard.

[Ali_face]

You could make a strong argument for the necessity of warlocks, being a class that's all about secret lore learned from your patron, to be Int-based instead of Cha-based. This would also mostly eliminate the Warlock 2 dip as a thing for bards/sorcerers/paladins, at the cost of making it more of a thing for wizards. Still, wizards have less incentive to dip warlock than sorcerers with metamagics (Quickened Agonizing Eldritch Blast x2) and sorcery points do (accumulating warlock slots => sorcery points => sorcerer slots for multiple short rests in a row), and more reason to be excited about gaining high-level spells, so I doubt not that the total number of Warlock 2 dips would fall.

Gnomish warlocks would then become a thing.

Fully agree, I would very much love to see the kind of design space where classes had at least 2 primary stat choices that are made at 1st level

The second stat choice could determine secondary saving throws and spellcasting/ class abilities w/ saving throws.

Fighters could be (CON) primary with a choice of (str) or (dex)
Rogues could be (DEX) primary with a choice of (int) or (cha) for AT (who are functionally sorcerers in spellcasting anyways)
Clerics could be (CON) primary with a choice of (wis) or (cha) or even (int)
Warlocks could be (CHA) primary with a choice of (int) or (con)

You've already hit the nail on the head by listing how many classes key off of CHA for spellcasting and how it leads to weird dips/ combos.

[EvilAnagram]

They are the only PHB race with no physical bonus. That makes them a bit narrow, I think.

In my experience, you only need a +2 in a primary stat to be successful in the early game, and the Standard Array gives you the option to be within a half-feet of a +3.

[Spacehamster]

Worst = Sunlight sensitivity races
Most boring = Variant human and Regular human

[MaxWilson]

Fully agree, I would very much love to see the kind of design space where classes had at least 2 primary stat choices that are made at 1st level

The second stat choice could determine secondary saving throws and spellcasting/ class abilities w/ saving throws.

Fighters could be (CON) primary with a choice of (str) or (dex)
Rogues could be (DEX) primary with a choice of (int) or (cha) for AT (who are functionally sorcerers in spellcasting anyways)
Clerics could be (CON) primary with a choice of (wis) or (cha) or even (int)
Warlocks could be (CHA) primary with a choice of (int) or (con)

You've already hit the nail on the head by listing how many classes key off of CHA for spellcasting and how it leads to weird dips/ combos.

To be clear, I'm suggesting a DM choice: switching warlocks from Cha to Int. If it's decided by players on a per-PC basis, you don't get rid of sorlocks and bardlocks and palalocks--they'll just all choose to make Warlocks Cha-based.

I'm attracted to this possibility, but I don't feel strongly enough about it to have implemented it.

[Ali_face]

Worst = Sunlight sensitivity races
Most boring = Variant human and Regular human

Sunlight Sensitivity is brutally debilitating if implemented by RAW, but so often ignored by players and DMs who allow and encourage these races.


To be clear, I'm suggesting a DM choice: switching warlocks from Cha to Int. If it's decided by players on a per-PC basis, you don't get rid of sorlocks and bardlocks and palalocks--they'll just all choose to make Warlocks Cha-based.

I'm attracted to this possibility, but I don't feel strongly enough about it to have implemented it.

I dont see anything wrong with letting players decide, it opens up significantly more character options and all but destroys the concept of pigeonholed class choices for races.

More diversity is good, and it doesn't enable any more broken choices than otherwise already exist.

[Luccan]

Something I've been considering: Int Bards. The only thing that runs on Cha is their casting. Which you can just change to Int. Given none of their class abilities rely on Performance anymore (even their explicit music skills), I feel like a widely skilled and classically trained character relying on Int makes sense. Inspiration and Song of Rest might need to be reworked, but I really think an Int Bard has something going for it.

[A Fat Dragon]

I think the lack of Int-Based Classes/Casters, and the new releases of the Mystic and Artificer in UA is no coincidence.

[the secret fire]

To be clear, I'm suggesting a DM choice: switching warlocks from Cha to Int. If it's decided by players on a per-PC basis, you don't get rid of sorlocks and bardlocks and palalocks--they'll just all choose to make Warlocks Cha-based.

I'm attracted to this possibility, but I don't feel strongly enough about it to have implemented it.

I think it's an extremely good idea, Max. I might even let multi-class Warlocks back into my games if they cast off of Int (I currently do allow them...sorta. I just force PCs to only advance as Warlocks once they have taken a level in the class...can't go back from the pact once you've started down that road).

[Nifft]

To be clear, I'm suggesting a DM choice: switching warlocks from Cha to Int. If it's decided by players on a per-PC basis, you don't get rid of sorlocks and bardlocks and palalocks--they'll just all choose to make Warlocks Cha-based.

I'm attracted to this possibility, but I don't feel strongly enough about it to have implemented it.

I'd like to see Con based Warlocks.

"Why yes, my magic is in fact different, because my body is the living conduit between this nice place and a truly terrible, alien power. So it's not about how much I study, or how pretty I am. It's about how much raw hate I can pull out of Hell."

[Cybren]

To be clear, I'm suggesting a DM choice: switching warlocks from Cha to Int. If it's decided by players on a per-PC basis, you don't get rid of sorlocks and bardlocks and palalocks--they'll just all choose to make Warlocks Cha-based.

I'm attracted to this possibility, but I don't feel strongly enough about it to have implemented it.

Yeah, I like the idea of int-warlocks because they would be the only kind of warlock. If the players that wanted to be warlocks had the choice I wouldn't bother even floating the house rule.

[the secret fire]

I'd like to see Con based Warlocks.

"Why yes, my magic is in fact different, because my body is the living conduit between this nice place and a truly terrible, alien power. So it's not about how much I study, or how pretty I am. It's about how much raw hate I can pull out of Hell."

I don't know if bringing back the Scarred Witch Doctor is such a great idea.

[MaxWilson]

Something I've been considering: Int Bards. The only thing that runs on Cha is their casting. Which you can just change to Int. Given none of their class abilities rely on Performance anymore (even their explicit music skills), I feel like a widely skilled and classically trained character relying on Int makes sense. Inspiration and Song of Rest might need to be reworked, but I really think an Int Bard has something going for it.

Bardic Inspiration also runs on Cha, which honestly is extremely weird for College of Swords bards. Int makes more sense for blade flourishes, but not for regular uses of inspiration.

I do like the idea of Int-based bards too, but I don't know exactly what to do about Inspiration. Could let them be MAD I suppose, with the College of Swords Bard as an exception who gets Int-based blade flourishes INSTEAD OF regular Cha-based Bardic Inspiration like other bards do.


I think it's an extremely good idea, Max. I might even let multi-class Warlocks back into my games if they cast off of Int (I currently do allow them...sorta. I just force PCs to only advance as Warlocks once they have taken a level in the class...can't go back from the pact once you've started down that road).

Good old dual-classing restrictions. :-)

[supergoji18]

I'd like to see Con based Warlocks.

"Why yes, my magic is in fact different, because my body is the living conduit between this nice place and a truly terrible, alien power. So it's not about how much I study, or how pretty I am. It's about how much raw hate I can pull out of Hell."
Good god imagine how terrifyingly over powered this would be if implemented. A one level dip into Barbarian for the Unarmored Defense, and then pump up the Constitution and Dexterity stats as much as possible, and you're looking at a genuine Tanklock. Spam spells, and soak up hits, and if you run out of spells you have your rage.

[Nifft]

Good god imagine how terrifyingly over powered this would be if implemented. A one level dip into Barbarian for the Unarmored Defense, and then pump up the Constitution and Dexterity stats as much as possible, and you're looking at a genuine Tanklock. Spam spells, and soak up hits, and if you run out of spells you have your rage.

*looks at Sorcadin*

*looks at Warbarian*

Yes, I think this Warbarian is appropriate and good.

[Luccan]

Bardic Inspiration also runs on Cha, which honestly is extremely weird for College of Swords bards.

I do like the idea of Int-based bards too, but I don't know exactly what to do about Inspiration. Could let them be MAD I suppose.



Good old dual-classing restrictions. :-)

You're right, but that could also easily be flipped to Int. I might make it apply immediately to rolls, sort of in the moment advice. I figured I'd toss a couple instruments for some tool proficiencies, so maybe that evens it out, now that tools actually do things.

[MaxWilson]

You're right, but that could also easily be flipped to Int. I might make it apply immediately to rolls, sort of in the moment advice. I figured I'd toss a couple instruments for some tool proficiencies, so maybe that evens it out, now that tools actually do things.

Sounds cool. Maybe rename the class the Expert while you're at it. :)

[Delicious Taffy]

Honestly, most of the Plane-Shift races bore me to tears. The only exception is the Kor, and they're iffy.

[mr-mercer]

Flavour-wise I love goliaths, but mechanically everything of theirs that I like I feel like the half-orc does better. Stone's Endurance is the only unique goliath thing that I actually like, but both Relentless Endurance and Savage attacks are just too good for me to ignore when I'm building a character that would use either of them.

[the secret fire]

Good old dual-classing restrictions. :-)

Giving away my AD&D roots, I suppose, but it's the lesser of two evils, imo. Warlock as default dip for every other Cha-based class is just gross.

[mephnick]

I change my vote to Genasi because I literally forgot they existed when first thinking of this question.

[ZorroGames]

Magical small races without big hairy feet.

Unfortunately there is still a fsction of players who tries to ruin them for everyone by playing them as Krynnish Tinker Gnomes with WoW-like squeaky & snnoying voices.

Thanks, I will gave nightmares for a week now...

Actually, pretty accurate.

[Beechgnome]

I change my vote to Genasi because I literally forgot they existed when first thinking of this question.

God, yes.They could be so much better.

What few abilities they possess are all tied to elemental affinity: nothing connects the race as as whole except +2 constitution and 'you speak a dialect of primordial.'

And those individual abilities pale in comparison to what tieflings or aasimar get.

I am playing an earth genasi right now for purely flavor reasons, because I actually like the flavor. But gah, I wish there was more.

[ZorroGames]

You're always welcome to create characters against type, thats a design space that a lot of players (including myself, currently playing a Rock Gnome Paladin (OotA)) enjoy.

But there is a fundamental difference between creating a character that breaks the mold of their Race by willingly accepting non optimal choices and a game system that doesn't support those choices.

I like to think about it in tiers, most "against the type" characters should at least be tier 2 in functionality, otherwise they will be a liability to the rest of the party... my Gnome Paladin is tier 3 at best, with a Halfling version of the same exact character being tier 2 and a Half-Elf/ Elven version being tier 1. In both of those other cases, Id still be playing against type for those races, but can do so in a way that still leads to a functional character that doesn't bog my party down.

Simply put, from a mechanical perspective, the game doesn't currently support INT based races outside of Wizards, and barely supports INT based Rogues/ Fighters.

This makes any race that gets INT/x stat array inherently weaker when playing most classes outside of Wizard.

Are we using “Tier”in the 5e sense or the 3.x/4 sense? Your words do not make sense in 5e tier terms as I am using it so that may be a factor.

As for IN - well that has been “threaded” to death recently.

[ZorroGames]

I change my vote to Genasi because I literally forgot they existed when first thinking of this question.

Hardest character to care about EVER since the early 1970s (back when halfling was a class,) is my Earth Genasi BattleMaster. yes, class. Horrible design. Earth Genasi bumped it off the list...

[Jerrykhor]

Most boring? Kenku. Everyone I play with personally fawns over them like they're the coolest race with the best lore, but nothing about them interests me.

Wow really? I thought they are so lame. Firstly, birdmen that cannot fly... So they are actually chickenmen. Second, that mimicry bull****. Techically they cant even cast spells with V component. If the developers have to issue a warning on how RPing the race correctly would be extremely annoying, the race is busted. Worst race ever.

Also, short lifespans and ugly appearance.

[supergoji18]

I change my vote to Genasi because I literally forgot they existed when first thinking of this question.


God, yes.They could be so much better.

What few abilities they possess are all tied to elemental affinity: nothing connects the race as as whole except +2 constitution and 'you speak a dialect of primordial.'

And those individual abilities pale in comparison to what tieflings or aasimar get.

I am playing an earth genasi right now for purely flavor reasons, because I actually like the flavor. But gah, I wish there was more.

I remember looking through the EE Player's Companion and thinking, "Oh boy, I can't wait to see how cool these half-elementals will be! I wonder what awesome powers they'll have."

My disappointment was immeasurable, and my day was ruined.

[Luccan]

Setting aside mechanics (which I don't peronally mind) how and why would you unite them further? They all have seperate elemental ancestry. That they're treated like subraces is the odd part.

[Asmotherion]

The non-variant Human. I'd never play one if I had the option to play something else.

I used to thing Humans were boring as a whole concept, until I found that the Variant Human could be used to represent an actual diferent culture, origin, magical aptitude or othervise something that is not "plain boring human".

I'm also not a big fan of Mundane, non-magical concepts, so I'd avoid personally playing a Race that promotes a society of Non-Magic Users, unless we decide on a Party Theme. If we do, I'll probably be the outcast who does just that either way.

[Mith]

Setting aside mechanics (which I don't peronally mind) how and why would you unite them further? They all have seperate elemental ancestry. That they're treated like subraces is the odd part.

I realise this isn't adressed to me, but this is how I would do it for all "plane touched" races.

How I would look at it is to make Genasai,Tieflings, and Assimar all comparable in structure as "plane touched" beings. So 1st level and 3rd level gives racial spell like abilities. They get a native resistance (Aasimar to radiant, Tieflings to Necrotic, Genasai to their respective element), and some neat passive ability.

If they did have Sorcerers give bonus spell lists, they could make some overlap between the associated Sorcerer's Origin and the plane touched race to allow for one to cover their bases with regards to spells.

[Delicious Taffy]

Can y'all quit dunkin' on my Genasi homies? I just rolled up a full 12 of them, and I'm feeling very attacked.

[strangebloke]

Flavour-wise I love goliaths, but mechanically everything of theirs that I like I feel like the half-orc does better. Stone's Endurance is the only unique goliath thing that I actually like, but both Relentless Endurance and Savage attacks are just too good for me to ignore when I'm building a character that would use either of them.
Stone's Endurance is good on any character. It's 1d12 HP per short rest!

Anyway, they aren't weak when compared with dragonborn, for instance. Stone's Endurance is 100% better than fire breath.

I change my vote to Genasi because I literally forgot they existed when first thinking of this question.
Amen. They're one of those races where I describe an NPC as one and the players are like... What are those again?

Wow really? I thought they are so lame. Firstly, birdmen that cannot fly... So they are actually chickenmen. Second, that mimicry bull****. Techically they cant even cast spells with V component. If the developers have to issue a warning on how RPing the race correctly would be extremely annoying, the race is busted. Worst race ever.

Also, short lifespans and ugly appearance.
Kenku are crap. Can't talk, can't cast worth crap, have no good features to compensate... and their fluff is, uh, weird. Like, nothing Volo's talks about there is every going to come up. You can't talk, which means no boring exposition about your god or whatever.

As far as fluff goes, I'm a big fan of limiting race choice heavily. My next game has: Orcs, humans, dragonborn. Take your pick. You can be a mountain orc (goliath) a rock orc (hobgoblin) or sniffer orc (goblin) but you'll still be an orc. This heavily reduces the number of times where I have to suddenly wizard some random tabaxi caravans into my custom setting, because Jimmy wanted to run really fast.

[MaxWilson]

Giving away my AD&D roots, I suppose, but it's the lesser of two evils, imo. Warlock as default dip for every other Cha-based class is just gross.

I'm not knocking it! I miss dual-classing actually. :) I don't like how vanilla 5E makes learning more of the "wrong" class an actual hindrance, e.g. if you stick with Fighter long enough to get Extra Attack and then later take up wizarding, sorry dude, you can never, ever learn 9th level spells. More knowledge should never be a bad thing.


The non-variant Human. I'd never play one if I had the option to play something else.

I used to thing Humans were boring as a whole concept, until I found that the Variant Human could be used to represent an actual diferent culture, origin, magical aptitude or othervise something that is not "plain boring human".

I second both these points: that non-variant humans are boring, and that variant humans as races/cultures/etc. are awesome. E.g. if you're a variant human with +1 Str and +1 Con plus Heavy Armor Master, congratulations, you're a Valerian, and may be recognized as such by NPCs including other Valerians, who tend to be stocky and dark-complexioned and are widely recognized as natural smiths and master armorers. It's up to you whether you have actual families ties back to Valerus or are some kind of expatriate.

[Quoxis]

Though better the head is still disproportionately large for an adult. Or so my artist friends keep telling me. My response is, “What have you had published lately?”

My problem with that picture isn’t the head so much as the feet and maybe the hands - look at them. How do these match boxes balance the watermelony belly above them?

[Knaight]

I'd put forth a two way tie between elves and dwarves, with halflings in that general pack of boringness. I'm not particularly fond of the default assumption that every setting needs to have non-human sentients, I'm even less on board with the same two appearing over, and over, and over, with a third cropping up less but still too frequently. This is without getting into how the standard elf and standard dwarf are basically Tolkien watered down, inspired by the hordes of Tolkien clones who caught extreme surface aspects of the style while missing everything that could conceivably be described as the point.

At least with kenku or lizardfolk you've got something somewhat distinct. If you're bringing in non-humans (a setting element that's better when used rarely) you might as well bring in non-mammals, along with all the real world inspiration that comes with that. If you've got to use mammals, maybe at least spring for non-primates.

[Beechgnome]

Setting aside mechanics (which I don't peronally mind) how and why would you unite them further? They all have seperate elemental ancestry. That they're treated like subraces is the odd part.

It's not so odd. All the Genie have common traits - why wouldn't their offpsring? It wouldn't be particularly inspiring, but they could have received a common skill proficiency - say, for example, Nature or Survival, to reflect their connection to the elemental forces, or Insight, to reflect their waryness of others.

For their unique abilities, give them all a bonus cantrip at 1, a 1st at 3rd and 2nd at 5th and a resistance that matches (switch Water from Acid to Cold, give Earth Acid, give Air Lightning). They would have different abilities, but they would be linked.

Then you can tack on the other abilities like holding breath, swimming/water breathing, earth walk on top of that. Then they would be on par with Tieflings, Aasimar, Elves, Dwarces etc.

[Arkhios]

Tiefling and Dragonborn. Because they're so emo, edgy, special snowflake, whatever you want to call it. (Dark elf too but theyre optional.)

Gnomes are by far the awesomest race. 5e made gnomes cool the same way 3e made halflings cool.

I agree. Except not entirely with the gnomes!
(gnomes are my pet peeve regardless of edition and game altogether). However, they are pretty interesting in 5th and I can see why someone else might like them.

[Willie the Duck]

Wait, how broad of a definition of "edgelord" are we using, given that we're now applying it to characters like Aragorn?

"Edgelord" as a term seems to be similar to "Mary Sue," in that it loses a lot of its meaning given that everyone uses it to mean something different.

"Edgelord" tells you a lot more about the person making the criticism than it does about the character they are criticizing. :smalltongue:


Good god imagine how terrifyingly over powered this would be if implemented. A one level dip into Barbarian for the Unarmored Defense, and then pump up the Constitution and Dexterity stats as much as possible, and you're looking at a genuine Tanklock. Spam spells, and soak up hits, and if you run out of spells you have your rage.

Forget that, hill dwarf Con-based bladelock wins the game. :smallbiggrin:

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

I tend to think there are no boring races, only boring characters. Races are piles of stat modifiers and special abilities to be dropped into your world.

[strangebloke]

I tend to think there are no boring races, only boring characters. Races are piles of stat modifiers and special abilities to be dropped into your world.

Things can be mechanically boring. For example, there's no real way to interact with the dragonborn's fire breath, so it can't really be part of your build.

And as to boring fluff.... less is sometimes more. Playing as a human means that you're "free" to define whatever about your own family history. Playing a tiefling pigeonholes you into "...but he looks like a demon!" That's why almost all of my characters have been human, or indistinguishable from a human.

Well, all the character I *want* to play, anyway. I don't get to play enough to make half the ones I want to.

[Tanarii]

I agree. Except not entirely with the gnomes!
(gnomes are my pet peeve regardless of edition and game altogether). However, they are pretty interesting in 5th and I can see why someone else might like them.Well like I said in another thread post, there is a sizable contingent that insists on playing them as squeaky-voiced steampunk / tinker gnomes, and ruins them for the rest of us.

A certain video game series (and eventually MMO), clearly inspired by D&D tinker gnomes originally, has unfortunately had a large feedback impact on modern D&D players when it comes to gnomes.

(Edit: basically, it'd be like if lots of player insisted on playing halflings as kender ... irrepressible and fearless thieves without a lick of common sense or survival instinct.)


"Edgelord tells you a lot more about the person making the criticism than it does about the character they are criticizing. :smalltongue:
Hahaha truth!

[JakOfAllTirades]

I think tieflings would thrive dead center in the heart of nobility. Oh sure, the common man is likely to shout "Burn the witch!!!" at the first opportunity, but the nobility, ever seeking an advantage in the cutthroat games of politics they play, would hardly be so prude not to accept help from some...unconventional sources. And where would these tieflings come from if not from dealings between infernals and the nobility themselves? Who else would have the power and the reason to mingle with demons so intimately?

And the Tieflings would then be protected by their name. Shamed, sure, but still quite useful and there is something to be said for the ease in which one could alter their identity in order to hide their outward appearance from those who would seek them harm. Such a creature should find no shortage of work in the top of society. Oh, sure, they are hated and mistrusted, but hate, mistrust, and deceit are in no short supply among the nobility.

I have several good tiefling ideas I wish to run.
A tiefling glamor bard. Sinfully gorgeous. Oddly well accepted, even among the highest and most devout company. Its as if people do not see his/her true form. Enticing people to sin through unnaturally gorgeous looks? Sign me up.

A tiefling Paladin, many archtypes work here. Born noble and cast off, he still retains some status (knight variant), but was nonetheless cast off to avoid being (rightfully) accused of mingling with demons. He was forced to swear oath to an order of paladins. The distrust of their race only strengthens their resolve to uphold the only family that has truely accepted them, even if they were likely paid quite well for accepting them into the order.

And of course the Infernal warlock will never get old :P. I'm a demon who works under a bigger demon and has a pet demon under me. Power hungry? Absolutely. Evil? No, not necessarily. Such a person could treat their friends quite well and simply not hold the morals of a society who wouldn't accept them in high regard. Sure they are hated, but...roll intimidation.

This is all spot on. Two of my last three characters have been Noble Tieflings. (FeyLock and Lore Bard) Both concepts worked beautifully. The Warlock's family disinherited him and refused to train him in either arms or magic, so he made a pact with a powerful Fey house, acquiring both. (Blade pact) He served his Fey liege well, and never ceased to find new and amazing ways to embarrass and annoy his human family. I didn't play him "dark and edgy" but rather farcical and outrageous. (Like the time he tried to make a Succubus his pet... didn't end well, but it was hilarious.)

The Noble Tiefling Bard is somewhat different. His family trained him in everything: fencing, magic, history, music, etc. But he found out he was actually adopted from another noble house; his family planned to use him to embarrass them due to an ancient rivalry. Rather than be part of their bizarre scheme, he left home and now refuses to go back. However, he is still a nobleman, and still upholds his responsibilities wherever he goes.

I have to agree with posters who have expressed dislike for the stereotypical "edgelord" Tiefling character; I wouldn't bother playing one myself. But it's a mistake to write off the entire race just because you think that's the only type of Tiefling character anyone can come up with.

[Willie the Duck]

And as to boring fluff.... less is sometimes more. Playing as a human means that you're "free" to define whatever about your own family history. Playing a tiefling pigeonholes you into "...but he looks like a demon!" That's why almost all of my characters have been human, or indistinguishable from a human.

Well, all the character I *want* to play, anyway. I don't get to play enough to make half the ones I want to.


Race has a hard time opening up options. The entire universe of personality types and most character backstories are available to a 'plain' human. The only exception is 'truly alien mindset' and given that there's not a lot farther than 'truly odd person' that one can explore without getting to 'so incomprehensible that the player is just playing the character as extra-random,' it's not as great a roleplaying tool as one might expect.

Race on characters is similar to being a sitcom/drama writer and defining a new character on your highschool show as 'the cheerleader' -- it doesn't actually open any new doors, but it can give a framework for audience expectations. Now the character can either embrace the stereotypes we expect from being the cheerleader (/elf/dwarf), or subvert them. But you still can't do anything with the character that you couldn't do with 'student #23' (/race: human).

[strangebloke]

Race has a hard time opening up options. The entire universe of personality types and most character backstories are available to a 'plain' human. The only exception is 'truly alien mindset' and given that there's not a lot farther than 'truly odd person' that one can explore without getting to 'so incomprehensible that the player is just playing the character as extra-random,' it's not as great a roleplaying tool as one might expect.

Race on characters is similar to being a sitcom/drama writer and defining a new character on your highschool show as 'the cheerleader' -- it doesn't actually open any new doors, but it can give a framework for audience expectations. Now the character can either embrace the stereotypes we expect from being the cheerleader (/elf/dwarf), or subvert them. But you still can't do anything with the character that you couldn't do with 'student #23' (/race: human).

I pretty much totally agree.

The exception is if a race occupies a certain bit of design space in a setting. Like, if humans aren't racist against each other, and you want your character to be racially discriminated against, you might want to play a half-orc or tiefling. Conversely, if the lords of a certain city are elves, you need to be an elf to come from that background.

But that's more the domain of setting design, and not the domain of race design.

It's also, btw, why I really dislike a lot of the 'freak' races. An elf or a half-orc might occupy a specific design space... but a kenku or tabaxi almost never does. If no PC plays a kenku, odds are that suddenly, magically, no kenku exist in that setting. It's simply too much work for a DM to define a special space for all these little niche races. Half-elves or aasimar or tiefling are all sort of permissible in this regard, since they're sort of defined in relation to other established races in the setting (celestials, demons, elves, orcs, etc.) and therefore don't require a great big civilization of weirdos out there somewhere. I've also got a big soft spot for goliaths, but that's just me.

Hence why my next setting has: Orcs, Drakonids, Humans, and Monsters.

[Potato_Priest]

Can y'all quit dunkin' on my Genasi homies? I just rolled up a full 12 of them, and I'm feeling very attacked.

Don’t worry taffy, I also like my genasi, but we can ignore the “haters”.

I think that my favorite thing about genasi is actually how human they are. They, unlike Tieflings, don’t feel shoehorned into some sort of angsty loner role, and unlike Aasimar they also aren’t shoehorned into being some sort of “child of destiny” by their angelic guardian. They’re just regular people with ties to another dimension, which makes them much easier for me to role play in ways I find interesting.

[Arkhios]

Well like I said in another thread post, there is a sizable contingent that insists on playing them as squeaky-voiced steampunk / tinker gnomes, and ruins them for the rest of us.

A certain video game series (and eventually MMO), clearly inspired by D&D tinker gnomes originally, has unfortunately had a large feedback impact on modern D&D players when it comes to gnomes.

(Edit: basically, it'd be like if lots of player insisted on playing halflings as kender ... irrepressible and fearless thieves without a lick of common sense or survival instinct.)


Hahaha truth!

FWIW, my opinion towards gnomes isn't derived from having played WoW for over 12 years. :smallbiggrin:
...I'm old enough to have played D&D long before WoW became a thing. And didn't know sh!t about Warcraft series before WoW :smalltongue:

My reason for gnome "hatred" is rather personal, and perhaps a little whimsical: One character of mine which I had specifically created as a human for specific reasons got reincarnated as a gnome, which didn't exactly make me want to play with the character more. Especially after he died again and was reincarnated... again as a gnome. After that second time, he went mad and became a villain.

[Nifft]

It's also, btw, why I really dislike a lot of the 'freak' races. An elf or a half-orc might occupy a specific design space... but a kenku or tabaxi almost never does. If no PC plays a kenku, odds are that suddenly, magically, no kenku exist in that setting. It's simply too much work for a DM to define a special space for all these little niche races. Half-elves or aasimar or tiefling are all sort of permissible in this regard, since they're sort of defined in relation to other established races in the setting (celestials, demons, elves, orcs, etc.) and therefore don't require a great big civilization of weirdos out there somewhere. I've also got a big soft spot for goliaths, but that's just me.

Hence why my next setting has: Orcs, Drakonids, Humans, and Monsters. This is a good observation.

IMHO the available PC races -- the "racial palette" -- are a DM tool for making a unique setting which has a distinct flavor. Likewise, the DM's specific "monster palette" contributes to the setting's overall flavor.

You can create a kitchen-sink setting, of course, but those have been done quite a bit already.

[strangebloke]

This is a good observation.

IMHO the available PC races -- the "racial palette" -- are a DM tool for making a unique setting which has a distinct flavor. Likewise, the DM's specific "monster palette" contributes to the setting's overall flavor.

You can create a kitchen-sink setting, of course, but those have been done quite a bit already.

Reason #12 why I don't play in AL. Nothing wrong with the fantasy kitchen sink, I just find it boring.

[The Jack]

Well I'm doing a setting where there's virtually no humans, and I'm really stretching. I'll let players play anything (balanced) and I'll make settlements of anything.

I rate creatures on how interesting their sociology'd be. Thus Hobgoblins are my all time favourites and hive minds or tabaxi just scream lazy.

[MaxWilson]

I'd put forth a two way tie between elves and dwarves, with halflings in that general pack of boringness. I'm not particularly fond of the default assumption that every setting needs to have non-human sentients, I'm even less on board with the same two appearing over, and over, and over, with a third cropping up less but still too frequently. This is without getting into how the standard elf and standard dwarf are basically Tolkien watered down, inspired by the hordes of Tolkien clones who caught extreme surface aspects of the style while missing everything that could conceivably be described as the point.

If it's not too off-topic, I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on what Tolkien elves and Tolkien dwarves are fundamentally about, i.e. "the point." I'm not super-familiar with Tolkien (e.g. I've read the Silmarillion, years ago, and was extremely bored by it, never made it all the way through LOTR books, but did like The Hobbit quite a lot as a child, and I have some Wikipedia-level knowledge of Unfinished Tales and Tolkien's various dragons)--as I say, I'm not super-familiar with Tolkien but it sounds like you are, and I'd love to know what you mean here.

[The Jack]

If it's not too off-topic, I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on what Tolkien elves and Tolkien dwarves are fundamentally about, i.e. "the point." I'm not super-familiar with Tolkien (e.g. I've read the Silmarillion, years ago, and was extremely bored by it, never made it all the way through LOTR books, but did like The Hobbit quite a lot as a child, and I have some Wikipedia-level knowledge of Unfinished Tales and Tolkien's various dragons)--as I say, I'm not super-familiar with Tolkien but it sounds like you are, and I'd love to know what you mean here.

Tolkien's elves were a near mary-sue race. They were better than humans in every way. They were better physically, lived with nature harmoniously (which was perfect because Tolkien was a total eco-warrior) and they had a political system that was really small government, trust everyone to do the right thing kinda deal, which was totally great in Tolkien's idea. Only hobbits did politics better.

The dwarves were all about tradition, honouring the past and good craftsmanship. They could get stubborn and greedy, but were considered a good race.

Orcs/goblins by comparison were industrial. They would destroy nature for resources. They didn't care for craftsmanship but liked to invent wicked machines. Their leaders were authoritarian. Basically everything Tolkien thought was wrong.

[strangebloke]

If it's not too off-topic, I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on what Tolkien elves and Tolkien dwarves are fundamentally about, i.e. "the point." I'm not super-familiar with Tolkien (e.g. I've read the Silmarillion, years ago, and was extremely bored by it, never made it all the way through LOTR books, but did like The Hobbit quite a lot as a child, and I have some Wikipedia-level knowledge of Unfinished Tales and Tolkien's various dragons)--as I say, I'm not super-familiar with Tolkien but it sounds like you are, and I'd love to know what you mean here.

Tolkien elves are the Sidhe, basically. They are immortal, are fair beyond imagining, use magic as though it were second nature, and are tied to the world in ways that humans are most definitely not. They're less physical than humans are, possessing less physical strength on average, and weighing very little indeed. Legolas is capable of walking across a snowdrift, for example. They are tremendously in tune with nature, to the point that they are incapable of self-determined action in the same way that humans are. If an elven city is destroyed, for example, elves can't really ever rebuild it to be as nice as it was. Feanor made the simarils, but when they're taken from him he can't replace them.

The elves clearly hearken back to an age of greater heroism and magic that is fading from the earth, never to return. Elves are perfected humans, in many respects, but they cannot grow or surpass their forbears. The destruction of the One Ring signals the end of the time of the elves, and all of the greatest elves left in the world pass on in the next few decades.

If you had to stat them in dnd they'd all be NPCS with 5-15 hit dice, and they wouldn't be a playable race.

So yeah, dnd elves are kind of bland and whatever by comparison. That's not all bad; less can be more.

[ZorroGames]

If it's not too off-topic, I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on what Tolkien elves and Tolkien dwarves are fundamentally about, i.e. "the point." I'm not super-familiar with Tolkien (e.g. I've read the Silmarillion, years ago, and was extremely bored by it, never made it all the way through LOTR books, but did like The Hobbit quite a lot as a child, and I have some Wikipedia-level knowledge of Unfinished Tales and Tolkien's various dragons)--as I say, I'm not super-familiar with Tolkien but it sounds like you are, and I'd love to know what you mean here.

That would be great but not neccessarily on this 5e forum.

I quit counting at 20 the times I read LOTR in my deliciously misspent youth and “young adult” years. Granted I failed three times to get past the Shire/Bree parts initially... which may be why “Halfling” PCs bore me to tears.

In short, before returning to OP question, I fail to see much of any relationship beyond the surface between JRRT Elves and Dwarf and D&D ones. YMMV.

Again, players make characters boring. Mechanics make playing some characters predictable because of... optimization only focus of some. Again, YMMV.

[strangebloke]

Tolkien's elves were a near mary-sue race. They were better than humans in every way. They were better physically, lived with nature harmoniously (which was perfect because Tolkien was a total eco-warrior) and they had a political system that was really small government, trust everyone to do the right thing kinda deal, which was totally great in Tolkien's idea. Only hobbits did politics better.

The dwarves were all about tradition, honouring the past and good craftsmanship. They could get stubborn and greedy, but were considered a good race.

Orcs/goblins by comparison were industrial. They would destroy nature for resources. They didn't care for craftsmanship but liked to invent wicked machines. Their leaders were authoritarian. Basically everything Tolkien thought was wrong.

1. Elves are perfect, but they can't replace anything they lose. This has been the failing point of their race for their entire history.

2. Dwarves don't care for the past any more than humans do. They care less for it than most Elves do. Thorin was pissed about smaug for like a hundred years. Elledan and Elrohir have been on a vengeance streak for several thousand and Maglor (most powerful elf in middle earth during the war of the ring) has been wandering by the sea singing sad songs for tens of thousands of years.

3. You're right to note that societies that don't rely on coercion are presented as better in LotR, but, uh... that's not really Tolkien specific.

4. It isn't that orcs are industrial. Dwarves are industrial. Hobbits are industrial. It's that Orcs have no sense of beauty or goodness and don't care for the world. Orc equipment is of perfectly good craftmanship, they just have no sense of artistry.

The more I think about it, the more I hate Kenku. I honestly think they're the worst race overall. They've got fluff, sure, but it's all stupid.

Cursed by an evil god? Well that's never coming up.
Can't talk? Really funny for like 15 minutes.
Is a crow? Yeah, and they look pretty stupid too.
Tend to be minions? Oh that's fun! But... There are goblins and kobolds for that.

I can't see why I'd ever play one as opposed to a goblin.

[Tanarii]

My reason for gnome "hatred" is rather personal, and perhaps a little whimsical: One character of mine which I had specifically created as a human for specific reasons got reincarnated as a gnome, which didn't exactly make me want to play with the character more. Especially after he died again and was reincarnated... again as a gnome. After that second time, he went mad and became a villain.May have sucked as the player, but it resulted in a cool tale. ;)

[ZorroGames]

May have sucked as the player, but it resulted in a cool tale. ;)

My wife might enjoy this story. :smallcool:

[strangebloke]

FWIW, my opinion towards gnomes isn't derived from having played WoW for over 12 years. :smallbiggrin:
...I'm old enough to have played D&D long before WoW became a thing. And didn't know sh!t about Warcraft series before WoW :smalltongue:

My reason for gnome "hatred" is rather personal, and perhaps a little whimsical: One character of mine which I had specifically created as a human for specific reasons got reincarnated as a gnome, which didn't exactly make me want to play with the character more. Especially after he died again and was reincarnated... again as a gnome. After that second time, he went mad and became a villain.

I hate gnomes because the smug little guys are just so unreasonably cheery!

...But in reality, it's the players I've dealt with. I've played with 4-5 gnomes over the years and every time its been a case of... "Well, better hide the peanut butter, things are about to get weird."

[supergoji18]

If it's not too off-topic, I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on what Tolkien elves and Tolkien dwarves are fundamentally about, i.e. "the point."

Tolkien's elves were a near mary-sue race. They were better than humans in every way. They were better physically, lived with nature harmoniously (which was perfect because Tolkien was a total eco-warrior) and they had a political system that was really small government, trust everyone to do the right thing kinda deal, which was totally great in Tolkien's idea. Only hobbits did politics better.


Elves are perfected humans, in many respects, but they cannot grow or surpass their forbears. The destruction of the One Ring signals the end of the time of the elves, and all of the greatest elves left in the world pass on in the next few decades.
Before I get to the part related to this discussion, I just want to say 2 things regarding Tolkein's Elves.
1. Tolkien's elves were meant to be a representation of what humans could have been had they not committed the original sin of disobeying God. Tolkien's intention when creating the Legendarium was to essentially create a mythology for England because he believed a country without its own mythology has no real identity. His stories weren't meant to be set in another world, they were meant to be a pre-history to our own world. With Tolkien being a devout Catholic, he wanted to make sure his stories agreed with Catholic beliefs and values. This is why a LOT of stuff in the Legendarium parallels with Catholic doctrine: there is only one true deity who created the universe (God/YHVH/Allah in Abrahamic religions, Eru Iluvatar in Middle Earth), there are numerous servants to this deity (Angels = Ainur, aka the Valar and Maiar), a rebellious servant is the root of all evil (Lucifer/Satan = Morgoth/Melkor), etc.
2. Despite this, the elves were still not perfect. There were prone to folly just as much as humans were, and this shows with many of the stories of the Silmarillion in which the elves screw up a lot. Furthermore, they were prone to melancholy because of their immortal nature. In fact, the elves were jealous of humans in for their mortality. The way the elves saw it, when a human grew weary of the world, they could simply choose to die and their souls would leave the world, traveling beyond Middle Earth to places unknown. Elves, on the other hand, were doomed to forever remain within Middle Earth even after death, as their souls are bound to the world. Of course, when elves try to tell humans this, the humans think the elves are being patronizing.

Now onto the part that actually has to do with the discussion at hand.

If we factor in Racial Feats into this discussion, how would that change things? Because I feel it would make a lot of the races much more interesting to play.

[the secret fire]

Before I get to the part related to this discussion, I just want to say 2 things regarding Tolkein's Elves.
1. Tolkien's elves were meant to be a representation of what humans could have been had they not committed the original sin of disobeying God. Tolkien's intention when creating the Legendarium was to essentially create a mythology for England because he believed a country without its own mythology has no real identity. His stories weren't meant to be set in another world, they were meant to be a pre-history to our own world. With Tolkien being a devout Catholic, he wanted to make sure his stories agreed with Catholic beliefs and values. This is why a LOT of stuff in the Legendarium parallels with Catholic doctrine: there is only one true deity who created the universe (God/YHVH/Allah in Abrahamic religions, Eru Iluvatar in Middle Earth), there are numerous servants to this deity (Angels = Ainur, aka the Valar and Maiar), a rebellious servant is the root of all evil (Lucifer/Satan = Morgoth/Melkor), etc.

The sunken island of Numenor is pretty clearly an allegorical mash-up of both Atlantis and the British Isles. The fact that Numenor was the homeland of the one "noble" race of men in Middle Earth (Gondor) is also no coincidence, nor is the "German-ness" of the once-good-but-fallen Rohir. The tan-to-black skin of the races of men who ally themselves with Sauron was also quite intentional, as was their use of great elephants, hearkening back to Hannibal and the Carthaginian invasion of Rome.

Even the shape of Middle Earth is highly European. It is a continent with a west coast, but no east coast, extending interminably into an unnamed eastern landmass. Yes, LoTR was a highly intentional piece of modern British myth-making.

[The Jack]

I don't think Tolkien had any dislike for eastern/southern people; all humans are capable of being corrupted.


That said, while we're on races. I think it's unfortunate that you've got to do your own research for settings that aren't your standard western-european thing. Then again Oriental adventures for 3.5 was a wildly inaccurate mess that I want to call racist but I'm just not sure if that's correct.

I dislike PC's that want to take really far-out ethnicities/races in a setting that doesn't support them.
(You can play the samurai class without being a samurai or use the monk class for a non-eastern brawler, I don't care for that)
I just remember really getting burned by a really distant snowflake warrior. Somehow our GM's tropical norse setting became japanese to accomadate the player. Two of the four players, including me, were playing perfectly norse characters that suddenly became the outlanders...

[supergoji18]

I dislike PC's that want to take really far-out ethnicities/races in a setting that doesn't support them.
(You can play the samurai class without being a samurai or use the monk class for a non-eastern brawler, I don't care for that)
I just remember really getting burned by a really distant snowflake warrior. Somehow our GM's tropical norse setting became japanese to accomadate the player. Two of the four players, including me, were playing perfectly norse characters that suddenly became the outlanders...
What irks me even more than this is when they expect the GM to then make said exotic race a large and prominent part of the setting. They'll play something like a Tabaxi or Kenku and then expect to find them everywhere in cities.

I don't know if I already posted my opinions on the matter here, but I'll say this regarding what I think the worst/most boring race is. I think its the standard human and dragonborn as far as the actual features are concerned. With nothing but some ability scores there's nothing interesting about the standard human, and dragonborn get so little that I frequently forget I'm even a dragonborn until I suddenly remember I have a damage resistance.

[strangebloke]

What irks me even more than this is when they expect the GM to then make said exotic race a large and prominent part of the setting. They'll play something like a Tabaxi or Kenku and then expect to find them everywhere in cities.


bonus points if the campaign's been going on a year and they suddenly expect tabaxi to spring out of nowhere and be a big race.

[mephnick]

What irks me even more than this is when they expect the GM to then make said exotic race a large and prominent part of the setting. They'll play something like a Tabaxi or Kenku and then expect to find them everywhere in cities.

Not exotic, but I explicitly left Halflings out of my setting because I can never find a good "place" for them. Unfortunately I forgot it in my wiki's list of races that don't exist. So I showed up to character creation and a player was super excited to play a halfling. I was going to start explaining why I find them boring but she was so excited I just couldn't do it...so I just pretended they were in the setting all along...Now there are some pretty important halfling characters in the setting and it makes me drink.

[Vorpal Crowbar]

mechanically - Dragonborn of the major races. Other than that, Goliaths are just uninteresting.

VC

[Tanarii]

mechanically - Dragonborn of the major races. Other than that, Goliaths are just uninteresting.

VC
Dragonborn are a minor race, or less common. The common races are Human, Elf, Dwarf, and Halfling.

So says the almighty PhB in the races chapter introduction. YCMV of course.

Interestingly, if we take the reincarnation table as the standard distribution of the cosmic population, humans make up about 25%, elves, dwarves, and Halfling about 16% each (or 48% total), gnomes 8% and Dragonborn, Tiefling, Drow, and half-humans 4% each (or 24% total).

So about a 8:4:1 ratio of human to each major non-human to each minor non-human, except gnomes are twice as common as the other 'minor'/less common races.

But also 1:2:1 ration for total human to total major non-human to total minor non-human. And 1 to 3 for human vs non-human.

That's a low threshold for human population by my standards of settings, but certainly would explain the common adventurer distribution in modern official play parties. :smallwink:

[Nifft]

Every now and then I get bit by the urge to consolidate races.

- Gnomes are just unlucky Halflings, cursed with a compulsion to learn (cursed with a genius in the Greek sense).

- Dwarves are just male Elves.

- Orcs are just primeval Humans.

- Dragonborn are just mutant Lizardfolk.

-- -- --

- Elves / Gnomes / Halflings are just risen Fey, and they correspond to Bugbears / Hobgoblins / Goblins who are fallen Fey.

- Goliaths are half-Human, half-Dwarf. They're like a Liger, who grows bigger than either parent race would.

- Tabaxi are former cat familiars who feasted on the flesh of their dead masters. Most aren't nice.

- Orcs are just tainted former Humans. Gnolls are former Human demonic cultists.

-- -- --

In general, I'd love it if WotC gave more options for special-snowflake unique individuals instead of forcing the DM to incorporate a whole special-snowflake race just for one (potentially ephemeral) PC.

To be clear: It's not a problem that a player wants to be extra-special. If that's a source of fun for that player, then it's fine, since players having fun is how the DM wins. The problem is that the main supported mechanism for being extra-special comes with a lot of campaign-altering baggage (i.e.: "Go fit my special race into your setting!").

[EvilAnagram]

Dragonborn are a minor race, or less common. The common races are Human, Elf, Dwarf, and Halfling.

So says the almighty PhB in the races chapter introduction. YCMV of course.

Interestingly, if we take the reincarnation table as the standard distribution of the cosmic population, humans make up about 25%, elves, dwarves, and Halfling about 16% each (or 48% total), gnomes 8% and Dragonborn, Tiefling, Drow, and half-humans 4% each (or 24% total).

So about a 8:4:1 ratio of human to each major non-human to each minor non-human, except gnomes are twice as common as the other 'minor'/less common races.

But also 1:2:1 ration for total human to total major non-human to total minor non-human. And 1 to 3 for human vs non-human.

That's a low threshold for human population by my standards of settings, but certainly would explain the common adventurer distribution in modern official play parties. :smallwink:

Huh. This is by far the most interesting thing to come out of this thread. It matches quite closely to the poll WotC took, too.

[supergoji18]

Every now and then I get bit by the urge to consolidate races.

- Gnomes are just unlucky Halflings, cursed with a compulsion to learn (cursed with a genius in the Greek sense).

- Dwarves are just male Elves.

- Orcs are just primeval Humans.

- Dragonborn are just mutant Lizardfolk.

-- -- --

- Elves / Gnomes / Halflings are just risen Fey, and they correspond to Bugbears / Hobgoblins / Goblins who are fallen Fey.

- Goliaths are half-Human, half-Dwarf. They're like a Liger, who grows bigger than either parent race would.

- Tabaxi are former cat familiars who feasted on the flesh of their dead masters. Most aren't nice.

- Orcs are just tainted former Humans. Gnolls are former Human demonic cultists.

-- -- --

In general, I'd love it if WotC gave more options for special-snowflake unique individuals instead of forcing the DM to incorporate a whole special-snowflake race just for one (potentially ephemeral) PC.

To be clear: It's not a problem that a player wants to be extra-special. If that's a source of fun for that player, then it's fine, since players having fun is how the DM wins. The problem is that the main supported mechanism for being extra-special comes with a lot of campaign-altering baggage (i.e.: "Go fit my special race into your setting!").
Im actually planning to do this in a setting of mine. The uncommon/animal races are just awakened animals, the fey include dwarves, elves, halflings, gnomes, goblinoids and orcs, and then there are the few exceptional races that have different origins like the dragonborn, goliaths, genasi, aasimar, and tieflings. I feel like it helps make the relations between the various races more apparent and provides a good amount of organization, which is something I do enjoy in my games.

[strangebloke]

mechanically - Dragonborn of the major races. Other than that, Goliaths are just uninteresting.

VC

Goliaths are mechanically uninteresting, that's what you're saying, right? I can kind of see that. Their only unique ability is a 1/sr ability that isn't super exciting and doesn't scale. I will note that they have powerful build and that they get a free skill proficiency, so I don't think you can consider them as bad as the dragonborn.

In which case you don't like their fluff in which case I don't know what to say to you. They're the best! Even when I play a human, I play a Goliath!

[Mith]

Every now and then I get bit by the urge to consolidate races.

- Gnomes are just unlucky Halflings, cursed with a compulsion to learn (cursed with a genius in the Greek sense).

- Dwarves are just male Elves.

- Orcs are just primeval Humans.

- Dragonborn are just mutant Lizardfolk.

-- -- --

- Elves / Gnomes / Halflings are just risen Fey, and they correspond to Bugbears / Hobgoblins / Goblins who are fallen Fey.

- Goliaths are half-Human, half-Dwarf. They're like a Liger, who grows bigger than either parent race would.

- Tabaxi are former cat familiars who feasted on the flesh of their dead masters. Most aren't nice.

- Orcs are just tainted former Humans. Gnolls are former Human demonic cultists.

-- -- --

In general, I'd love it if WotC gave more options for special-snowflake unique individuals instead of forcing the DM to incorporate a whole special-snowflake race just for one (potentially ephemeral) PC.

To be clear: It's not a problem that a player wants to be extra-special. If that's a source of fun for that player, then it's fine, since players having fun is how the DM wins. The problem is that the main supported mechanism for being extra-special comes with a lot of campaign-altering baggage (i.e.: "Go fit my special race into your setting!").

How I do it in my setting ideas:



-Animal races: They are a First People like that of many shamanistic cultures. There are rites to become like them, but many have been lost or correlupted over the years. These peoples have a faith based on ancestor worship, withe the First of their race being the collective vessel of their power, and take on aspects depending on needs. For the Gnolls and Minotaurs, their gods were imprisoned after the end of a war while as war gods, making all Gnolls and Minotaurs kind of insane and sexless. They breed though the use of blood rituals.

-Halflings, Goblins, Gnomes, and Kobolds are all part of a one race that have drifted apart over time. Undecided if Humans are connected to them along with Hobgoblins, and Dragonborn by divine meddling, but that would work well.

-Orcs, Goliaths, and Firbolgs are the lowest of the Giantkin.

-Elves and Dwarves are their own seperate races.


Basically, I try to tie all races together as part of a history, and I think it works well.

[poolio]

Personally, I would never play a gnome. To me, they are all tied to Wizard class. I can't wrap my brain around a gnome being anything else, and I don't like wizards that much (I know they are great, I just don't like them).

Gnomes look much more like NPCs than players to me.

I've played two gnomes, one forest arcane trickster, lot's of fun with illusions and her mouse made a great scout, and one rock eldritch knight, fantastic anti-wizard with the natural resistance to a lot of spells, it usually became my job to lock down enemy spell casters, granted they're both the kinda wizardy sub-classes, but i think they have a lot to offer,

As for underwhelming races, I'd have to go with the Asamier (afb right now but whatever the half celestial guys are called) i can't see them being anything other then op paladins, i don't really like a lot of the volo's guide options actually, they all have way to much going on that kinda shoe horns them into other classes, but i haven't had a lot of experience playing them yet so who knows, i might feel differently after giving them a shot.

I do have a couple builds i want to try with some of them, a Kenku paladin, and an Eldritch knight goblin, hopefully i get a chance to try one of those soon, i usually dm, so maybe I'll make them npc's to see how they do lol

[nothinglord]

I think that Genasi fit both categories. They get next to no racial abilities, getting literally only subrace abilities, and only about the same number as any other subrace, thus not making up for no base racial abilities.

There is little thematic reason to play them. Unlike Tieflings and Dragonborn, which are the Devil-people and Dragon-people, Genasi feel less like Fire/Water/Earth/Wind-people and more like Red/Green/Grey/Blue/whatever colored people. They get next to no (useful) abilities that would make them feel like such. Earth and Air Genasi in particular. Being able to hold your breath indefinitely and float in one spot, unable to fly under your own power (or lift someone else) aren't the most useful abilities and don't scream Air Person on their own. And being to walk more quietly is definitely what I picture and Earth-person doing.

Fire and Water Genasi are better off, but unlike literally every other race with innate spellcasting, they don't get a spell at 5th level (also Burning Hands isn't upcast to 2nd level, unlike Tieflings). Plus the existence of these two, buts into question why Earth and Air Genasi weren't designed the same way. Why don't Air Genasi get the Gust cantrip and Gust of Wind? Why don't Earth Genasi get the Mold Earth cantrip and Earth Tremor? Literally 3 of these spells were in the book Genasi are published in, and both the cantrips are the Earth and Wind equivalents to the cantrips that Fire and Water Genasi get. Why don't Earth or Air Genasi get a resistance and why does water get Acid instead of cold? If they aren't meant to get any resistance, than give them something else.


If anything published in 5th feels like something done to pad books, these would be the #1 example.

[supergoji18]

I think that Genasi fit both categories. They get next to no racial abilities, getting literally only subrace abilities, and only about the same number as any other subrace, thus not making up for no base racial abilities.

What kind of racial abilities or features would you give them? I have a hard time figuring out what would make sense.

[JakOfAllTirades]

What kind of racial abilities or features would you give them? I have a hard time figuring out what would make sense.

The "elemental" cantrips should be available to each type. Water Genasi already have the Shape Water cantrip, which is good. So...

Air Genasi: Gust
Earth Genasi: Mold Earth
Fire Genasi: Control Flames (replaces Create Bonfire?)

Giving all the Genasi types some basic at-will control over their respective elements would provide some utility as well as flavor (both of which are lacking) without breaking the game.

[supergoji18]

The "elemental" cantrips should be available to each type. Water Genasi already have the Shape Water cantrip, which is good. So...

Air Genasi: Gust
Earth Genasi: Mold Earth
Fire Genasi: Control Flames (replaces Create Bonfire?)

Giving all the Genasi types some basic at-will control over their respective elements would provide some utility as well as flavor (both of which are lacking) without breaking the game.
I was referring to something that all of them get, not something the subraces would get. I completely agree they should have those cantrips, but I was wondering what traits, if any, should they all share. Like how all elves have the fey ancestry and trance traits.

[Mith]

I was referring to something that all of them get, not something the subraces would get. I completely agree they should have those cantrips, but I was wondering what traits, if any, should they all share. Like how all elves have the fey ancestry and trance traits.

Do not have to sleep, just an hour of meditation? Resistance to Poison? Advantage on Charisma checks with elementals of shared heritage?

[The Jack]

I think that Genasi fit both categories. They get next to no racial abilities, getting literally only subrace abilities, and only about the same number as any other subrace, thus not making up for no base racial abilities.


I like genies, and the part where their alignment biased but is less extreme than Celestials/Fiends makes them a stronger thematic choice than demon/angel people, which is usually played fairly cliche.

Also, like Half dragons, I totally think Gensai-ness could be a great blessing/stolen power rather than just something to be born with. I think adding traits to a race makes for a more interesting settup than just making a new race and assuming the other half doesn't matter and looks human.

Note that you could totally use the mechanics of draconic sorcery with a Djinn blood reflavour. Except maybe earth.

That said, Making gensai closer to genies would be phenomenally overpowered and flight/burrow speeds are things you want to hold back for. Most dudes get all their racial spells by 5th level; Flight and burrow aren't 5th level. It gets a bit too complicated for 5e. Even a 10ft burrow/flight speed is terrifying.

The recharge mechanic should be used for more player things I think.

[JakOfAllTirades]

Do not have to sleep, just an hour of meditation? Resistance to Poison? Advantage on Charisma checks with elementals of shared heritage?

Any of those would make sense for Genasi as a group.

[Beechgnome]

Any of those would make sense for Genasi as a group.

Genies all have Darkvision out to 120 feet. Why the genasi all don't have at least 60 feet is a head scratcher... Especially since they gave fire genasi the 'you have Darkvision but everything is red' Darkvision.

[Willie the Duck]

Genies all have Darkvision out to 120 feet. Why the genasi all don't have at least 60 feet is a head scratcher... Especially since they gave fire genasi the 'you have Darkvision but everything is red' Darkvision.

As usual, I have no special insight into the design process. However, I suspect it is as simple as 'let's not hand out darkvision to all non-humans this time,' plus darkvision not being the first thing people think of when they think of genasi.

[Ralanr]

Can I also add that I find Goliath’s rather boring? They just feel like neutral orcs that don’t have constant raiding parties for nearby settlers.

When they were released I was annoyed. Why play a half-orc Barbarian (beyond the synergy) when you could play a Goliath Barbarian?

[strangebloke]

Can I also add that I find Goliath’s rather boring? They just feel like neutral orcs that don’t have constant raiding parties for nearby settlers.

When they were released I was annoyed. Why play a half-orc Barbarian (beyond the synergy) when you could play a Goliath Barbarian?

How are they orcs?

Goliaths are obsessed with their contribution to the tribe/herd's survival. Orcs are obsessed with strength in battle.

Goliaths worship the giant pantheon, but not really all that zealously. Orcs are religious fanatics.

Goliaths mostly stay away from other races. Orcs are constant raiders and have all-out grudge matches with both goblinoids as a whole, and elves specifically.

I mean, orcs and goliaths are both 'big muscly guys who don't live in cities and care about strength,' but... as you point out, they're not really competing with Orcs as a player race. They're competing with half-orcs. And half-orcs, being partway between humans and orcs, have very different fluff than goliaths do.

[JakOfAllTirades]

How are they orcs?

Goliaths are obsessed with their contribution to the tribe/herd's survival. Orcs are obsessed with strength in battle.

Goliaths worship the giant pantheon, but not really all that zealously. Orcs are religious fanatics.

Goliaths mostly stay away from other races. Orcs are constant raiders and have all-out grudge matches with both goblinoids as a whole, and elves specifically.

I mean, orcs and goliaths are both 'big muscly guys who don't live in cities and care about strength,' but... as you point out, they're not really competing with Orcs as a player race. They're competing with half-orcs. And half-orcs, being partway between humans and orcs, have very different fluff than goliaths do.


Also, choosing Goliath as your race lets you play Korg from Thor: Ragnarok. Who doesn't like Korg?

[Ralanr]

How are they orcs?

Goliaths are obsessed with their contribution to the tribe/herd's survival. Orcs are obsessed with strength in battle.

Goliaths worship the giant pantheon, but not really all that zealously. Orcs are religious fanatics.

Goliaths mostly stay away from other races. Orcs are constant raiders and have all-out grudge matches with both goblinoids as a whole, and elves specifically.

I mean, orcs and goliaths are both 'big muscly guys who don't live in cities and care about strength,' but... as you point out, they're not really competing with Orcs as a player race. They're competing with half-orcs. And half-orcs, being partway between humans and orcs, have very different fluff than goliaths do.

Mainly how at first glance both races can easily fill the savage wild man or outlander fairly easily. Yeah if you dive deeper you get more differences (which is good) but at first glance I find them rather boring.

Or maybe I’m just bitter that Goliaths use the basic flavor I used for a white Dragonborn tribe one of my characters came from. It’s probably that.

[strangebloke]

Also, choosing Goliath as your race lets you play Korg from Thor: Ragnarok. Who doesn't like Korg?

Or Grog from Critical Role. (Though he basically was a half-orc)

My best character ever was a Goliath. I saw the competition-related fluff and I ran with it. I made a character that was delusionally assured of his own excellence. He was convinced he was the best at everything (except magic), would accept any kind of challenge, and when he inevitably lost (assuming the challenge wasn't strength or constitution based) he'd infer that the thing he'd been challenged on had actually been a magic-based challenge after all. Reading? Clearly a magic art. Look at how many books those wizards have! Archery? Throwing something so light that far and that accurately is clearly witchcraft.

[The Jack]

Also, choosing Goliath as your race lets you play Korg from Thor: Ragnarok. Who doesn't like Korg?

I hated Korg and Thor: Ragnarok was a bad film.

But they're pretty disparate. Goliath ain't rock men. You'd better fit as an earth gensai or something.

[supergoji18]

I loved Korg and Thor: Ragnarok was a fantastic film.

fixed it for you :smalltongue:

I am currently in the process of doing some edits to races that I feel have been voted highest for needing more to them. I will post them here and maybe in a new thread when I am done, but here are some highlights:
- Dragonborn: giving them a breath weapon with better scaling and more practical usage, as well as several other features that will make them more fun to play.
- Genasi: adding a lot of new toys for them to increase the feeling of playing as a humanoid elemental.
- Humans: since being jack-of-all-trades is a boring niche, I'm trying to reimagine them as beings who possess enormous latent power but need a lot of time and experience to draw it out. I'm adding scaling bonuses to them to simulate this feeling.

[Pex]

What irks me even more than this is when they expect the GM to then make said exotic race a large and prominent part of the setting. They'll play something like a Tabaxi or Kenku and then expect to find them everywhere in cities.

I know that feeling. I'm all for DMs accommodating players as they can, but every once in a while when the DM said yes I really wished he said no. Having a kitchen sink campaign is irksome. Just because it's published doesn't mean it has to be used. When everyone is a special snowflake no one is. Sometimes I even secretly think the player wants to play an exotic race for munchkin reasons. It's not wrong to play the race, but sometimes I want to figuratively smack D&D upside the head for indulging. I still haven't forgiven it for tieflings and aasimars. Funny thing, I don't object to goblin, kobold, bugbear, orc, etc. non-evil PCs. There's a sense of coolness to have a traditional common enemy be on the party's team. It's the "exotic" races that bother me. It's not being fair, maybe being hypocritical, but it's there.

I don't say anything, though. I keep the thought to myself. If the DM is going to allow it it's not something worth feet voting or anything like that. The PC is a party member all the same.



I don't know if I already posted my opinions on the matter here, but I'll say this regarding what I think the worst/most boring race is. I think its the standard human and dragonborn as far as the actual features are concerned. With nothing but some ability scores there's nothing interesting about the standard human, and dragonborn get so little that I frequently forget I'm even a dragonborn until I suddenly remember I have a damage resistance.

And everyone always forget dragonborn do not have dark vision.

[Tanarii]

Mainly how at first glance both races can easily fill the savage wild man or outlander fairly easily.That's the first time I've ever heard standard fantasy-filler Orcs described that way. they're more usually "evil & pointlessly destructive might-makes-right" man. Are you a proponent of misunderstood-noble-savage orcs?

[MaxWilson]

Or Grog from Critical Role. (Though he basically was a half-orc)

My best character ever was a Goliath. I saw the competition-related fluff and I ran with it. I made a character that was delusionally assured of his own excellence. He was convinced he was the best at everything (except magic), would accept any kind of challenge, and when he inevitably lost (assuming the challenge wasn't strength or constitution based) he'd infer that the thing he'd been challenged on had actually been a magic-based challenge after all. Reading? Clearly a magic art. Look at how many books those wizards have! Archery? Throwing something so light that far and that accurately is clearly witchcraft.

That is fantastic. :)

[Ralanr]

That's the first time I've ever heard standard fantasy-filler Orcs described that way. they're more usually "evil & pointlessly destructive might-makes-right" man. Are you a proponent of misunderstood-noble-savage orcs?

More or less yeah. I tend to view most races as being more grey than other cultures give them credit for and much of the entries are written by outsiders of a culture in the books (which isn’t actually the case). It’s also why I hate what 5e did to gnolls.

My main excuse is underworld races like demons and devils as they are basically genetically evil (as dumb as that sounds).

[strangebloke]

More or less yeah. I tend to view most races as being more grey than other cultures give them credit for and much of the entries are written by outsiders of a culture in the books (which isn’t actually the case). It’s also why I hate what 5e did to gnolls.

My main excuse is underworld races like demons and devils as they are basically genetically evil (as dumb as that sounds).

I don't love that the default fluff for orcs is the same as the drow insofar as 'they are evil because of evil micromanaging deities.' Still, sometimes you just need an argly bargly monsters, and that's clearly the role orcs are intended to fill. I could see playing an orc with a grand ambition to overthrow the orcish and goblinoid gods and make a new, perfect orc society.

Anyway, it seems kind of sour grapes to complain that Goliaths overlap with your homebrewed orc race.

[Ralanr]

I don't love that the default fluff for orcs is the same as the drow insofar as 'they are evil because of evil micromanaging deities.' Still, sometimes you just need an argly bargly monsters, and that's clearly the role orcs are intended to fill. I could see playing an orc with a grand ambition to overthrow the orcish and goblinoid gods and make a new, perfect orc society.

Anyway, it seems kind of sour grapes to complain that Goliaths overlap with your homebrewed orc race.

Oh it is, and I’m not saying I’d go out of my way to change them. I just find them boring and won’t go out of my way to play them.

It’s not like having them exist makes me want to stop playing the game or anything.

[Nifft]

It’s not like having them exist makes me want to stop playing the game or anything.

Yeah they're not Kender.

[supergoji18]

Yeah they're not Kender.

Can someone explain to me what Kender are?

[strangebloke]

Can someone explain to me what Kender are?
Dragonlance race.

They're small. They're extreme kleptomaniacs. They're childlike and full of wonder and don't/can't understand why stealing is wrong. So you can be good and steak from the party and no one can fault you.

They can, however, kill your character, and probably will.

[Pex]

Can someone explain to me what Kender are?

Halflings of the Dragonlance story but lacking the capacity to understand that taking things is wrong. The Dragonlance game tells you to steal anything and everything from everyone, i.e. to be a Jerk.

[Willie the Duck]

Can someone explain to me what Kender are?

The original attempt to re-image Halfling (-like races) as something other than Hobbit-lights (back before the Jackson films which made hobbits cool (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hobbit_(1977_film))).

They had personality traits which were relatively fun for a single character in a trilogy of novels, but make no sense for a whole race, and seem custom-built to give everyone's most annoying players license to play in a way that is chaotic-stupid in the most frustrating ways possible. They give Drizzt a run for his money for most-hated D&D-ism of the TSR era.

[Tanarii]

Yeah they're not Kender.Tasslehoff Burrfoot is one of my favorite novel characters of young-adulthood.

He / Kender in general / Halfling played Kender-like, are also a primary example of why RPGs don't work like stories. :smallamused:

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

They're also immune to fear. That, plus the mandated kleptomania, makes a potent mixture of perverse incentives. The big arc updating the Dragonlance world to 3E introduced 'afflicted' kender, which are kender who've experienced so much trauma that they lose the fearlessness and the random acts of thievery - that is, kender who are supposed to play like normal PCs.

[KorvinStarmast]

They {Kender} give Drizzt a run for his money for most-hated D&D-ism of the TSR era. Yeah, and then they sprinted past him.

As to Goliaths: some people have an aversion to playing half orcs. A goliath is a nice sub for something like a half orc or an orc, in terms of being exotic, if you are keen on playing something that isn't human and is a barbarian. In our current tier 3 campaign the MC barbarian/druid goliath is great fun to play with. It helps that the player has put some thought into how this all works together.

[JakOfAllTirades]

Can someone explain to me what Kender are?

They're the poster children for PvP. Also, kill them and take their stuff. Because some of it's probably your stuff.

Usually the race chosen by the kid at the table who needs too much attention.

[Ali_face]

Its worth noting that Tasslehoff was particularly lax on personal property rights more-so than most Kender.

But like D'rizzt, he became the poster-child for "how to play a Kender" leading to a million clones of his mentality and attitude.

I like how they folded Kender into Halflings in 3E, and even retained their resistance to fear... Hobbits are never cool, nothing Jackson did changed that.

[Tanarii]

I like how they folded Kender into Halflings in 3E, and even retained their resistance to fear... Hobbits are never cool, nothing Jackson did changed that.Yup. Kender were a breathe of fresh air compared to Hobbits. Then they became annoying because they're an asshat magnet, the same was Assassins were in 1e. But 3e made Halflings awesome, exactly because they took all the best parts of Kender, and threw away all the stuff that made them an asshat magnet.

[Dankus Memakus]

I literally despise gnomes. Nothing about gnomes makes me think they are cool. Like you have a party of all these epic characters AND the gnome. A garden gnome. I really have tried to like them I just can't. They bug me. To be fair though some of my bias stems from the stupid WoW gnomes. Ugh.

[Arkhios]

Yup. Kender were a breathe of fresh air compared to Hobbits. Then they became annoying because they're an asshat magnet, the same was Assassins were in 1e. But 3e made Halflings awesome, exactly because they took all the best parts of Kender, and threw away all the stuff that made them an asshat magnet.

As an aside, Halfling (apparently since 3rd edition; never played a halfling before that) is my favorite of the small races, hands down. I like their "attitude". Despite being small, they are just as "big" and "strong" as the taller races.

[Drascin]

I genuinely never minded kender. I've never had any problems with people playing kender. They can get a bit tiresome, but so can stereotypical elf haughtiness and the like. Now people playing rangers, on the other hand, hoo boy. Talk about a class that attracts the worst "I am a grr loner survivalist and will leave the party to hang whenever the hell I want with no reason and require everyone to keep contriving reasons for me so my character actually plays" types.

Anyway, for most boring race, I kinda have to go with all the Genasi. They've always been boring, and far as I can tell no writer has managed to make them anything other than weirdly colored humans. 5E is no different in this regard.

[Jrocc]

I hate the flavour of the kobalds. The fact that they are forced to be cowardly through their racial abilities kind of blocks player creativity I think, and more people would play them if they didn’t have such negative stats! Also the fact that the half elf drow basically has the drow’s positive abilities while not being bothered by the sunlight sensitivity pretty much makes the drow pointless now too.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

I literally despise gnomes. Nothing about gnomes makes me think they are cool. Like you have a party of all these epic characters AND the gnome. A garden gnome. I really have tried to like them I just can't. They bug me. To be fair though some of my bias stems from the stupid WoW gnomes. Ugh.

I always wanted D and D to adopt Shanara-style gnomes.

[Tanarii]

I literally despise gnomes. Nothing about gnomes makes me think they are cool. Like you have a party of all these epic characters AND the gnome. A garden gnome. I really have tried to like them I just can't. They bug me. To be fair though some of my bias stems from the stupid WoW gnomes. Ugh.I suggest a reread of the 5e PHB description on them, keeping in mind D&D gnomes originated as a kind of magical-capable & good natured dwarf/elf hybrid, and not WoW-steam-punk squeaky-voices gnomes.

[supergoji18]

As I mentioned before, I started my reimagining of the races voted to be the most boring mechanically. I've started with the goliath, and have posted it in the Homebrew forum: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?555874-Reimagined-Races-Part-1-Goliath&p=22984503#post22984503

[mephnick]

not WoW-steam-punk squeaky-voices gnomes.

WoW basically ruined everything. Now everyone under 25 thinks Gnomes are steam-punk and orcs are misunderstood.

[Nifft]

WoW basically ruined everything. Now everyone under 25 thinks Gnomes are steam-punk and orcs are misunderstood.

In reality, of course, it's the orcs who are steam-punk, and the gnomes who are misunderstood.

[mr-mercer]

WoW basically ruined everything. Now everyone under 25 thinks Gnomes are steam-punk and orcs are misunderstood.

I mean, technically this means the orcs are misunderstood, just on a more meta level than they were expecting.

[Knaight]

WoW basically ruined everything. Now everyone under 25 thinks Gnomes are steam-punk and orcs are misunderstood.

A similar case could be made about LotR and how it changed elves and dwarves from previous interpretations.

[supergoji18]

A similar case could be made about LotR and how it changed elves and dwarves from previous interpretations.

not quite, since Tolkien's intention with them was to return them to a way people interpreted them before the "modernized" idea of elves and dwarves came out (i.e. christmas elves and dwarves that were more like trolls).

[Knaight]

not quite, since Tolkien's intention with them was to return them to a way people interpreted them before the "modernized" idea of elves and dwarves came out (i.e. christmas elves and dwarves that were more like trolls).

Regardless of whether or not that was his intention, that's not what happened - there wasn't a single standardized elf or dwarf before the "modernized" ideas, and that plethora of conflicting mythologies effectively got standardized. The same thing applies.

[2D8HP]

A similar case could be made about LotR and how it changed elves and dwarves from previous interpretations.


not quite, since Tolkien's intention with them was to return them to a way people interpreted them before the "modernized" idea of elves and dwarves came out (i.e. christmas elves and dwarves that were more like trolls).


Regardless of whether or not that was his intention, that's not what happened - there wasn't a single standardized elf or dwarf before the "modernized" ideas, and that plethora of conflicting mythologies effectively got standardized. The same thing applies.


Besides folklore, I quite prefer the Elves in the 1920's to '50's stories of Poul Anderson, Lord Dunsany, and Hope Mirrless to those angelic Elves of Tolkien.

Fortunately after Tolkien some newer writers have made works that retain grander and restore the menace of the Elves (http://allthetropes.wikia.com/wiki/The_Fair_Folk).

[EvilAnagram]

not quite, since Tolkien's intention with them was to return them to a way people interpreted them before the "modernized" idea of elves and dwarves came out (i.e. christmas elves and dwarves that were more like trolls).
This is entirely inaccurate. The elves of folklore bear some things in common with Tolkien's take on them, but they are not noble, angelic beings. Depending on the region and time, they can be anything from Keebler-esque helper spirits to menaces that kidnap, murder, and afflict livestock with illnesses. The noblest, most angelic depictions of them portray them as temptresses and rapists.

I believe the oldest text that mentions them is a medical text that included a mention of them as causing illness in livestock, so the original elf is mad cow disease.

[supergoji18]

This is entirely inaccurate. The elves of folklore bear some things in common with Tolkien's take on them, but they are not noble, angelic beings. Depending on the region and time, they can be anything from Keebler-esque helper spirits to menaces that kidnap, murder, and afflict livestock with illnesses. The noblest, most angelic depictions of them portray them as temptresses and rapists.

I believe the oldest text that mentions them is a medical text that included a mention of them as causing illness in livestock, so the original elf is mad cow disease.

Perhaps I wasn't clear in what I said. What I meant was that Tolkien intended to bring back the sense of awe and reverence the elves evoked, as opposed to them being the joke they had become compared to their original interpretations.

[EvilAnagram]

Perhaps I wasn't clear in what I said. What I meant was that Tolkien intended to bring back the sense of awe and reverence the elves evoked, as opposed to them being the joke they had become compared to their original interpretations.

That's fair.

[galaxia]

I literally despise gnomes. Nothing about gnomes makes me think they are cool. Like you have a party of all these epic characters AND the gnome. A garden gnome. I really have tried to like them I just can't. They bug me. To be fair though some of my bias stems from the stupid WoW gnomes. Ugh.

That's the point. Gnomes are lighthearted instead of the BIG BAD TOUGH STUFF that is all over tabletop RP. They're for the player who wants to be a bit whimsical instead of BIG BAD TOUGH STUFF all the time.

I'll take a mundane garden gnome with a silly pointy hat over the overly self-important overproduced superhero folk that are so much in vogue these days. Sometimes it's more fun to be epic rather than look it.

Looking at these comments I see a lot of people basically saying "I hate it when other people aren't me!". Not everyone is going to have your personal taste and Tolkien also doesn't have a monopoly on fantasy.

That said, though, I'm not particularly impressed by macho stuff like Dragonborn, Tiefling, and BLOOD HUNTER. Overly Macho stuff puts me to sleep, and that includes "super tough bad girl" characters, too.

When critiquing the so-called races (really, they're species) — people should decide if they want to focus on crunch (the dreaded "rollplaying") or on flavor (the thing that so many say they think is important but...)

[Nifft]

the so-called races (really, they're species)

My magical robots aren't a species.

My asexual mutated psionic ex-human aberrations aren't a species.

"Race" might be dumb and inaccurate, but "species" is no less dumb, no more accurate, and adds the malus of being unfamiliar.

[Finback]

i don't love that the default fluff for orcs is the same as the drow insofar as 'they are evil because of evil micromanaging deities.'

gruumsh one-eye need you to come in on weekend. No overtime.

[Finback]

In reality, of course, it's the orcs who are steam-punk, and the gnomes who are misunderstood.

Funnily, I *sort of* did this in a campaign. The party met up with a mad lich (Chaotic Neutral, far more interested in his mad science projects, like creating a city for the free undead, uncovering the modron ruins*, and developing insane projects**. Amongst his guests were a half-orc barbarian, and a gnome artificier - who had been mind swapped by a trap. So now you've got a gnome with a steampunk arm trying to lift a greataxe, and a half-orc who is frustrated that his fingers are too unwieldy to manipulate his tools.

* Which was going to lead to this synthesis of the two groups, because we all need a city of pure weirdness now and then
** which would lead to the big Final Battle of the campaign, in which the party has to *awaken* the Tarrasque as the last valid option against the Cthulhu-With-The-Serials-Filed-Off. The skies would be dark with terrible, winged Horrors From Beyond The Stars - at which point, Krarius the Mad would descend upon the back of a huge skeletal dragon, followed by his army of hyper-fast spinning skeletal paratroopers. THE SKELECHOPTERS.

[Knaight]

Looking at these comments I see a lot of people basically saying "I hate it when other people aren't me!". Not everyone is going to have your personal taste and Tolkien also doesn't have a monopoly on fantasy.

Tolkien doesn't have a monopoly on fantasy - which is a great reason to stop pulling up the old elves/dwarves/orc trifecta over and over.

[Nifft]

at which point, Krarius the Mad would descend upon the back of a huge skeletal dragon, followed by his army of hyper-fast spinning skeletal paratroopers. THE SKELECHOPTERS.

Oh my gods that sounds awesome.

NECROPUNK.

Until right now, I never knew how badly I needed that in a game.

[Willie the Duck]

Looking at these comments I see a lot of people basically saying "I hate it when other people aren't me!". Not everyone is going to have your personal taste and Tolkien also doesn't have a monopoly on fantasy.

That said, though, I'm not particularly impressed by macho stuff like Dragonborn, Tiefling, and BLOOD HUNTER. Overly Macho stuff puts me to sleep, and that includes "super tough bad girl" characters, too.


You are aware that you put a 'not everyone is going to have your personal taste' statement one sentence before deriding other people for their tastes, yes?

[CantigThimble]

I mean, I think the whole point of this thread is for people to say what races are the furthest outside of their personal taste. That was the point wasn't it? :smallconfused:

[2D8HP]

You are aware that you put a 'not everyone is going to have your personal taste' statement one sentence before deriding other people for their tastes, yes?


Well 'e did say "That said, though..."

'sides, if you can't proclaim your own tastes as "AWESOME! " and contrary tastes as "objectively LAME!" what's a Forum for?

Civil discourse and sharing of information?

Where's the sport?