New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 172
  1. - Top - End - #61
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2018

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
    I would say it's the complete opposite and is actually very smart design wise because now the racial features actually matter. Pre-Tasha's the most important consideration for race was the stat bonuses, the racial features were secondary at best and often had little to no impact since if they didn't lineup with the class focus they were useless/never used. Now with floating ASIs the most important consideration are those racial features and so you can get creative with race/class combinations in a way you couldn't before.
    That's not universally true. I have seen plenty of players that valued some racial traits (like darkvision) above the ability modifiers and they have selected races with less than ideal ASMs so they could get those other traits. I have also seen players avoid mechanically strong options (like a hobgoblin wizard) because of the roleplaying issues they might cause.

  2. - Top - End - #62
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2019

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Quote Originally Posted by HappyDaze View Post
    That's not universally true. I have seen plenty of players that valued some racial traits (like darkvision) above the ability modifiers and they have selected races with less than ideal ASMs so they could get those other traits. I have also seen players avoid mechanically strong options (like a hobgoblin wizard) because of the roleplaying issues they might cause.
    Sure it's not universally true but the point remains. In fact in even highlights why it's actually quite smart solution rather then a lazy change. A player selecting a race for mechanical reasons benefits from floating ASIs because it opens up more options and makes racial features more prominent. A player selecting a race for RP reasons also benefits from floating ASIs since the character isn't being hindered (Relatively) for going with a non-standard race/class choice.

  3. - Top - End - #63
    Titan in the Playground
     
    KorvinStarmast's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Texas
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Quote Originally Posted by HappyDaze View Post
    and not all DMs use/allow the variant human.
    1. My first 5e DM (2014) did not allow vHuman(at all) nor feats (until 4th level) as we began the game. But a year later, when he was DMing in a shared world with me, those prohibitions were off when the three DMs agreed that there was no reason for our group to have such a restriction.
    2. My most recent campaign GM does not allow vHuman. So, my bard is a regular human. It works.
    3. I have always allowed vHuman as a DM, but very few of my players have chosen it.
    Last edited by KorvinStarmast; 2021-06-06 at 12:58 PM.
    Avatar by linklele. How Teleport Works
    a. Malifice (paraphrased):
    Rulings are not 'House Rules.' Rulings are a DM doing what DMs are supposed to do.
    b. greenstone (paraphrased):
    Agency means that they {players} control their character's actions; you control the world's reactions to the character's actions.
    Gosh, 2D8HP, you are so very correct!
    Second known member of the Greyview Appreciation Society

  4. - Top - End - #64
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2008

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
    I would say it's the complete opposite and is actually very smart design wise because now the racial features actually matter. Pre-Tasha's the most important consideration for race was the stat bonuses, the racial features were secondary at best and often had little to no impact since if they didn't lineup with the class focus they were useless/never used. Now with floating ASIs the most important consideration are those racial features and so you can get creative with race/class combinations in a way you couldn't before.
    I'd agree, if they actually went through and remade the racial features to be balanced with each other regardless of ASIs.

    And if they actually made the changes fit the fluff of the races. Yes elves have excellent vision and hearing but now we can turn their natural adeptness at Perception into Intimidation because... reasons.

    That is what makes it lazy. Not that there isn't a good idea in it, but that they didn't work through it before they released it to the wild.
    Last edited by Dienekes; 2021-06-06 at 01:00 PM.

  5. - Top - End - #65
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Amnestic's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Castle Sparrowcellar
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Quote Originally Posted by HappyDaze View Post
    Explain what you mean, because the smile does not do that. The variant human is a specific (and specific beats general, remember), but there is nothing in the PHB allowing other races to use the variant human rules (as they are not humans) and not all DMs use/allow the variant human.
    Right, Variant Human is a specific race with floating stats.

    Just as dhampir, reborn, etc. are specific races with floating stats.

    Just like half elves had two floating stats.
    Just like warforged had one floating stat.

    Those specific races have it. V.Human and Half-Elves were in the PHB even, setting the precedent that floating stats may exist on races to a greater or lesser degree, which we now see occurring with the dhampir, reborn, etc.

    In addition to those specific listed races, you can choose to use Tasha's optional rule so all races have them, if you so desire.
    DMing:
    Iron Crisis IC | OOC
    Cyre Red IC | OOC

    Playing:
    OotA IC | OOC

    Master Homebrew Index (5e)

  6. - Top - End - #66
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Tanarii's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    They were very clear in the UA for them all that they're following the Tasha standard.

  7. - Top - End - #67
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2019

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dienekes View Post
    I'd agree, if they actually went through and remade the racial features to be balanced with each other regardless of ASIs.

    And if they actually made the changes fit the fluff of the races. Yes elves have excellent vision and hearing but now we can turn their natural adeptness at Perception into Intimidation because... reasons.

    That is what makes it lazy. Not that there isn't a good idea in it, but that they didn't work through it before they released it to the wild.
    I'm not sure it was really feasible for them to remake all the races, so I'm willing to chalk up a few outliers as the cost of keeping things simple and straight forward which is important for any design/re-design.

    The Elf perception thing for example stems from the original mistake of giving proficiency in perception rather then giving something like Keen Senses or the Eagle totem eyesight feature. And although irrelevant to your point Intimidation is a bad example since Fey creatures quite often have abilities to cause the Frightened condition so it actually makes sense that some elves with a little bit of extra Fey-ness in their blood could use that to help their Intimidation check.

  8. - Top - End - #68
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Segev's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
    I'm not sure it was really feasible for them to remake all the races, so I'm willing to chalk up a few outliers as the cost of keeping things simple and straight forward which is important for any design/re-design.

    The Elf perception thing for example stems from the original mistake of giving proficiency in perception rather then giving something like Keen Senses or the Eagle totem eyesight feature. And although irrelevant to your point Intimidation is a bad example since Fey creatures quite often have abilities to cause the Frightened condition so it actually makes sense that some elves with a little bit of extra Fey-ness in their blood could use that to help their Intimidation check.
    THey should have saved any major re-design for a full 5.5 or 6e. That's part of why this is lazy/sloppy. If it were done with sincere desire to improve the game, it wouldn't be done with a slap-dash "sure, pick whatever" "optional rule" that is not really optional going forward. It certainly isn't solving any genuine problems in the mechanics. And it doesn't actually open up new concepts so much as just change which ones are now optimal.

  9. - Top - End - #69
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Aug 2014

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Quote Originally Posted by HappyDaze View Post
    That's not universally true. I have seen plenty of players that valued some racial traits (like darkvision) above the ability modifiers and they have selected races with less than ideal ASMs so they could get those other traits. I have also seen players avoid mechanically strong options (like a hobgoblin wizard) because of the roleplaying issues they might cause.
    Some examples of characters I've built choosing races for their traits rather than stats:

    Deekeek, aarakocra barbarian/fighter, built around the idea of flying, grappling and dropping people. Chosen for flight, natural attack is also a bonus. Dex +2 Wis +1 is helpful for Deekeek's defenses but doesn't directly aid her combat effectiveness.

    Amaryllis Tosscobble, stoutheart halfling wizard (divination)/sorcerer (wild magic), built around manipulating luck and fate. Chosen for halfling luck and the bountiful luck racial feat. Again, Dex +2 Con +1 is helpful for defenses but not directly relevant to her build. (Come to think of it, lightheart would have been a better choice - I chose her race when I was just planning to go wizard 20.)

    Konari Derra, kalashtar barbarian (bear totem), built for resistance to everything and also RP reasons. Chosen for psychic resistance and having a quori spirit, I fluffed that Konari's connection with their quori is malfunctioning and instead of actually communicating properly, the quori can just take over when Konari's in mortal danger (rage). Wis +2 helps with defenses a bit, Cha +1 is utterly useless to Konari (who actually dumped that stat, but dumped Int even more).

    Linguist, changeling sorcerer/cleric/fighter/ranger/rogue/druid, built for having the most languages known (19-25, depending on what you count as a known language) that I could pack into a lvl 20 build. Chosen because changelings start with three languages and change appearance plus being a polyglot helps sell disguises really well (helps that Linguist is a mastermind rogue and therefore good at mimicking speech patterns, too). Cha +2 and Dex +1 are somewhat helpful, but Linguist's highest casting class is ranger (they're mostly a ranger/rogue/fighter, the rest are dips) and they've got mediocre Wisdom.

  10. - Top - End - #70
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2019

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Quote Originally Posted by Segev View Post
    THey should have saved any major re-design for a full 5.5 or 6e. That's part of why this is lazy/sloppy. If it were done with sincere desire to improve the game, it wouldn't be done with a slap-dash "sure, pick whatever" "optional rule" that is not really optional going forward. It certainly isn't solving any genuine problems in the mechanics. And it doesn't actually open up new concepts so much as just change which ones are now optimal.
    Ignoring whether floating ASIs improve the game or not, let's assume that WotC sincerely believes that it is an improvement.

    Why is it lazy for them to not wait until 6e to start implementing that? If anything wouldn't waiting for 6e be the lazy approach? They have this solution that they believe will improve the game, but they don't use it until 6e sounds like a way lazier approach then adding it as an optional rule.

    As for not being optional going forward, again if they really believe floating ASIs is a better design for races why wouldn't they use that for future races they create? Sticking to what they believe is bad/worse design despite there already being precedent in the PHB for floating ASIs sounds like a very lazy approach. If the results of whatever research they do tells them that Half-Elf and V. Human are the most popular races because they have floating ASI then what good reason is there for not using floating ASIs when making a new race?

  11. - Top - End - #71
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2008

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
    Ignoring whether floating ASIs improve the game or not, let's assume that WotC sincerely believes that it is an improvement.

    Why is it lazy for them to not wait until 6e to start implementing that? If anything wouldn't waiting for 6e be the lazy approach? They have this solution that they believe will improve the game, but they don't use it until 6e sounds like a way lazier approach then adding it as an optional rule.

    As for not being optional going forward, again if they really believe floating ASIs is a better design for races why wouldn't they use that for future races they create? Sticking to what they believe is bad/worse design despite there already being precedent in the PHB for floating ASIs sounds like a very lazy approach. If the results of whatever research they do tells them that Half-Elf and V. Human are the most popular races because they have floating ASI then what good reason is there for not using floating ASIs when making a new race?
    This is the reasoning why we get a bunch of half completed products, and designers hand waving their mistakes away to fix it later.

    No, it is not lazy to work through and correct your designs before releasing them to the public.
    Last edited by Dienekes; 2021-06-06 at 02:28 PM.

  12. - Top - End - #72
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    RedWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Oct 2020

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Unfortunately.

    Let's just all play characters with 10s across the board, the same racial abilities, etc.

    {scrubbed}
    Last edited by Peelee; 2021-06-06 at 07:45 PM.

  13. - Top - End - #73
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2019

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dienekes View Post
    This is the reasoning why we get a bunch of half completed products, and designers hand waving their mistakes away to fix it later.

    No, it is not lazy to work through and correct your designs before releasing them to the public.
    Just to be clear you think if WotC recognizes that there's a better way to do something they should continue to use the old/bad way for all new content within that edition?

  14. - Top - End - #74
    Troll in the Playground
     
    DwarfClericGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
    Ignoring whether floating ASIs improve the game or not, let's assume that WotC sincerely believes that it is an improvement.

    Why is it lazy for them to not wait until 6e to start implementing that? If anything wouldn't waiting for 6e be the lazy approach? They have this solution that they believe will improve the game, but they don't use it until 6e sounds like a way lazier approach then adding it as an optional rule.

    As for not being optional going forward, again if they really believe floating ASIs is a better design for races why wouldn't they use that for future races they create? Sticking to what they believe is bad/worse design despite there already being precedent in the PHB for floating ASIs sounds like a very lazy approach. If the results of whatever research they do tells them that Half-Elf and V. Human are the most popular races because they have floating ASI then what good reason is there for not using floating ASIs when making a new race?
    I suspect this is exactly what they're doing, and I also suspect, with the amount of backlash they're getting, it'll be scrapped instead of improved upon like Segev suggested... but also because of Segev's attitude being felt by a large number of vocal opponents, WotC will say the change isn't wanted. Damned if you do, etc.

    I haven't done a deep dive on the races released since Tasha's via UA, but I'm curious if they're considered mechanically stronger than most PHB races with floating ASM. Is it possible the WotC is doing exactly what Segev wants with new races and perhaps working in the background to rebuild the older races for a .5 or 6 launch?
    Last edited by Theodoxus; 2021-06-06 at 03:25 PM.
    Trollbait extraordinaire

  15. - Top - End - #75
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BarbarianGuy

    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    providence
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mjolnirbear View Post

    If 5.5 ever became a thing,
    That’s what Tasha’s was.
    I usually post from my phone, so please excuse any horrendous typos.

    Quote Originally Posted by 1337 b4k4 View Post
    [to somebody getting upset over somebody else's house rule] Maybe you should take a break, you're getting rather worked up over magic elf games.

  16. - Top - End - #76
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Segev's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
    Just to be clear you think if WotC recognizes that there's a better way to do something they should continue to use the old/bad way for all new content within that edition?
    If they believe it is truly better, is it not worth doing right?

    If this is truly all they think is needed to improve it, then they are simply wrong. May as well say that classes should get ASIs and feats every other level to enable more conCepts.

  17. - Top - End - #77
    Halfling in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2020

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Can we agree to make the perfect the enemy of the good?

  18. - Top - End - #78
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2019

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Quote Originally Posted by Segev View Post
    If they believe it is truly better, is it not worth doing right?

    If this is truly all they think is needed to improve it, then they are simply wrong. May as well say that classes should get ASIs and feats every other level to enable more conCepts.
    If you think they are wrong then that's one thing, but you claimed they were lazy which is a completely different. Why is it lazy to start using a new approach if you believe it's better? Especially given there is already precedent in the PHB for this new approach.

  19. - Top - End - #79
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    DruidGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2017

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Hot take here - I think all they're doing is giving better rule support for the kind of home-brewing we did in the 80's.

    The game back then was much less structured, so it felt a lot easier just to build your own stuff, and the zeitgeist of the time (i.e. building your own stuff from Radio Shack parts, Legos / Erector Sets / science kits being popular geek toys) lent itself to that quite nicely.

    Nowadays, the game is much more holistically structured, and new players coming in are much less likely to home-brew, if the sample size of the players I know who are new holds true.

    So, giving explicit rules support for it gives guidelines for people to expand beyond the races if they want, and lessening the chance they break the game in the meantime.

    They're not moving beyond races - strong archetypes are still the foundation of the game. This is all 'Optional Healing Rules in the DMG' level stuff.
    I swear, 1 handed quarterstaves are 5e's spiked chain. - Rainbownaga
    The Warlock is Faust: the Musical: The Class. - toapat

  20. - Top - End - #80
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Tanarii's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Quote Originally Posted by Beelzebubba View Post
    This is all 'Optional Healing Rules in the DMG' level stuff.
    Except this "optional" rule is now the standard.

    Quote Originally Posted by Second Wind View Post
    Can we agree to make the perfect the enemy of the good?
    In the case of Tasha's, its bad is the enemy of good.
    Last edited by Tanarii; 2021-06-06 at 07:00 PM.

  21. - Top - End - #81
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    HalflingWizardGirl

    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Location
    The United States
    Gender
    Male2Female

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
    If you think they are wrong then that's one thing, but you claimed they were lazy which is a completely different. Why is it lazy to start using a new approach if you believe it's better? Especially given there is already precedent in the PHB for this new approach.
    I’m not Segev, but the reason it’s lazy is that (contrary to what Crawford has claimed) races were balanced with fixed ASIs in mind. The two most obvious cases are the Mountain Dwarf and the Yuan-Ti Pureblood. The former has its double +2s balanced with a sub race trait that is anti-synergistic with those ASIs, as armor proficiencies are largely redundant on the classes that want racial boosts to Strength and Constitution (Barbarian, Fighter, Paladin, some Clerics). The latter has the anti-synergistic combination of +2 CHA and +1 INT as the only thing attempting to hold it back from broken (not that it succeeds, as many DMs straight-up ban it regardless, myself among them).

    The reason this change is specifically lazy is that since races have fixed ASIs as a balancing feature (even those with full or partial flexibility, such as Variant Human, Half-Elf, Warforged, and Changeling, use the versatility of their ASIs as an attempted power boost), that means saying “eh, do whatever” in many circumstances unbalances certain races, such as MD and YTP. If WotC truly gave a darn about this going the way forward rather than chasing a trend (which may or may not turn out to be a fad), they would wait until the de jure 5.5e (not de facto like Tasha’s) or 6e and implement it there, with the races designed with flexible ASIs in mind, and not stick 2 pages in the next available product after the events of May/June 2020.

  22. - Top - End - #82
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    ClericGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    New Zealand
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    I fear this is so.

    There has been a lot of discussion about removing bonuses and penalties races, some of which I agree with, a lot of which I don't. It has left me with the question, what is the point (in the game rules) of race?

    If we can't put ability scores or other features next to "orc", then why have "orc" in the game at all? An "orc" becomes just a "human with green skin", which seems somehow more racist to me.

    I would really like to see rules-based support for different races being, well, different. I want there to be something in the mechanics that makes an elf different to a human different to a gnome, to help me play an elf differently to a dwarf differently to a dragonborn (rather than what happens at the moment, which is "an elf/dwarf/whatever is just a stat bump that I can use to min/max.").
    Quote Originally Posted by ad_hoc View Post
    Don't waste time making rolls on things that aren't interesting. Move on and get to the good stuff.

  23. - Top - End - #83
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2019

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Quote Originally Posted by P. G. Macer View Post
    I’m not Segev, but the reason it’s lazy is that (contrary to what Crawford has claimed) races were balanced with fixed ASIs in mind. The two most obvious cases are the Mountain Dwarf and the Yuan-Ti Pureblood. The former has its double +2s balanced with a sub race trait that is anti-synergistic with those ASIs, as armor proficiencies are largely redundant on the classes that want racial boosts to Strength and Constitution (Barbarian, Fighter, Paladin, some Clerics). The latter has the anti-synergistic combination of +2 CHA and +1 INT as the only thing attempting to hold it back from broken (not that it succeeds, as many DMs straight-up ban it regardless, myself among them).

    The reason this change is specifically lazy is that since races have fixed ASIs as a balancing feature (even those with full or partial flexibility, such as Variant Human, Half-Elf, Warforged, and Changeling, use the versatility of their ASIs as an attempted power boost), that means saying “eh, do whatever” in many circumstances unbalances certain races, such as MD and YTP. If WotC truly gave a darn about this going the way forward rather than chasing a trend (which may or may not turn out to be a fad), they would wait until the de jure 5.5e (not de facto like Tasha’s) or 6e and implement it there, with the races designed with flexible ASIs in mind, and not stick 2 pages in the next available product after the events of May/June 2020.
    I agree to an extent that they sort of of used the ASIs to try and balance things but at the same time they clearly failed. Compare Yuanti to Tiefling, they both have the same +2 Cha, +1 Int yet I don't think anyone suggests that the other features are balanced, or that Tiefling was a powerhouse of abilities that was only balanced through poor ASI distribution. I think your point would have more merit if with Tasha's changes it actually unbalanced the race/class combinations. Is Mountain Dwarf now the premier race chosen by players? I don't know have any stats but I have my doubts that's the case. I can certainly believe they are more popular with Tasha's but I think it's still well within norm.

    It's also worth noting that many complaints are about how Tasha's is not actually optional and is forced upon people since all new races follow the floating ASIs. It's worth noting that the balance concern doesn't hold up in these cases since the races were built with floating ASIs in mind. So if you do have balance concerns with the floating ASIs then you can simply not use the optional rules presented in Tasha's and don't have to worry about new races with floating ASIs since they are built with that already in mind.

  24. - Top - End - #84
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2019

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Quote Originally Posted by greenstone View Post
    I fear this is so.

    There has been a lot of discussion about removing bonuses and penalties races, some of which I agree with, a lot of which I don't. It has left me with the question, what is the point (in the game rules) of race?

    If we can't put ability scores or other features next to "orc", then why have "orc" in the game at all? An "orc" becomes just a "human with green skin", which seems somehow more racist to me.

    I would really like to see rules-based support for different races being, well, different. I want there to be something in the mechanics that makes an elf different to a human different to a gnome, to help me play an elf differently to a dwarf differently to a dragonborn (rather than what happens at the moment, which is "an elf/dwarf/whatever is just a stat bump that I can use to min/max.").
    Isn't that already the case?

    An elf gets Trance that can create something different. An Elf GOO Warlock for example is going to feel a lot different then a Human GOO Warlock because every LR the Elf is going to be able to take 4 SR and therefore cast multiple Sending, Scrying spells and still have their normal slots for the day.

    Meanwhile the Goblin Warlock is probably going to take spells that allow them to take advantage of being able to BA Hide in combat so again it's going to feel different from the other races. While the Tortle Warlock can be a Pact of Blade Gish without feeling like they have to take Hexblade.

    Now admittedly they probably can do a better job creating those differences and make them more interesting, but the focus on ASI actually took away from the racial differences so the floating ASIs are at least a step in the right direction.

  25. - Top - End - #85
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    RedWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    I don't have that book, so i haven't seen the custom lineage. But floating ASIs for everyone is a definitive win in my mind. Lets you pick whatever race without being too worried if you're optimized enough or not. Only +4 to hit is horrible when you're unlucky with dice.

    Quote Originally Posted by Witty Username View Post

    Should the significant mechanical differences be unique to the race or acquirable through other means? And if they are acquirable through other means, then couldn't we manage race as part of the character's description?

    Dragonborn can breathe fire, a dragon blood sorcerer w/ subtle spell can accomplish similar with burning hands. Could we then say the concept of dragonborn could be better handled by a custom lineage dragon blood sorcerer? And since custom lineage is just a cluster of mechanics to make the math work, we could just give everyone a cluster of features to make the math work. This would mean we would be intentionally blurring the line between class features and racial abilities as needed, maybe the ranger's Primal awareness to sense creatures within a mile is because they are a wolfman with a good sense of smell. Races would exist from this point as a matter of description and context.

    This is kinda what is flagging in my mind, Racial abilities tend to not be unique or are very niche. goblin and Nimble Escape is a great example, the better trait of the Goblin is not unique, anyone with 2 levels in rogue has it. so any 2nd level rogue could pass as a goblin mechanically. And once that is the case would I not be able to just RP a goblin?
    I've been checking a lot of M&M lately and i really prefer points-buy Ã* la carte style of character creations. ( Shadowrun is another i've played) Doesn't matter if you get a skill or special ability from background ,race or class. Doesn't matter if someone has a race with only one weak ability and the other spend half his points on the race, as long as the totals are equal. Those kind of system are more fun IMO, cause you can do pretty much any concept you want while still being as effective/optimized. You don't have a problem with paying double for a feature ( goblin rogue) and you can freely divorce an elf raised by elves from an elf raised by humans.

  26. - Top - End - #86
    Titan in the Playground
     
    KorvinStarmast's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Texas
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Quote Originally Posted by Menji View Post
    Let's just all play characters with 10s across the board, the same racial abilities, etc.
    IIRC, the mean of 4d6k3 is 12.25, and the mean of 3d6 is 10.5. Why not start with all 12's for PCs?
    Quote Originally Posted by Second Wind View Post
    Can we agree to make the perfect the enemy of the good?
    Heh-that got a grin out of me.
    Avatar by linklele. How Teleport Works
    a. Malifice (paraphrased):
    Rulings are not 'House Rules.' Rulings are a DM doing what DMs are supposed to do.
    b. greenstone (paraphrased):
    Agency means that they {players} control their character's actions; you control the world's reactions to the character's actions.
    Gosh, 2D8HP, you are so very correct!
    Second known member of the Greyview Appreciation Society

  27. - Top - End - #87
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Aug 2014

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
    An elf gets Trance that can create something different. An Elf GOO Warlock for example is going to feel a lot different then a Human GOO Warlock because every LR the Elf is going to be able to take 4 SR and therefore cast multiple Sending, Scrying spells and still have their normal slots for the day.
    This may or may not work depending on how you rule Trance. The official rules are ambiguous about whether elves have a 4-hour long rest or an 8-hour long rest involving 4 hours of Trance and 4 hours of light activity. If the latter interpretation is in play, your elf warlock isn't going to be taking extra short rests.

  28. - Top - End - #88
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    BarbarianGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Quote Originally Posted by KorvinStarmast View Post
    IIRC, the mean of 4d6k3 is 12.25, and the mean of 3d6 is 10.5. Why not start with all 12's for PCs?
    Frankly I think a 5.5e could do worse than to say all PCs start with 3 10s and 3 12s, apply some kind of ASI based on your initial class choice (maybe no ASI when multiclassing), and then 2 +1s that the player can apply as desired. Plus a number of non-ASI race features like trance or whatever.

  29. - Top - End - #89
    Titan in the Playground
     
    KorvinStarmast's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Texas
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Quote Originally Posted by EggKookoo View Post
    Frankly I think a 5.5e could do worse than to say all PCs start with 3 10s and 3 12s, apply some kind of ASI based on your initial class choice (maybe no ASI when multiclassing), and then 2 +1s that the player can apply as desired. Plus a number of non-ASI race features like trance or whatever.
    13th Age does something like that. A +2 for race that you choose from a few choices, and a +2 for your class (again, you can choose from a few).
    Avatar by linklele. How Teleport Works
    a. Malifice (paraphrased):
    Rulings are not 'House Rules.' Rulings are a DM doing what DMs are supposed to do.
    b. greenstone (paraphrased):
    Agency means that they {players} control their character's actions; you control the world's reactions to the character's actions.
    Gosh, 2D8HP, you are so very correct!
    Second known member of the Greyview Appreciation Society

  30. - Top - End - #90
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Vacation in Nyalotha

    Default Re: Are Races Vistigial in D&D?

    Quote Originally Posted by Addaran View Post
    I've been checking a lot of M&M lately and i really prefer points-buy Ã* la carte style of character creations. ( Shadowrun is another i've played) Doesn't matter if you get a skill or special ability from background ,race or class. Doesn't matter if someone has a race with only one weak ability and the other spend half his points on the race, as long as the totals are equal. Those kind of system are more fun IMO, cause you can do pretty much any concept you want while still being as effective/optimized. You don't have a problem with paying double for a feature ( goblin rogue) and you can freely divorce an elf raised by elves from an elf raised by humans.
    I’m generously assuming you mean karma build method, rather than the degenerate build point or priority systems. Due to the function of attribute caps and the accessibility of cyberware (in the good editions of SR) you are incentivized to pick a metatype for long term play if you care about numbers. The beauty of Shadowrun is in how probability is obfuscated. Opposed dicepools are nowhere near as clean cut as 1d20+mod vs DC, and I’ve found that this leads to less griping over numbers so long as no two characters are mercilessly competing on the same niche.
    If all rules are suggestions what happens when I pass the save?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •