D&D 5E Single-race, non-human campaign.

[Sunseeker]

I was thinking up some good campaign ideas and came up with a few good ones for campaigns that were entirely non-human, or limited only to two races (human and one other). However in such a setting the "other" race would be roughly as vast and diverse as humans, and I want that to be able to be represented mechanically.

So I was thinking: in a setting without humans, would it be fair (to the system) to allow players to choose the 'human stats' or even the human variant stats in place of the standard racial-specific stats? I don't see this as potentially unbalanced since everyone at the table would have the option to take them, or possibly would be forced to use them, depending on how I set it up. Has anyone tried this? I'll welcome experiences from older editions as well.

Also: in a bi-racial campaign, ie: humans and one "other" does anyone have any good thoughts for diversifying the stats of the "other" race to better represent a larger, more diverse population without simply "humanizing" the stat choices? I considered letting players invert the racial stats, ie: instead of +2str, +1wis; now it's: +1str, +2wis. But I'm not sure that would be sufficiently variant, again I'm doing this in 5th, but experiences from any edition are welcome.

 

[LandOfConfusion]

Theoretically you can just rename all the races in the PHB. Or at least a handful of races. Issues of game balance really only matter when you want to take stuff from your game to another game. I mean yes you can break stuff at your table, but if it is broken for everyone it doesn't really matter. So, don't get hung up on labels or even game balance. Ok pay attention to balance in so much as you don't want to make one option way better than all other options. Then players feel they need to take that option.

If you want to make a world where there is one race, like real life on the planet Earth, then just pick a race and do it. If you want to essentially use sub-races then just reskin the races in the book. Come up with reasons why there is differences and variations in all these sub-races. Magic, where they live, influence from the gods, whatever. The sub-races don't have to look or act like the race you are using from the PHB. For example you could take the dwarf stats and say they are a sub-race of humans that live in the mountains and revere work and endurance. They are actually large because they don't protect the weak among them, so only the strongest survive.

This would take care of any game balance worries you may have.

 

[Mephista]

Well, this kind of situation is exactly why we have subraces. Take elves. There are four subraces, plus the half-elf, for a total of five different stat combinations.

Its pretty easy to create new subraces for the dwarves as well. Draugr would get a +1 Charisma bonus, as well as some spells, taken from the MM. Favor the sorcerer class. A half-dwarf... well, I'm sure there's some out there, but I have no idea of anything about them. Dwarven alchemists are also a thing, and that's a wizard subclass, so a +1 Int subrace with a bonus to crafting things wouldn't be amiss.

Tieflings... for tieflings, I actually combined them with aasimar, then used that as a base for making a series of sub races. +2 Charisma, +1 any other attribute, darkvision as the base. Subraces get different resistances and different spells. Default tieflings keep their spells, though tweaking Thaumaturgy to work on giving intimidate and bluff bonuses via GM giving advantage. Aasimar swap out Light cantrip for Guidance, to reflect the 4e Deva reincarnation bonus. Add other celestial / fiendish subraces as inspiration strikes.


After subraces, there is the option of allowing one to 'give up' +2 worth of your starting attribtues for a feat. That also creates more variation at beginning.


Now, I'm personally against "human and other race X." Simply because that risks the game defaulting back to "human." Keep in mind something else - there's nothing wrong with playing a human in an elf-focused game. Or, for that matter, a dwarf. However, be sure to point out that the story line will be based around elves, include elven cities and prejudices and issues. Non-elves could come up as slaves, or maybe orphans raised by elves, or something with a connection to the plot.

The point of single-race games is to focus on the stories of that race. If a player has an idea for a half-orc raised by dwarves, and is defined by the struggle against their anger and their mother's people attacking their adopted family's mountain home, then by all means, go for it if it'll fit into your campaign.

Most players are good about working with the DM when they present an idea that they want to work with.

 

[steeldragons]

Insofar as I am following what you're asking and, for whatever reason, not just picking two races from the books as is how about this that i just made up:

Ability Generation: Roll 4d6, drop the lowest. Every PC gets +4 they can apply as they wish. HOWEVER!...

Race A can only apply their bonus points to: Str., Wis., or Cha.
Race B can only apply their bonus points to: Int., Dex., or Con.

Shake them up/season to taste. But figure this would generate a baseline of racial diversity and racial vis a vis cultural foci. What does a culture of highly intelligent, speedy and/or tough folks look like? What about some physically intimidating, but personable with a deep spiritual enlightenment?

Also allows to play into or against tropes like Elves can have Int. & Dex, but if they do need to be wimpy/low Con. Well, now you could have a aslightly less smart, but still speedy and unusually tough elf. Have a nation of strong and charismatic dwarven paladins, who are not particularly "tough" in the typically thought of dwarvish way. Or a dwarven culture built around a warlock-upper class, ever concerned with increasing their powers (and Charisma) to the point that the typical dwarven "toughness" has essentially been forgotten/bred out.

I don't know...first cup of coffee and all...but seems like there's some possibilities in there that I may not even be seeing at the moment.

Do note, I have no idea if it would WORK! I've never done this in a game I've run or seen it done before.

But there's an idea for ya.

 

[Sunseeker]

Well, this kind of situation is exactly why we have subraces. Take elves. There are four subraces, plus the half-elf, for a total of five different stat combinations.

Its pretty easy to create new subraces for the dwarves as well. Draugr would get a +1 Charisma bonus, as well as some spells, taken from the MM. Favor the sorcerer class. A half-dwarf... well, I'm sure there's some out there, but I have no idea of anything about them. Dwarven alchemists are also a thing, and that's a wizard subclass, so a +1 Int subrace with a bonus to crafting things wouldn't be amiss.

Tieflings... for tieflings, I actually combined them with aasimar, then used that as a base for making a series of sub races. +2 Charisma, +1 any other attribute, darkvision as the base. Subraces get different resistances and different spells. Default tieflings keep their spells, though tweaking Thaumaturgy to work on giving intimidate and bluff bonuses via GM giving advantage. Aasimar swap out Light cantrip for Guidance, to reflect the 4e Deva reincarnation bonus. Add other celestial / fiendish subraces as inspiration strikes.

I don't think I had intended to get that complex with it all, but I really do like the idea and I feel it may be worth the effort to go and do this. Being the sort of person that I am I wouldn't mind following in your footsteps and creating a laundry-list of subraces for the ones currently lacking it and perhaps something creative for humans as well.

After subraces, there is the option of allowing one to 'give up' +2 worth of your starting attribtues for a feat. That also creates more variation at beginning.

Without humans being an option and with my campaign intended to start at level 1, I think I would allow this straight across though, or perhaps the "original" race would get the feat option, while the rest would get some additional perks.

If it helps with suggestions, my campaign is intended Dragonborn-centered, sort of an 'ending of the age of dragons' sort of thing with your players essentially playing out whether your society and species will fade into the mix of rising new species (who are this point, too savage or too isolated to be considered playable) or if you're willing to pay the price for racial supremacy (yes there will be some serious racist tones in the game, I think most of my players can handle this).

Now, I'm personally against "human and other race X." Simply because that risks the game defaulting back to "human." Keep in mind something else - there's nothing wrong with playing a human in an elf-focused game. Or, for that matter, a dwarf. However, be sure to point out that the story line will be based around elves, include elven cities and prejudices and issues. Non-elves could come up as slaves, or maybe orphans raised by elves, or something with a connection to the plot.

Right, I mean I could see potentially "free elves" or "free humans" as possible player options, but you're right that it just really wouldn't work if I wanted to keep the game in arguably "unfriendly" lands for an extended period of time.

Most players are good about working with the DM when they present an idea that they want to work with.

Yeah, I know a few who aren't, but I think I'm gonna go ahead and just take the party temperature and see if "a party of humans" or "a party of elves(or whatever)" seems more attractive to them, and whichever side of the game they decide to start on would be the one we play through.

 

[Mephista]

Dragonborn are... a bit tricky, at least statwise. Personally, I think that they're a pretty poorly made race. Its ironic that they make poor dragonblood sorcerers, and, if they do go that route, you're almost better off to pick a different element than the one you picked for race. Their breath weapon scales poorly, quickly becoming a bad option to use in combat; it doesn't help that it keys off Constitution.

Anyways, dragonborn. Thematically, they're supposed to make good berserker (intimidating) barbarians, paladins, battlemaster fighters, valor bards (especially since 3e with their dragon-magic inspiration), and dragon sorcerers.

As things stand, I would recommend the following changes to the race:

~ boosting the stats to +1 Strength, +1 Constitution, +1 Charisma, with a +1 float that can be put on top of any of the other stats.

~ Overall increase the damage more at each milestone. At least 2d6 jump in power instead of just 1d6 at each milestone.

~ Allow class-specific bonuses to add to the power of dragonbreath. Barbarian rage increases the damage from the breath (+2 at 1, +2 * 2 at level 6, +3 * 3 at 11, etc). A divine channel ability Sacred Weapon to increase the DC, or can be used as if a smite attack (hit, dragonbreath smite). Sorcerer level 6 ability that increases elemental spell damages increases elemental breath, and can metamagic it. Battlemasters can use manuevers with it. Valor bards... okay, this is a bit of a stretch, but I'd allow the breath to be "used" as an extra bardic inspiration per rest that used the dragonbreath elemental damage type and some damage bonus when used to boost weapon accuracy / damage.

Not only does this allow the dragonbreath to be more useful, but the way it interacts with each different class helps make the different characters each feel different from each other. It may be a lot stronger, maybe too much stronger, but the general idea is how I would go about it.

 

[Kikuras]

racial supremacy (yes there will be some serious racist tones in the game, I think most of my players can handle this).

As bad as this may sound, I always try to bring racial bias into the characters I play, and I feel that all too often there's WAY too much racial acceptance in D&D. Beyond the classic trope of dwarves and elves not getting along, why would any particular human be accepting of elves? Or dwarves? Elves would be inclined to think everyone is less worthy, not just dwarves. True or not, I've always been told that dragonborn eat halfling babies. What then becomes fun for me is establishing the friendships and comradery between peoples who might normally not get along. Also makes for good RP.

 

[Sunseeker]

Dragonborn are... a bit tricky, at least statwise. *snip*

Yes, I generally agree that of the 5th edition races they're probably the worst designed, but they're also fairly simple, which means stripping down what they have is also simple. Right now, going off your previous post, I'm working on some subraces and trying to decide if I should have 5 subraces with each subrace containing one chromatic and one metallic dragon or if they should each get their own subrace. Then I'm trying to decide if each subrace should get only a +1 to a stat in addition to the str bump or if they should have their own unique stats. I want each subrace to be a little unique from each of the others, but I also want to play off the good/evil mirrored symmetry the chromatic/metallic dragons have. I want there to be a potential for inter-dragonborn-type conflict, but I don't want it to be a default assumption that metallic dragonborn and chromatic dragonborn are at each others throats just a level of standing bigotry both ways.

As far as the breath weapon goes, I think I would add increased uses at each milestone, but leave the dice untouched, it would accomplish the same thing numerically, but add utility, which I tend to favor over straight damage.

ugh, sick, was gonna write more, brain fog...

 

[aramis erak]

Well, this kind of situation is exactly why we have subraces. Take elves. There are four subraces, plus the half-elf, for a total of five different stat combinations.

Actually, the half-elf alone is 10...
1 fixed stat bonus - can be ignored
ChSD
ChSCo
ChSI
ChSW
ChDCo
ChDI
ChDW
ChCoI
ChCoW
ChIW

With 5+ subraces, a race has 6 possible combinations
Stat A - every member of the race
Stat B - either none, or one of the 5 other attributes

So, 6 possibilities.
7 if you allow for a subrace with a +3 to a single attribute.
So for elves + halfelves, we've got 14 published combinations, so far, or a potential 17.

Humans have 22 possibilities, when you count the default plus the 21 permutations of 2 @+1...

 

[Storminator]

I run a goblins game but I just let the players make any race they want and call them goblins (or hobgoblins or bugbears). I'm interested in the fiction of limited races, not the rules