D&D General I think the choice of Species / Race / Ancestry has more to do with Story than Rules...

[EzekielRaiden]

Got a favorite kind of Dragonborn? Chromatic, Gem or Metallic?

Mechanically, gem. Thematically, metallic all the way. Been playing silver (or "platinum") dragonborn since I first picked up 4e. Bahamut, particularly his 4e incarnation, is by far my favorite deity in D&D. The whole "there is a higher law, from which the law derives its justice" angle is great stuff, the kind of thing entire fantasy series are based off of.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I don't think you need specific mechanics to show how your elf fighter fights differently than does your dwarf fighter. In fact, D&D has never offered such mechanics. It has just offered a blunt differences like slightly different attributes or starting armour proficiencies. If you want your elf to fight gracefully and your dwarf like a blunt weapon, that's always come down to how you narrate your actions.

For example, both just have "the attack action." Or "cast spell." It's up to you, the player, to decide what that looks like.

You could have species-specific attacks and so on, but then what about the player who doesn't see their elf that way? I think it is a strength to let the players add the flavour that they desire, instead of having the rules legislate their imagination.

that's not the kind of thing people are talking about when they say they want a species to have 'flavour' for the way they fight, your example that's just fluff, or picking apropriate class options, people are talking about stuff like goblin's nimble escape, actual mechanical traits that give ways to act in combat that makes sense for how that species would be adept at fighting, goblins are narritively small and weak and rely on being quick and sneaky to win battles rather than head to head combat, so being able to disengage or hide as a bonus action encourages the 'goblin combat style' of hit and run tactics and ambushing and disappearing mid-fight only to launch a sneak attack from a hidden nook.

 

[Corinnguard]

Mechanically, gem. Thematically, metallic all the way. Been playing silver (or "platinum") dragonborn since I first picked up 4e. Bahamut, particularly his 4e incarnation, is by far my favorite deity in D&D. The whole "there is a higher law, from which the law derives its justice" angle is great stuff, the kind of thing entire fantasy series are based off of.

Mechanically and thematically metallic here. My first Dragonborn character was a Bronze Dragonborn Fighter (Scout variant- D&D Wiki). I used the PHB version back then. I am definitely going to use the UA: Draconic options version next time.

Btw, Level Up offers up a 4th type of Dragonborn. The Essence Dragonborn.

 

[Corinnguard]

Essence dragons fly wingless over distant shores, their serpentine pennant-like bodies snapping back and forth magically as they soar. Their spirits are intertwined with the magic of the land and are usually tied to a specific sea, river, or mountain, or to a separate plane entirely. Essence dragons see their dragonborn as trusted guardians and custodians, charging them with the safety and protection of the place from which they draw their power. Such dragonborn clans are often highly attuned to nature, and guard their progenitor’s home at all costs.

 

[James Gasik]

I don't think you need specific mechanics to show how your elf fighter fights differently than does your dwarf fighter. In fact, D&D has never offered such mechanics. It has just offered a blunt differences like slightly different attributes or starting armour proficiencies. If you want your elf to fight gracefully and your dwarf like a blunt weapon, that's always come down to how you narrate your actions.

For example, both just have "the attack action." Or "cast spell." It's up to you, the player, to decide what that looks like.

You could have species-specific attacks and so on, but then what about the player who doesn't see their elf that way? I think it is a strength to let the players add the flavour that they desire, instead of having the rules legislate their imagination.

Do the special combat maneuvers or Bladesong Fighting style in the Complete Book of Elves count?

 

[Ruin Explorer]

How would that house rule impact the choice you make?

It would open it up somewhat, but it wouldn't be night and day, for me.

There are a few races in D&D so bad that I wouldn't even consider them, especially not after free stat choice. PHB Dragonborn are one. But there aren't many. Maybe a double-handful at most.

And I tend to like outre races, and in 5E, those have also tended to be pretty good and powerful. Like, I might well play a Satyr or Yuan-Ti based on their basic concept alone - indeed, the Satyr illustration (I know it was stolen from MtG!) is so fantastic it made me immediately want to play one!

This one:

Full of energy, joy, life, fun.

Not this tired, generic and forgettable nonsense:

YAAAAAWN! Please no more "floating on a white background" race illustrations EVER. PLEASE WOTC. I BEG THEE!

You know what I'd never play again without it offering a mechanical benefit though? A BLOODY ELF. Half-Elf or similar, sure. Not another bloody elf though!

But you theory is, I think, broadly correct - most people, most of the time, are picking races primarily for the vibes, for the roleplaying, for the cool ears, and so on. There are certain races that are elevated or pushed down by being mechanically awful or great. Elves in 5E, for example, are simply boosted wildly by being overpowered. As they have been in most editions. Take aware the mechanical advantages, including their sleep advantage, and they'd still have devotees because they're pretty, anti-hirsute, extremely long-lived and so on - but I think you'd see a significant drop.

One question is would we see more or fewer humans? I think we'd actually see slightly fewer, overall, because I think there are a certain percentage of people who mostly pick human out of fear of making a "bad choice" race-wise or because they just don't want to get involved in the analysis of picking the "right race" for a class or whatever, and humans are fine. But if every race was the right race for a class or setup, then I think things would broaden out a bit.

Also realistically media trends are going to vary stuff - if we see D&D races/species as "stocks" as it were, for Dwarves are going to be way, way up right now from their usual value thanks to Delicious in Dungeon and the beloved Senshi and the badass Namari. Hell even Halflings will be going up thanks primarily to Chilchuck.

and that includes for the story telling, as having mechanics that reflect the narrative of the story increases the validity of the story

I think a good case could be made that 5E doesn't really do that very well or consistently with regards to race. In fact, major story stuff about races is often just not really reflected in the abilities of a race, or only lightly. Other stuff which is barely a part of the story of the race, or just happened to be a mechanic in a previous edition is often given top billing. We might look at Yuan-Ti Purebloods (now just Yuan-Ti, I see) for example - magic resistance is not a magic story theme or even really something people are naturally going to think of re: them, but it's their most major ability.

 

[Micah Sweet]

that's not the kind of thing people are talking about when they say they want a species to have 'flavour' for the way they fight, your example that's just fluff, or picking apropriate class options, people are talking about stuff like goblin's nimble escape, actual mechanical traits that give ways to act in combat that makes sense for how that species would be adept at fighting, goblins are narritively small and weak and rely on being quick and sneaky to win battles rather than head to head combat, so being able to disengage or hide as a bonus action encourages the 'goblin combat style' of hit and run tactics and ambushing and disappearing mid-fight only to launch a sneak attack from a hidden nook.

Especially since actually being small and weak, even with compensations, if frowned upon in most modern game design.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It would open it up somewhat, but it wouldn't be night and day, for me.

There are a few races in D&D so bad that I wouldn't even consider them, especially not after free stat choice. PHB Dragonborn are one. But there aren't many. Maybe a double-handful at most.

And I tend to like outre races, and in 5E, those have also tended to be pretty good and powerful. Like, I might well play a Satyr or Yuan-Ti based on their basic concept.

You know what I'd never play again without it offering a mechanical benefit though? A BLOODY ELF. Half-Elf or similar, sure. Not another bloody elf though!

But you theory is, I think, broadly correct - most people, most of the time, are picking races primarily for the vibes, for the roleplaying, for the cool ears, and so on. There are certain races that are elevated or pushed down by being mechanically awful or great. Elves in 5E, for example, are simply boosted wildly by being overpowered. As they have been in most editions. Take aware the mechanical advantages, including their sleep advantage, and they'd still have devotees because they're pretty, anti-hirsute, extremely long-lived and so on - but I think you'd see a significant drop.

One question is would we see more or fewer humans? I think we'd actually see slightly fewer, overall, because I think there are a certain percentage of people who mostly pick human out of fear of making a "bad choice" race-wise or because they just don't want to get involved in the analysis of picking the "right race" for a class or whatever, and humans are fine. But if every race was the right race for a class or setup, then I think things would broaden out a bit.

Also realistically media trends are going to vary stuff - if we see D&D races/species as "stocks" as it were, for Dwarves are going to be way, way up right now from their usual value thanks to Delicious in Dungeon and the beloved Senshi and the badass Namari. Hell even Halflings will be going up thanks primarily to Chilchuck.

I really love that series.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

It would open it up somewhat, but it wouldn't be night and day, for me.

There are a few races in D&D so bad that I wouldn't even consider them, especially not after free stat choice. PHB Dragonborn are one. But there aren't many. Maybe a double-handful at most.

And I tend to like outre races, and in 5E, those have also tended to be pretty good and powerful. Like, I might well play a Satyr or Yuan-Ti based on their basic concept.

You know what I'd never play again without it offering a mechanical benefit though? A BLOODY ELF. Half-Elf or similar, sure. Not another bloody elf though!

But you theory is, I think, broadly correct - most people, most of the time, are picking races primarily for the vibes, for the roleplaying, for the cool ears, and so on. There are certain races that are elevated or pushed down by being mechanically awful or great. Elves in 5E, for example, are simply boosted wildly by being overpowered. As they have been in most editions. Take aware the mechanical advantages, including their sleep advantage, and they'd still have devotees because they're pretty, anti-hirsute, extremely long-lived and so on - but I think you'd see a significant drop.

One question is would we see more or fewer humans? I think we'd actually see slightly fewer, overall, because I think there are a certain percentage of people who mostly pick human out of fear of making a "bad choice" race-wise or because they just don't want to get involved in the analysis of picking the "right race" for a class or whatever, and humans are fine. But if every race was the right race for a class or setup, then I think things would broaden out a bit.

Also realistically media trends are going to vary stuff - if we see D&D races/species as "stocks" as it were, for Dwarves are going to be way, way up right now from their usual value thanks to Delicious in Dungeon and the beloved Senshi and the badass Namari. Hell even Halflings will be going up thanks primarily to Chilchuck.

Very funny! I just played and elf for thr first time since 2000!

I wanted an extra cantrip and elven accuracy for an artillerist artificer…I thought it would double down on a quick and accurate attacker whether with shortsword or arcane firearm!

I prefer dwarves but these benefits persuaded me to go elf this time…

The extra feat really pushed a lot of us to go with variant human.

Armor on mountain dwarves makes for a good blade pact warlock…

 

[CleverNickName]

I have an untested theory that lots of players would still choose to play the same species they would have with the mechanical benefits. In other words, if you wanted to play a Dwarf Fighter, you would choose Dwarf whether there was a mechanical benefit or not.

This is because, in my opinion, the choice of species has more to do with the story a player wants to tell (or experience), and less to do with mechanical benefits. A player who wants to be an elf is going to play as an elf whether they receive a +2 to Dexterity or not. A player who wants to be an Ooze is going to play as a Plasmoid even if they don't have explicit rules about sliding under doors.

The Custom Lineage rules in Tasha's Cauldron of Everything seem to agree with this assessment. The approach is more "think about what you want to accomplish, and then just invent the specifics to suit your preference." It looks like Wizards of the Coast has given this matter a lot of consideration.