"Customizing your Origin in D&D"

[LudicSavant]

"The average orc is stronger but dumber than the average elf" is totally a tangible in-world thing.

The fact that this particular orc PC has 15 Int tells me absolutely nothing about the average orc or average elf, neither of which have that, and neither of which are PCs, and neither of which need to be generated with PC character creation rules.

However, if I see an orc with 24 Strength right out the gate, that tells me that that is a possible Strength score for a natural orc to have in the world. That's the difference. The information that can be directly inferred from the character's in-world existence.

And please, please don't tell me that the fluff represented is that they had to 'work harder' to get where they are. Does someone who is unusually tall for their race have to start short and work harder to be tall? Do we say that a Wizard requires more XP to level up because they have to work harder to than a Sorcerer? That's not how anything works.

[king_steve]

Because 'the strongest orc is stronger than the strongest human' is a tangible in-world thing.

Isn't this represented by the Powerful Build feature?

[LudicSavant]

Isn't this represented by the Powerful Build feature?

Yep. That is a tangible fluff thing.

[KorvinStarmast]

But then again, I like drow. Possibly because I completely rewrote their lore.

Then they aren't drow, they are word, or something else, in the context of this discussion.

Why no Small races with 2H Versatile weapons?

They can already use versatile weapons with two hands: long sword, battle axe, quarter staff. It's in the PHB, and they can try to use the Maul or Great Axe and attack with disadvantage. That's also in the PHB.

Power combo: an Eldritch Knight contracts lycanthropy from a werebear, then transforms to hybrid form (Large size). He Reduces a Fire Giant's sword to Large size so he can wield it, then attacks with it for 6d6-1d4 damage per hit.

Seriously, Enlarge/Reduce makes no sense.

And why not? Cheese is delicious. But it is still cheese.

What's the point of races at all at that point? Just cosmetic value?

Here's an idea: there isn't one.

[LudicSavant]

Then they aren't drow, they are word, or something else, in the context of this discussion.

I also like Eberron drow. Do those get to count?

[Boci]

The fact that this particular orc PC has 15 Int tells me absolutely nothing about the average orc or average elf, neither of which have that.

Yes, smart high-elves are also smarter than orc or half-orcs, or wood elves for that matter. Again, totally tangible in-world fluff backed by mechanics.

And please, please don't tell me that the fluff represented is that they had to 'work harder' to get where they are. Does someone who is unusually tall for their race have to start short and work harder to be tall? Do we say that a Wizard requires more XP to level up because they have to work harder to than a Sorcerer? That's not how anything works.

Except for half-orc and orc wizards it totally is how D&D 5e worked until now, years after its publication.

Again, not a problem if you like new rule, but you seem to be convinced its been a long time coming when it might just be a one off, "here, go nuts". I guess we won't find out until 6th ed drops.

[LudicSavant]

Yes, smart high-elves are also smarter than orc or half-orcs, or wood elves for that matter. Again, totally tangible in-world fluff backed by mechanics.

You're not following me here.

If I observe an individual orc PC, and I see that they have 15 Int, I don't have any information about 'average orcs' or the orc race in general other than that 15 Int is a possible stat for them to have. I cannot scientifically deduce that an average orc has 15 Int (or any other Int score) from this. I can't even do it if I measure every single orc NPC in the world because they didn't get generated with PC creation rules.

[x3n0n]

"The average orc is stronger but dumber than the average elf" is totally a tangible in-world thing.

So now this goes back to their stated rationale, doesn't it? The race ability score modifiers as printed in PHB may reflect average differences between populations. Let's stipulate that they do.

Where is the logical link that says those numbers *should* have any effect on the creation of a PC, especially in a world where you can already rearrange your array?

If we want to go back to "roll your dice, the first one is Str", then maybe you could use racial ability modifiers over many characters to simulate a population. But who cares about that? Modern D&D character creation philosophy is not about taking the hand you're dealt, it's about creating the character concept you want to play.

I've actually talked myself into the "floating +2/+1 or modifiers as printed" camp. (With "modifiers as printed" as a concession to people who really want a race with an unusual modifier like Mountain Dwarf, Half-Elf, or Triton.)

Thanks to all for a stimulating discussion and for helping me understand my feelings on this.

[sambojin]

So, Firbolgs now get +2Wis, +1Con (or Dex or Cha), Powerful Build (for 240lb dump-stat carry), and Common/ Primordial/ Sylvan so they can talk to all their druid summons at character creation. Nice :)

Edit: yes I did mean Con. 👇
Oh, and they get plenty of short rest racial casting as well. To tell you the truth, they'd make fine wizards as well now, with Int/ Con.

Overall, I like the changes, both from a character creation perspective and from a power-gaming one.

[x3n0n]

So, Firbolgs now get +2Wis, +1Dex (or Cha), Powerful Build (for 240lb dump-stat carry), and Common/ Primordial/ Sylvan so they can talk to all their druid summons at character creation. Nice :)

Aside: did you mean Con or Cha? I'd usually take Con there.

Also: yes, that seems nice. :)

[Boci]

So now this goes back to their stated rationale, doesn't it? The race ability score modifiers as printed in PHB may reflect average differences between populations. Let's stipulate that they do.

Where is the logical link that says those numbers *should* have any effect on the creation of a PC, especially in a world where you can already rearrange your array?

Because I don't believe in divorcing PCs from the fluff of the races they come from. They're already exceptional, making them more, especially at the cost of weakening their cultural link to existing factions of the world, isn't something I'd like in most games. Hardly a deal breaker, but not my preference.

Its not just average. The average elf is more graceful than the average orc. The clumsy elf, is still more graceful, or less clumsy than, the clumsy orc, and an exceptionally graceful elf is more graceful than an exceptionally graceful orc. And then there is a cieling mortals reach, where by the orc can catch up to the elf, though it will take them longer.

At the same time I'm not completly opposed to floating stat bonuses. I gave half-orcs in my game +2 strength and +1 to any other score, since half-elf's got the same (except better).

[MaxWilson]

You're not following me here.

If I observe an individual orc PC, and I see that they have 15 Int, I don't have any information about 'average orcs' or the orc race in general other than that 15 Int is a possible stat for them to have. I cannot scientifically deduce that an average orc has 15 Int (or any other Int score) from this. I can't even do it if I measure every single orc NPC in the world because they didn't get generated with PC creation rules.

Bold assertion. How do you know this?

The DMG certainly encourages DMs to create NPCs using PHB rules, so they aren't PC creation rules in the first place. They're just character creation rules, for Player Characters and Non-Player Characters alike, although Non-Player Characters are allowed to be created in other ways as well including DM fiat.

The only way it would be true that none of the NPCs in the world got created via PHB methods would be if the DM of the world in question flatly refuses to do so, doesn't use modules/NPCs created by other DMs, and doesn't allow retired PCs to be converted into NPCs.

[LudicSavant]

Bold assertion. How do you know this?

Because the book outright told me so.

[MaxWilson]

Because the book outright told me so.

My DMG says the opposite. AFB so I can't give quotes, but it says in at least two places that PHB rules are valid for NPCs as well as PCs, and it even gives examples of NPC-only classes for NPCs created using PHB methods.

What does your DMG say?

[LudicSavant]

So now this goes back to their stated rationale, doesn't it? The race ability score modifiers as printed in PHB may reflect average differences between populations. Let's stipulate that they do.

Where is the logical link that says those numbers *should* have any effect on the creation of a PC, especially in a world where you can already rearrange your array?

If we want to go back to "roll your dice, the first one is Str", then maybe you could use racial ability modifiers over many characters to simulate a population. But who cares about that? Modern D&D character creation philosophy is not about taking the hand you're dealt, it's about creating the character concept you want to play.

I've actually talked myself into the "floating +2/+1 or modifiers as printed" camp. (With "modifiers as printed" as a concession to people who really want a race with an unusual modifier like Mountain Dwarf, Half-Elf, or Triton.)

Thanks to all for a stimulating discussion and for helping me understand my feelings on this.

This guy gets it.

In general, features are not costed by their 'deviation from averageness.' They're costed by their power level.

So for example, it doesn't matter if Batman is the rarest human being ever and Superman is a relatively average Kryptonian, if we're playing a Superheroes RPG odds are Superman is the more expensive character to make.

My DMG says the opposite. AFB so I can't give quotes, but it says in at least two places that PHB rules are valid for NPCs as well as PCs, and it even gives examples of NPC-only classes for NPCs created using PHB methods.

What does your DMG say?

To paraphrase, my books say that PCs are special and extraordinary, but that it's valid for you to make special NPCs using the same methods, in addition to a variety of other methods of creating NPCs that are not the PC creation rules. And then it gives you a way to make some very much NOT average people, like Death Clerics and Oathbreaker Paladins.

[Boci]

You're not following me here.

If I observe an individual orc PC, and I see that they have 15 Int, I don't have any information about 'average orcs' or the orc race in general other than that 15 Int is a possible stat for them to have. I cannot scientifically deduce that an average orc has 15 Int (or any other Int score) from this. I can't even do it if I measure every single orc NPC in the world because they didn't get generated with PC creation rules.

Right, but the highelf in the same situation would have 16 intelligence, because highelves are smarter than orcs not just at the average but also at the low end and high end (before the mortal cap), and whilst PCs are exceptional members of their race, they are still members of their race.

The orc being exceptional is measured in their 15 intelligence, which as you point out, is above average for their race.

[Evaar]

Orcs have a bonus to Strength and Con because Tolkien described orcs as being Strong and Tough. The Orcs in something like Warfcraft or The Forgotten Realms are first and foremost derivative of Tolkein's Orcs, and the Phb Statblock is a reflection of that archetype.

Warcraft is actually a great example of why the floating ASIs are generally a better way to go.

For one, racial stats matter exactly not at all for player characters. You care about racial abilities, but your starting stats are completely trivial right from the beginning. A Gnome makes just as good a Warrior as a Tauren.

But also, look at individual races in Warcraft and take a look at some of the characters within those races. Sticking with Orcs, if we take a look at someone like Garrosh - a low Wisdom, extremely high Strength, high Charisma Fighter - he presents a big contrast to someone like Thrall - a high Wisdom, medium Charisma, high-ish Strength Nature Cleric (not Druid, Thrall doesn't shapeshift). Thrall is one of the best in the world at what he does, even though in D&D he wouldn't have a Wisdom boost. The end result of that is that he wouldn't be able to afford room for something like Warcaster, which he should clearly have, or Inspiring Leader. Instead the current D&D system incentivizes him to either waste ASIs with an odd score, or to choose a non-thematic half-feat like Observant so he doesn't end up with a dangling 17 or whatever in Strength. Because 20 Wisdom isn't really negotiable when you're playing a Wisdom-based class.

Currently, the game rewards Garrosh for leaning in to his racial stereotype and punishes Thrall for leaning against it. And it doesn't do it in an interesting way - you can't outsmart it or play around it (with some exceptions made possible through spell choice), you just are less effective because your resources are all dedicated towards catching up.

If I had my way, we'd ditch racial ability modifiers entirely and just provide things like Fire Resistance or Relentless Endurance or Bonus Cantrip to flavor the physiologies and cultures of the races. Class preferences should be based on synergies with those features, not just an outright mathematical advantage. But that's tougher design requiring more creativity than just writing +1 To Thing, so it doesn't get done as often.

If we want to go back to "roll your dice, the first one is Str", then maybe you could use racial ability modifiers over many characters to simulate a population. But who cares about that? Modern D&D character creation philosophy is not about taking the hand you're dealt, it's about creating the character concept you want to play.

Extremely this.

And please, please don't tell me that the fluff represented is that they had to 'work harder' to get where they are. Does someone who is unusually tall for their race have to start short and work harder to be tall? Do we say that a Wizard requires more XP to level up because they have to work harder to than a Sorcerer? That's not how anything works.

And this! Why is my Mark of the Storm Half-Elf Storm Herald Barbarian not just allowed to be a big beefy boy because he was born a big beefy boy? Maybe his grandpa was The Rock, and The Rock's half-elf kid hooked up with a Lyrandar heir, and now I'm The Rock's grandson and I have the Mark of Storm.

[BRC]

At the same time I'm not completly opposed to floating stat bonuses. I gave half-orcs in my game +2 strength and +1 to any other score, since half-elf's got the same (except better).

to be honest, this seems like the way to do it?

Part of the reason racial bonuses are such a big deal in 5e is that they're the only way to break the point buy starting cap of 15, and the difference between starting at 15 vs 16 is the difference between needing 2 vs 3 ASI's to reach 20, as well as the difference between a +2 vs a +3 in your primary stat at the crucial early levels.

Starting at 17 means you need 1 ASI, and half of another, which is still better than starting at 16, but doesn't feel as big a difference, since you need the same number of ASIs to reach 20.

If you rework every race into "Set a +2 and a floating +1", then anybody can get to 16 in any stat at level 1. You still have the idea that some races are better at starting with certain stats higher than others (with all the implications therein), but the metric of "How many ASIs does it take for you to get +5 in your primary stat" would be less of a factor, and that's my primary mechanical beef with inherent racial bonuses.

Heck, we could even do it like so if you want to lean multiple directions for some races

Orcs: +2 to Str OR Con, +1 to any other stat
Dwarves: +2 to Con or Wis, +1 to any other stat
Elves: +2 to Dex or Int, +1 to any other stat
Halflings: +2 to Dex or Int, +1 to any other stat
Gnomes: +2 to Con or Int, +1 to any other stat

This means we're still leaning into the idea of racial bonuses, which is something that WoTC seems to want to get away from, but it sands the edges off the most egregious flaws in the current system IMO.

[Boci]

to be honest, this seems like the way to do it?

Sure. I personally limit it to half-orcs and half-elves (I guess regular humans technically have the same in that they have a floating +1 to all stats), because I like the theme of half-breeds being the most versatile races because they spend their lives between two world, not belonging to one entirely, but sure it could expanded to other races to, and yeah, there's nothing wrong with the argument "my dwarf has never felt they belong for reasons unrelated to their genetics". That's a valid aspect to have on any character.

I certainly would be more inclined to make an accepting and give one floating state to any other race, rather than both.

[x3n0n]

Because I don't believe in divorcing PCs from the fluff of the races they come from. They're already exceptional, making them more, especially at the cost of weakening their cultural link to existing factions of the world, isn't something I'd like in most games. Hardly a deal breaker, but not my preference.

Fair. As a half-time DM, I would rather give my daughters the chance to point-buy the race/class character concepts they want with good effectiveness even in low-level games, even knowing that it makes their characters even more atypical. Life is short enough as it is.

The clumsy elf, is still more graceful, or less clumsy than, the clumsy orc, and an exceptionally graceful elf is more graceful than an exceptionally graceful orc.

I see this point, I think, which manifests as "some elves start with Dex 20, but no orcs do". I don't think it bothers me enough to dislike these rules, especially since we generally do a generous array (16/14/13/12/10/9, per anydice.com) or an equivalent point buy, so rolled 18s plus 2 are already off the table. (In fact, I think I would have suggested standard point buy with floating +2/+1 if it had already been in dndbeyond when we started our last campaign.)

[Amnestic]

Thrall - a high Wisdom, medium Charisma, high-ish Strength Nature Cleric (not Druid, Thrall doesn't shapeshift)

Thrall does shapeshift, specifically into Ghost Wolf form.

My +1 vhuman ability score went into nitpicking.

[Boci]

Fair. As a half-time DM, I would rather give my daughters the chance to point-buy the race/class character concepts they want with good effectiveness even in low-level games, even knowing that it makes their characters even more atypical. Life is short enough as it is.

In my expirience at least, new players are waaay less likely to avoid a race + class combination because the stat bonuses don't match up. I've seen a new player make a sorceror with higher dex than charisma, knowing sorcerors cast off charisma.

Thrall does shapeshift, specifically into Ghost Wolf form.

My +1 vhuman ability score went into nitpicking.

One of your +1 vhuman ability score bonuses. You get two and you can't put them both in nitpicking.

[Segev]

Where is the logical link that says those numbers *should* have any effect on the creation of a PC, especially in a world where you can already rearrange your array?

It's the exact same logical link that says that a halfling should have luck as a racial feature while a goblin should have the ability to hide or disengage as a bonus action as a racial feature, and not have this be interchangeable. After all, PCs are exceptional, right? Why can't a halfling just use goblin stats and still be a halfling?

Why can't a bear of a human use Goliath stats and still be just a very tall human?

Why can't my High Elf ranger be good with crossbows and rapiers and see extra-far in the dark rather than getting a bonus cantrip?

Why can't my drow sorcerer be proficient in light armor and have +2 Cha and +2 Dex without being short and stout and bearded and not a drow?

Where's the logic that says that these exceptional PCs have to have anything at all in common with the races they claim to be part of?

[LudicSavant]

Right, but the highelf in the same situation would have 16 intelligence

The same metagame situation.

The fact that guy A and guy B rolled the same, but ended up with different stats, is a purely metagame event as ephemeral as whether or not Miko literally had the word "Samurai" in the name of her Class.

It does not matter from an in-world perspective what out-of-game steps you took to arrive at the in-game result. Guy A could have just rolled 1 higher. The in-world characters don't know what "rolling stats" is.

Does Guy A suddenly 'make the game have less flavor" if they rolled 1 higher and thus had the same Int as the highelf?

In-world, I do not know or care whether they got the 16 Int by using the Tasha's variant, or by rolling 1 higher for stats.

[Boci]

Why can't my High Elf ranger be good with crossbows and rapiers and see extra-far in the dark rather than getting a bonus cantrip?

I actually have played a wood-elf ranger and the DM agreed to let me have superior darkvision and sunlight sensistivity. It was fluffed as his parents being taken in a drow raid so he had spent most of his life below the surface hunting them.

The same metagame situation.

If you'rte rolling sure. I was assuming point buy, in which case the 15 represented the peak of what either race was capable of, and the elf was 16 because the smartest elf that is inexpirienced enough to be level 1 is smarter than the smartest in the same situation.

[sambojin]

Heck, we could even do it like so if you want to lean multiple directions for some races

Orcs: +2 to Str OR Con, +1 to any other stat
Dwarves: +2 to Con or Wis, +1 to any other stat
Elves: +2 to Dex or Int, +1 to any other stat
Halflings: +2 to Dex or Int, +1 to any other stat
Gnomes: +2 to Con or Int, +1 to any other stat

This means we're still leaning into the idea of racial bonuses, which is something that WoTC seems to want to get away from, but it sands the edges off the most egregious flaws in the current system IMO.

I think that's the point of the openness of the Tasha change. It's easy to make a Garrosh, but not a Thrall, with the PHB chassis. And while by-and-large races do fit their stereotypes in the default settings if the DM wants them to, PCs are by default "incredibly exceptionally OP individuals". Ones that are min-maxed beyond the ken of most mortal NPCs.

I mean, I see both sides of the argument (and I even like your system of options). But I don't think allowing the freedoms in the Tasha's system makes entire races vanilla/ window dressing, it just makes PCs more powerful at character creation, while giving DMs some credible NPC creation rules for their own characters. And PCs were pretty powerful to begin with, there were just roadblocks in the way of being a truly awesome Thrall, for no massive reason for their being so (any more than asking your DM "hey, I know my character sheet says he's a Firbolg, but he's really an Orc. Are you cool with that?").

[Segev]

I actually have played a wood-elf ranger and the DM agreed to let me have superior darkvision and sunlight sensistivity. It was fluffed as his parents being taken in a drow raid so he had spent most of his life below the surface hunting them.

As I've mentioned elsewhere, I am ironically more okay with that kind of reskinning than the generic malleability that's been introduced by Tasha's.

And if you're fine with it in general, then more power to you. All I'm saying is that the logic people are using to say that exceptional PCs mean that there's no need to have stat mods mean anything can be applied to literally every racial trait.

[sambojin]

As I've mentioned elsewhere, I am ironically more okay with that kind of reskinning than the generic malleability that's been introduced by Tasha's.

And if you're fine with it in general, then more power to you. All I'm saying is that the logic people are using to say that exceptional PCs mean that there's no need to have stat mods mean anything can be applied to literally every racial trait.

True. Maybe in 6th there'll be an option for that. And we could buy even more skins as a paid DLC.
(oh, wait. That's what this is, isn't it? OK, never mind, it's in 5th already. But it was free :)
You just have to convince your DM that your Halfling is in-fact a Goblin. So + points for player/ DM interaction.)

[x3n0n]

It's the exact same logical link that says that a halfling should have luck as a racial feature while a goblin should have the ability to hide or disengage as a bonus action as a racial feature, and not have this be interchangeable.

It's slightly different, though. All D&D 5e creatures have 6 ability scores, generally ranging from 3 to 20. Needing a way to assign those 6 numbers is universal.

Other characteristics are not universal, and are governed by different rules.

As I mentioned earlier, I am significantly less comfortable with trading initial proficiencies, which actually change what is possible rather than selecting favorite spaces in the possibility space. I think (for example) that dwarven weapon proficiency and tool proficiency were intended to be almost ribbons, and now they aren't. I'll take it, but I'll side-eye at folks who don't have a coherent story about why they are burglar/herbalist/poisoners.

In reality, I think we are eventually headed toward a D&D next-next world where character creation looks more like Variant Human or Half-Elf, and the existing races are just named bundles of mix & match features with some kind of point-buy mechanic. Creating a race looks more like creating a custom background, but with way more mechanical relevance.

[Evaar]

I think that's the point of the openness of the Tasha change. It's easy to make a Garrosh, but not a Thrall, with the PHB chassis. And while by-and-large races do fit their stereotypes in the default settings if the DM wants them to, PCs are by default "incredibly exceptionally OP individuals". Ones that are min-maxed beyond the ken of most mortal NPCs.

I mean, I see both sides of the argument (and I even like your system of options). But I don't think allowing the freedoms in the Tasha's system makes entire races vanilla/ window dressing, it just makes PCs more powerful at character creation, while giving DMs some credible NPC creation rules for their own characters. And PCs were pretty powerful to begin with, there were just roadblocks in the way of being a truly awesome Thrall, for no massive reason for their being so (any more than asking your DM "hey, I know my character sheet says he's a Firbolg, but he's really an Orc. Are you cool with that?").

EvilJackNicholsonYes.gif