D&D General Vote up a 5e-Alike: Ancestries! (First Draft)

[Faolyn]

To reflect their "Rockhide" ability and to differentiate them further from other species, I'd have the weight range be more like 180-220 lb, if not even higher.

Good idea! I'm not entirely sure about the disadvantage when swimming. It's a good idea, but I haven't included any disadvantages in any other ancestry.

Folks? Should each ancestry have a disadvantage in some way?

Add the words "when underground" to the bolded, to save a lot of headaches when players try to exploit this for outdoors use.

I honestly don't see a problem with them using it above ground.

Caverns should not be on this list. Elves don't do underground like Dwarves and Gnomes etc. do.

The drow and the Mystaran shadow elves have both entered the chat. And mythologically speaking, you have the dokkalfar and a couple of types of subterranean nymph in Greek myth.

Overpowered. KttW should be tied to (and locked in to) the terrain type where the Elf has spent most of its life prior to adventuring, i.e. where it grew up.

That's one possibility, but it leads to a problem: what if the terrain you took as a background never comes up in game. I.e., you choose to be a Prairie Elf, but the game takes place entirely in forests and dungeons. For a lot of people, this would be a major disappointment, bordering on anger-inducing. I could see dialing it back a bit. I don't want these elves to be Better Than You.

Plus, it's connected to the bit about them being able to choose their sex, which comes from Tasha's Cauldron of Everything.

Not sure if this should even be here; if it's kept the cantrip should be random, not chosen.

I disagree here. Random rolls can mean the difference between a character that is fun to play and and one that is completely worthless or boring.

When I've played Cypher System games, your starting cyphers are rolled randomly (at least that's what my GM does) and are almost always useless for me. I don't mean in terms of power level; I mean in terms of having nothing to do with my character's background or the idea I had for them. Imagine getting a magic item designed for loud, flashy, front-line fighters and you're playing a sneak-thief. Cyphers one-use items and easily replaceable because the whole game is about getting new ones, but because they were randomly rolled and didn't fit my characters, I had no use for them and thus was missing out on options. This would be worse if it were a cantrip you can't get rid of or swap out.

This should be for Orcs, not Elves. Also, the change should not be controllable - it happens a randomly-determined number of days after the last change (I'd say d100 + 50) UNLESS the creature is or becomes pregnant, in which case it must remain female at least until birth.

Again, this is something that would be very troublesome for a lot of players. Some people don't want to play certain sexes and many people don't want something as personal as their gender to be dictated by a die roll. One of my players is non-binary and really doesn't want to play any game that would force them to be a particular gender; the idea of it really upsets them.

And honestly, it doesn't fit any aspect of orc I've heard about it.

No. Both too meta and a bit overpowered. Lose this one.

Humans need something; they should be cool in their own right, not just be the base average.

The added crit die is fine; that can easily be explained by a lifetime of getting into fights.

This ties into the Mighty Thews. Even a scrawny 6-Strength orc who doesn't know what part of the sword to hold is stronger than a 6-Strength human. They can carry more and can sometimes hit a lot harder.

This entire piece should be fully optional; and for those that choose it, completely random in what you're tainted with and what it gives you (and what it gives shouldn't all be benefits or additional abilities - there should be potential drawbacks too!). Otherwise, if nothing else every Human played by a wise player will take it just for the darkvision.

It's a game rule, which means it already is completely optional, and, well, see above for random things and how they aren't useful. Plus, if you want to have a character who background says they escaped the Feywild or their parents were cultists or whose fly-by-night dad was actually an angel, it's nice to be able to reflect that in your stats.

 

[Faolyn]

I liked the post, but not for this. No playable monsters, thanks!

Heh, so humans only?

 

[Lanefan]

Good idea! I'm not entirely sure about the disadvantage when swimming. It's a good idea, but I haven't included any disadvantages in any other ancestry.

Folks? Should each ancestry have a disadvantage in some way?

Probably not a bad idea, because... (see below)

The drow and the Mystaran shadow elves have both entered the chat. And mythologically speaking, you have the dokkalfar and a couple of types of subterranean nymph in Greek myth.

Drow shouldn't be PC-playable IMO, therefore I ignore them when considering what Elves should have going for them.

That's one possibility, but it leads to a problem: what if the terrain you took as a background never comes up in game. I.e., you choose to be a Prairie Elf, but the game takes place entirely in forests and dungeons.

Tough. Them's the breaks.

That said, ideally a DM will vary the adventure locations enough that most terrain types will appear at some point.

I disagree here. Random rolls can mean the difference between a character that is fun to play and and one that is completely worthless or boring.

When I've played Cypher System games, your starting cyphers are rolled randomly (at least that's what my GM does) and are almost always useless for me. I don't mean in terms of power level; I mean in terms of having nothing to do with my character's background or the idea I had for them. Imagine getting a magic item designed for loud, flashy, front-line fighters and you're playing a sneak-thief.

Yep. Again, them's the breaks. My response: always be very flexible with your character concepts, as the dice won't always cooperate.

Cyphers one-use items and easily replaceable because the whole game is about getting new ones, but because they were randomly rolled and didn't fit my characters, I had no use for them and thus was missing out on options. This would be worse if it were a cantrip you can't get rid of or swap out.

Given that it's a freebie benefit, I can't see any reason to complain if it's something not always useful.

Again, this is something that would be very troublesome for a lot of players. Some people don't want to play certain sexes and many people don't want something as personal as their gender to be dictated by a die roll. One of my players is non-binary and really doesn't want to play any game that would force them to be a particular gender; the idea of it really upsets them.

So those players don't play that species. End of issue.

And honestly, it doesn't fit any aspect of orc I've heard about it.

I've never bought into the D&D depiction of Elvish gender, but for my current campaign I did give the (random frequency) gender-flip piece to pure Orcs (not to Part-Orcs) as an experiment to see how it'd work on a common but non-PC-playable species. So far so good.

Humans need something; they should be cool in their own right, not just be the base average.

(this is where the see-below leads) ... Humans should be the baseline* to which everything else is then (vaguely) balanced, including drawbacks to cancel out the benefits. This is why I hold that species-based ASIs should go both up AND down.

* - something has to be the baseline against which everything else is measured, and if not Humans then who?

This ties into the Mighty Thews. Even a scrawny 6-Strength orc who doesn't know what part of the sword to hold is stronger than a 6-Strength human. They can carry more and can sometimes hit a lot harder.

To the bolded: no. Flat hard no. As in, dealbreaker-level no.

Strength 6 is Strength 6 regardless who or what has it. If you want the Orc to be stronger than a Human in the fiction then give it a higher Strength score to reflect that at the table.

If what you're getting at is that the bell-curve for Orc Strength goes more like 7-20 than the 3-18 range for Humans, then I get that. However, what this means to me is that a Strength-6 Orc simply can't exist in the setting: the weakest of Orcs is still Str-7, and the scores have to be adjusted to suit.

It's a game rule, which means it already is completely optional, and, well, see above for random things and how they aren't useful. Plus, if you want to have a character who background says they escaped the Feywild or their parents were cultists or whose fly-by-night dad was actually an angel, it's nice to be able to reflect that in your stats.

I don't think things that potentially give great benefits (e.g. angelic ancestry) should ever be chooseable. Random, sure. I expect that some people in the setting are simply better/luckier than others, even among adventurers.

 

[Tonguez]

I liked the post, but not for this. No playable monsters, thanks!

thats a fair position but we already have Orc and goblin was one of the races highlighted in the poll - I’m just saying give the people what they asked for!

 

[Faolyn]

my only concerns with this is total choice from any and all cantrips, personally i might specifiy they can pick a non-offensive cantrip, also in the interest of versatility i'd let them pick any mental stat at character creation (if that even matters on utility cantrips).

It'd probably be easier when we codify exactly how magic works. We may use those unusual spell schools we'd talked about elsewhere, or put everything into arcane/divine/primal/occult boxes instead.

even if they're small i think it would give them a good thematic niche to give them 35ft movespeed, focusing on their movement based capabilites, i've remarked in threads before that i think small creatures get the short end of the stick being imposed with a number of restrictions for not alot of benefits

That is true. Hmm. Maybe instead of a 35 ft. speed, since they do have those bitty legs, they can Dash as a bonus action, maybe with a tabaxi-like restriction of limiting how many times they can do it in a row. Little creatures walk slowly but can run like mad when they want to

while thematically cool, i don't know how significant having natural weapons actually is, maybe something like a 20ft line bullrush to knock enemies prone or ability to push enemies when you make a melee attack would be more useful

Well, they're weapons that can't be taken away from you, which is handy.

personally on all standard ASI i'd let them raise the cap to 24 on both choices of stats even though they only get the +2 on one of them, but with unusual ancestry one of those stat caps is changed to be CHA with the +2 moved there

this is very desirable, i'd alter it to 30ft low light vision like the elf but put in a clause that says if you already have low light it upgrades to 30ft darkvision

Fair enough; that's two votes against it. I did try to keep darkvision as rare as possible, which is why only dwarfs have it among the standard ancestries. I feel like if anyone were to have darkvision, it would be these unusual ancestries, but I have zero problem downgrading it to low-light vision. (As someone who prefers running horror; darkvision has messed up more than one plan.)

if the element is air i might offer the ability to instead create a strong breeze or something similar

Good idea. Also, thanks for pointing out that I had forgotten to include ranges or areas of effects.

 

[Faolyn]

thats a fair position but we already have Orc and goblin was one of the races highlighted in the poll - I’m just saying give the people what they asked for!

I had forgotten about the goblins! <smacks head>

 

[CreamCloud0]

Well, they're weapons that can't be taken away from you, which is handy.

sure but in what seems like 99% of circumstances players are either geared up with more weapons than an armoury within arms reach or when the group does encounter a scenario where they've lost all their weapons it'll of already of been accounted for somehow due to the rest of the group not having them, not to mention natural weapons not exactly being all that strong.

 

[Lanefan]

thats a fair position but we already have Orc and goblin was one of the races highlighted in the poll - I’m just saying give the people what they asked for!

OK, that's fair. I didn't know (or forgot) that Goblin was one of the species voted in. I assume they'll roughly take the place of Gnomes, then?

 

[Bill Zebub]

You lost me at “Ability Score Modifier”.

 

[Faolyn]

Probably not a bad idea, because... (see below)

Drow shouldn't be PC-playable IMO, therefore I ignore them when considering what Elves should have going for them.

See, my table and I all hate the idea of Always Evil races and therefore see no reason why subterranean elves shouldn't be playable.

Tough. Them's the breaks.

Hard disagree. There's no point giving an ancestry an ability that's going to be useless a lot of the time. It's incredibly frustrating to have abilities or other character elements that can't be used 90% of the time.

That said, ideally a DM will vary the adventure locations enough that most terrain types will appear at some point.

Maybe, maybe not. But not all games are travelogues, and not all travelogues are going to go through all terrain types.

Yep. Again, them's the breaks. My response: always be very flexible with your character concepts, as the dice won't always cooperate.

That's only if you believe in rolling randomly for backgrounds or build them after you roll your stats--which not everybody does. A very large percentage of players come up with their backgrounds before their stats. This isn't like the old days where you rolled 3d6 in order and then resigned yourself to playing whatever it was you rolled the highest in, even if you hated the class.

So those players don't play that species. End of issue.

Not end of issue, because there's no reason for a game like D&D to force you to play as a particular gender or to gatekeep an ancestry behind an ability like that; nor should D&D try to go out of its way to make a race uncomfortable for people to play. That's why the gender change thing is listed as an optional trait, not one that you must take if you want to play an elf.

(this is where the see-below leads) ... Humans should be the baseline* to which everything else is then (vaguely) balanced, including drawbacks to cancel out the benefits. This is why I hold that species-based ASIs should go both up AND down.

Nah, humanity as a baseline is boring and there's not only no reason to have a boring race in the game, it also ignores that humans can actually be really cool. HFY all the way!

And, well, IME most disadvantages in a game like D&D are either going to be useless (if your dwarfs have a hard time swimming and the game takes place almost entirely on dry land, your dwarf basically has no disadvantages) or crippling (like D&D races with sunlight sensitivity, which penalizes them during 90% of gameplay). Or filled with Unfortunate Implications, like any sort of stat penalty, especially mental stats.

* - something has to be the baseline against which everything else is measured, and if not Humans then who?

A platonic ideal of Averageness, perhaps.

To the bolded: no. Flat hard no. As in, dealbreaker-level no.

Strength 6 is Strength 6 regardless who or what has it. If you want the Orc to be stronger than a Human in the fiction then give it a higher Strength score to reflect that at the table.

How high do you want the attribute tables to go up to? I looked it up; one of the strongest humans in the real world was able to bench something like 535 pounds, which in 5e terms means a Strength of 35 (and could deadlift over a thousand pounds), or 18 if you are playing a Medium race with a Heavy Lifter type trait. But in 5e, you're limited to Strength of 20, or 300 pounds; dragons don't even have Strength 35.

Anyway, for an orc to be as strong as you think they should be, they'd have to start out with a Strength of well above 20--which would make them far too OP to allow in a game. The same goes for any stat modifications. You want halflings to be physically weak? They'd have to have a Strength of, like, 4 if you want humans to be the baseline. Want elves to be particularly graceful? They'd all have to start out with Dex scores of at least 18 or 20. It's all going to be either OP or so weak that nobody would ever want to play them.

See, the game-standard of a +1 or +2 or even +4 to a stat is no more than a +1 or +2 to a d20 roll, or a 5% o 10% on a d%, and that does next to nothing to make a race feel stronger or smarter (or weaker or more clumsy). It's just an annoying thing that tries to force people into specific race/class combos or penalizes them if they choose to break the mold, which is both boring and highly limiting.

And above everything else, those numbers are abstract. A Strength of 6 doesn't really mean all that much. A person with an Intelligence of 5 is fully playable as anything but a wizard, really--but I used to work with developmentally disabled adults, and an actual person with an Intelligence that low wouldn't might not be able to even talk, walk, or use their hands properly, let alone adventure and hold a sword. (The brain controls the body; if you have a very low IQ, your brain is, as one of my old professors put it, basically Swiss cheese and your body simply won't work properly because of it.)

So an orc with a Strength of 6 is fine. All it means is that they get a -2 to their Strength-based rolls. They'll still be able lift more than a human with the same Strength, and they'll still do more damage that even an average human on a critical hit. And you know what? That's fun.

If what you're getting at is that the bell-curve for Orc Strength goes more like 7-20 than the 3-18 range for Humans, then I get that. However, what this means to me is that a Strength-6 Orc simply can't exist in the setting: the weakest of Orcs is still Str-7, and the scores have to be adjusted to suit.

And that's another thing. Why can't a Strength 6 or exist in the setting? Why can't I have them in my game? Why does the game have to forbid them?

I don't think things that potentially give great benefits (e.g. angelic ancestry) should ever be chooseable. Random, sure. I expect that some people in the setting are simply better/luckier than others, even among adventurers.

And a third thing. Why not? Your game, sure, but everyone's game? They're fictional characters, entirely under our control.