"Customizing your Origin in D&D"

[Dork_Forge]

If the MD is able to trade down each weapon proficiency it gets for a skill, I can certainly see your argument. Trading away three weapons to get three skills is borderline insane. Is that how it works? I thought it was trading all weapon proficiencies granted by race for one skill. Is it Warhammer, Light Hammer, etc each for a skill or tool?

You have to trade skill for skill, but otherwise you can trade any weapon prof for a tool or just a weapon that you'd rather have. So you can trade all your weapons away for tools if you're getting martial weapons from somewhere.

[Amnestic]

If the MD is able to trade down each weapon proficiency it gets for a skill, I can certainly see your argument. Trading away three weapons to get three skills is borderline insane. Is that how it works? I thought it was trading all weapon proficiencies granted by race for one skill. Is it Warhammer, Light Hammer, etc each for a skill or tool?

From the OP:

PROFICIENCY SWAPS:
Skill to Skill
Simple weapon to Simple weapon or tool
Martial weapon to Simple/martial weapon or tool
Tool to Tool or simple weapon

You can't trade weapon profs for skills, just tools. It's rare for tools to really be that used, and people could already pick the 'important one' (thieves) freely via backgrounds. If a High Elf wants to trade their four weapon proficiencies for four tools then...go nuts honestly?

[Evaar]

Meh. Give it time, I say.

I remember back when the PHB came out and people were complaining about feats and multiclassing being so definitely broken that no one with a mind for balance should ever allow them.

Now it's 6 years later and I don't remember the last time I saw someone running a feat-less game. Multiclassing seems to be slightly less common, but still widely accepted.

As someone else said, it's not like a +1 to a secondary score and Medium Armor makes Mountain Dwarf the be all and end all of races. If anything this makes the VHuman and the Half-elf less of completely obvious choices.

More recently, you can look at people throwing tantrums over the Dragonmarked race options adding spells to spell lists. Plenty of folks on this very forum argued that these options were massive power creep, truly broken. I think I've seen one or two builds that actually utilize the additional options effectively since then.

Many armchair designers have knee-jerk, pearl-clutching reactions to any kind of shift in the paradigm.

These changes aren't balanced, but they don't break the game. We're gonna get through this, everyone. Deep breaths.

[jaappleton]

Ok that does clarify a few things.

I can see why so many argue the MDwarf is so good now.

I personally still wouldn't pick them (They're still at 25' speed, right?), but I understand why everything is saying it. They're among the top tier now, for sure.

[Boci]

More recently, you can look at people throwing tantrums over the Dragonmarked race options adding spells to spell lists. Plenty of folks on this very forum argued that these options were massive power creep, truly broken. I think I've seen one or two builds that actually utilize the additional options effectively since then.

Many armchair designers have knee-jerk, pearl-clutching reactions to any kind of shift in the paradigm.

These changes aren't balanced, but they don't break the game. We're gonna get through this, everyone. Deep breaths.

I feel "I don't like these changes that aren't balanced" isn't automatically knee-jerk, pearl clutching. Most posters against the idea seem to think it will not be a good edition to the game, which is a valid opinion to have about a new varient rule.

[OldTrees1]

I feel "I don't like these changes that aren't balanced" isn't automatically knee-jerk, pearl clutching. Most posters against the idea seem to think it will not be a good edition to the game, which is a valid opinion to have about a new varient rule.

I am not sure about that 2nd half. I think a decent fraction of those criticizing the change think is is imperfect but positive.

[Boci]

I am not sure about that 2nd half. I think a decent fraction of those criticizing the change think is is imperfect but positive.

Some people certain;y seem to think there is more for more flexibility but this system is not the way to do it, which I would still tally as this version being not good for the game. Just because you don't like a rule doesn't mean you don't like what the rule is trying to do.

[Amechra]

More recently, you can look at people throwing tantrums over the Dragonmarked race options adding spells to spell lists. Plenty of folks on this very forum argued that these options were massive power creep, truly broken. I think I've seen one or two builds that actually utilize the additional options effectively since then.

Arguably, the reason that you haven't seen more builds using them is because they're Eberron specific. And, on top of that, people might actually be avoiding them - kinda like how some people avoid Hexblade dips because they're gauche.

[jaappleton]

I also read (You can see it in my first response in the Tasha's topic on page 1) that some races were being re-written and having stat penalties removed. This specifically mentioned races from Volo's which IIRC have two races with penalties: Kobold and Orc. Now, it could be they're just removing Orc altogether and going with Orcs of Eberron or Wildemount as their base, vanilla Orc now. Which I'd be fine with.

But Kobold. Kobold getting Pack Tactics and a floating bonus... Would make them excellent, excellent Barbarians. Spear, shield, PAM and +2 Str with Pack Tactics? Wolf Totem so them and everybody around 'em gets Advantage? Swolebold for the win, indeed.

I'm more curious if they remove Sunlight Sensitivity. It sucks, honestly just get rid of it. Worse yet is that by RAW there's only one singular item I know of which negates it, and it belongs to Jarlaxle and is available only by taking it from him in Waterdeep: Dragon Heist.

[Dork_Forge]

More recently, you can look at people throwing tantrums over the Dragonmarked race options adding spells to spell lists. Plenty of folks on this very forum argued that these options were massive power creep, truly broken. I think I've seen one or two builds that actually utilize the additional options effectively since then.

Many armchair designers have knee-jerk, pearl-clutching reactions to any kind of shift in the paradigm.

These changes aren't balanced, but they don't break the game. We're gonna get through this, everyone. Deep breaths.

That would all be well and good if these changes existed in a vacuum, but they don't. Let's take your specific example, now you can stack GGTR backgrounds, with your Dragonmark of choice and basically disregard the spell lists and the balance/sense of identity they're meant to give. With this new change you can do that but still get + to your most valuable stats.

Powercreep effects the entire game, especially if it's the common direction for new rules, before you know it we end up with something that doesn't resemble the balance the game was designed around.

Side note, as someone that didn't like the addition of spells known, it was a worrying direction to be taken. Unnecessary powercreep that broke existing design doctrine that we didn't get the chance to approve through playtest. Lo and behold we've now received more rules with little care for balance that we didn't get to playtest. Not convinced by this example? We didn't get to see the Satyr in playtest either and now we have another race with magic resistance stacked on top of other desirable traits (oh and this new rules makes that unplaytested race even stronger...).

[Boci]

I'm more curious if they remove Sunlight Sensitivity. It sucks, honestly just get rid of it. Worse yet is that by RAW there's only one singular item I know of which negates it, and it belongs to Jarlaxle and is available only by taking it from him in Waterdeep: Dragon Heist.

If sunlight sensitivity is going, I feel pack tactics are too.

[Dienekes]

If sunlight sensitivity is going, I feel pack tactics are too.

Which would be a bit amusing, getting the fixed kobold as just: Darkvision and Grovel, Cower, and Beg.

[JackPhoenix]

Arguably, this could encourages optimizers (myself included) to really expand the races they play and encourage more role playing.

Does it, though, or does it simply switch the subset of races the optimizers play to a different, just as expansive (i.e. not very), if not less, subset?

[Amechra]

Now, it could be they're just removing Orc altogether and going with Orcs of Eberron or Wildemount as their base, vanilla Orc now. Which I'd be fine with.

Or you could do what a DM I played with once did, and just sharpie over the "Half-" in Half-Orc. There - you're done!

(I'd also be amenable to doing the same thing with Half-Elves, so that they can all be The Prettiest.)

[Boci]

Does it, though, or does it simply switch the subset of races the optimizers play to a different, just as expansive (i.e. not very), if not less, subset?

Short term at least, likely not. Its not like optimizers hate roleplay, and a fair few has wanted to try X race and Y class and have just been turned off by the lack of relevant stats bonuses, so yes short term you will see optimizers finally playing a more diverse set of race and class combinations.

Long term there is maybe a danger as the 3 bests races emerging that you can now use for any class, but that doesn't seem too likely to be a think for that many people.

[Segev]

I generally agree with you, but you have to accept that there are degrees, its not all or nothing. Many people didn't like orcs getting a penalty to int, even though it fits with D&D fluff. At the same time, most of these people probably didn't want all stats thrown out of the window. There are degrees to which someone can want racial mechanics to matter, and the stat adjustments aren't everything.

Of course there are degrees. But defining where those degrees are and WHY one degree is acceptable and another is not is important. Simply saying, "Well, that's going too far, so of course it isn't right," is inviting a similar response to whatever is being proposed, unless a distinction that explains why one is too far and the other is not is provided.

"We will get a better view if we move back," is a valid thing to say about taking in, say, a mountain-backed vista. It remains valid up to a point where either there's no place left to move back to (because falling off a cliff is going to absolutely ruin your view), or your ability to focus and capture detail becomes too small to appreciate the vista. Both of these are conditions you can name that specify when "move back a bit more" becomes bad advice, or at least stops being good advice.

If you can't name some metrics by which your proposed change can be measured that provide a limit to keeping moving the changes further out, you are not properly demonstrating that there is a flaw in asking why not go all the way.


Thus, what is the metric by which you can judge when making this "creative concepts shouldn't be held captive to racial mechanics" adjustment has gone too far? Why is simply using the tiefling mechanics on what you're calling a "human sorcerer" not perfectly fine? Why isn't using the human chassis on a "dragonborn warlock" not perfectly fine? Why can't he be mechanically human but called a dragonborn and described as a dragonborn?

Why is that going too far, when ditching the racial ASIs is not?

[Boci]

If you can't name some metrics by which your proposed change can be measured that provide a limit to keeping moving the changes further out, you are not properly demonstrating that there is a flaw in asking why not go all the way.

It's a game, we play it to have fun. Its great if you can express why you think X enriches the game and Y is ultimatly detracting from the goals most groups are aiming when they play, but its important to remember that "I don't know, I just like it" and "I don't know, but its not for me" are also perfectly valid opinions.

[Segev]

It's a game, we play it to have fun. Its great if you can express why you think X enriches the game and Y is ultimatly detracting from the goals most groups are aiming when they play, but its important to remember that "I don't know, I just like it" and "I don't know, but its not for me" are also perfectly valid opinions.

They are, but you then have to accept it when people say that about what you like.

I don't like the ASI thing they've done here, for reasons I have articulated. Of course any game table can use whatever rules they want.

Ironically, I would be more comfortable with reskinning a complete racial package as a different race than this "flexibility" thing, because this "flexibility" thing reads to me more as homogenizing, rather than diversifying.

[Boci]

They are, but you then have to accept it when people say that about what you like.

Yeah, has anyone on this thread not done that?

Ironically, I would be more comfortable with reskinning a complete racial package as a different race than this "flexibility" thing, because this "flexibility" thing reads to me more as homogenizing, rather than diversifying.

An idea I've been toying with is a while is cutting what races give you in half and then adding an upbringing. Feral, highbred, that short of stuff, and splitting the traints across both. I have some notes for it, but its a far cry from complete.

[jaappleton]

Does it, though, or does it simply switch the subset of races the optimizers play to a different, just as expansive (i.e. not very), if not less, subset?

It does!

For a very long time I'd wanted to play a military commander style Hobgoblin. Like a general on the battlefield.

I always thought Order Domain would be a solid way to do it, but their stats never touched Wisdom. Now I'm able to make this character to their fullest potential!

[x3n0n]

Does it, though, or does it simply switch the subset of races the optimizers play to a different, just as expansive (i.e. not very), if not less, subset?

Coming from an Magic: the Gathering background, this rhythm feels familiar.
* New tools are added to the pool, then
* there is a frenzy of white-room building, then
* people discover at the table what is most fun and/or effective, then
* the mechanical part of the game gets "stale" and
* new tools are added, restarting the cycle.

In competitive M:tG, this usually leads to "winnowing" down to a small number of high-tier archetypes because there are very few options that are mechanically optimized.

I think "Tasha's" is going to trigger a similar building frenzy, which is honestly pretty fun for as long as it lasts, exploring a modified possibility space. However, there will be some "best" builds, which may become new folklore, until the system shifts again.

(I'd like to think that D&D, especially at home, does not have the same level of pressure to force everyone to exclusively play characters on the frontier of high-performance builds.)

[Boci]

Coming from an Magic: the Gathering background, this rhythm feels familiar.
* New tools are added to the pool, then
* there is a frenzy of white-room building, then
* people discover at the table what is most fun and/or effective, then
* the mechanical part of the game gets "stale" and
* new tools are added, restarting the cycle.

In competitive M:tG, this usually leads to "winnowing" down to a small number of high-tier archetypes because there are very few options that are mechanically optimized.

I think "Tasha's" is going to trigger a similar building frenzy, which is honestly pretty fun for as long as it lasts, exploring a modified possibility space. However, there will be some "best" builds, which may become new folklore, until the system shifts again.

(I'd like to think that D&D, especially at home, does not have the same level of pressure to force everyone to exclusively play characters on the frontier of high-performance builds.)

Even in MtG though some people roleplay. One of my friends only run Avacyn in a deck if they have a way to return a creature from exile. And D&D players, even optimizers, presumably have more reason to roleplay.

[LudicSavant]

Does it, though, or does it simply switch the subset of races the optimizers play to a different, just as expansive (i.e. not very), if not less, subset?

There are still absolutely going to be 'best races.' But I suspect that the gap will be narrowed; e.g. a Half-Orc Wizard will still not be the best Wizard, but the best Wizard won't be as far ahead of the Half-Orc Wizard as they used to be.

[Segev]

There are still absolutely going to be 'best races.' But I suspect that the gap will be narrowed; e.g. a Half-Orc Wizard will still not be the best Wizard, but the best Wizard won't be as far ahead of the Half-Orc Wizard as they used to be.

I would contend that the half-orc wizard is actually a better wizard than the high elf wizard, now.

That 1/long rest "get out of 0 hp free" card is particularly powerful for low-hp squishies.

[jaappleton]

There are still absolutely going to be 'best races.' But I suspect that the gap will be narrowed; e.g. a Half-Orc Wizard will still not be the best Wizard, but the best Wizard won't be as far ahead of the Half-Orc Wizard as they used to be.

^This.

Its part of why I love your posts, Ludic.

Also, lets not forget the Stormwind Fallacy. The TL;DR is that "Optimization does not negate roleplay".

What could have prevented someone from being that Half Orc Wizard is that they didn't want to be 'ineffective' at their job. Being able to start with only a +2 Intelligence could have nagged at someone in the back of their mind that they won't be very effective, so they'd shelve the idea.

[Boci]

I would contend that the half-orc wizard is actually a better wizard than the high elf wizard, now.

That 1/long rest "get out of 0 hp free" card is particularly powerful for low-hp squishies.

I think I agree. +1 cantrip isn't very useful for a wizard, a skill proficienct is a skill proficiency, and a language whilst okay is rarely going to matter. The big thing the high elf has is passive advantage on saves vs. charm (and the situational immunity to sleep), which does trigger all the time, but HP is the much more common threat.

[KorvinStarmast]

But Kobold. Kobold getting Pack Tactics and a floating bonus...

PC's getting pack tactics was a bad idea to start with ... unless you picked it as a Totem Barbarian. One of many sins Volo's committed, IMO.
(PS: keep sunlight sensitivity, or you'll get nothing but drow PCs. )

[jaappleton]

PC's getting pack tactics was a bad idea to start with ... unless you picked it as a Totem Barbarian. One of many sins Volo's committed, IMO.

I mean... For DMs, yes. Its bad.

As a player? Kobold Wolf Totem is fun for the whole team

[LudicSavant]

I would contend that the half-orc wizard is actually a better wizard than the high elf wizard, now.

That 1/long rest "get out of 0 hp free" card is particularly powerful for low-hp squishies.

It also synergizes with abilities like, say, the Evoker's ability to Overchannel. And Savage Attacks will work with things like Shadow Bladesingers or whatever.

So it's decent.

And that's what I expect the result is going to be. There's going to be a new lineup of 'best' races, but there's going a lot more races that fall into the 'decent for every class' range.

[KorvinStarmast]

As a player? Kobold Wolf Totem is fun for the whole team

Yeah, that's one way to look at it, sure.