Do We Really Need Half-Elves and Half-Orcs?

lowkey13 said:

HOWEVER, I strongly disagree with you about campaigns. Many, if not most, DMs run a standard "kitchen sink" fantasy campaign setting. And that's fine (I have run many of those). But if the DM is running something else, then you should try and abide by those strictures. Because, well, respect is a two-way street. Not to beat a broken drum, but I have never seen a game of D&D played, yet, where the DM didn't have the most in terms of commitment (time). If the DM is going to run a specialized campaign, and put that effort it, then why not play within those strictures? To use the Dark Sun example- you can always play a gnome, so why not, for this one DS campaign, play a DS race (for example)?

In other words, if you are lucky enough to have an involved DM (not just a "my way or the highway jerk DM") why shouldn't the players at least try to make it work in a campaign, instead of just creating a "whatever" generic character?

In the end, it's about communication- if the DM makes it clear what type of campaign it is going to be, then you can make your choice. But IMO, I can't imagine that I would want a player, who, after I put together a list of particular rules for that campaign, was all like, "Yeah, whatever man, I wanna play this instead of the countless other options."

Click to expand...

I would agree. I think perhaps I tailored my post too much toward the DM; I am primarily a DM when my group plays, and I used to think such setting restrictions were valid. And I would say that they may even be valid.

My point is that I don't think the reasons presented wind up being all that valid. Most of the time, the reasons seem to be personal preference masked as "the setting". At least in the discussions I've seen online. Very rarely do I ever see anyone describe a restriction like "No Tieflings" and then explain why, and I think, "wow, that really makes sense." Usually all I win up thinking is "wow, you really hate tieflings."

The examples I gave are more restrictive, and therefore a bit different, I think. But most of the ones I see online don't accomplish what they claim to. This is from my admittedly limited poin of view of hearing about them online rather than in playing in the actual game, of course. But that's why I use Athas as a go to in these discussions...it's a common ground we can all use as a baseline for discussion.

But aside from that, yes, I think that players can be just as guilty of a dick move by deciding to play a character that goes against the campaign concept. I agree with that totally. I just don't know if I think that targeted racial restrictions really do all that much for a campaign's feel. I also don't think that picking a specific race really MUST be counter to the feel of a campaign.

Perhaps the player has an interesting concept for their Athasian gnome. Perhaps that player has even given more thought to the setting than a player who simply looked at the list of allowable races and classes and said "okay I'll play a human fighter".

billd91 said:

In your opinion. Personally, I think it's one of the better reasons to remove a race from play. If the DM wants to work with a setting with only a limited set of races, that's fine as far as I'm concerned. We do that kind of thing reasonably frequently in the games I play in.

Click to expand...

Well, yes, it's my opinion of course!

Do you have a specific example that would illustrate how such a restriction could be useful to establishing the vibe of a campaign? Do you think that the lack of gnomes (or orcs or trolls or a myriad of other non-playable races) really brings all that much to Dark Sun? Because I don't think most of the time that such specific racial restrictions do much for a setting. That's all I was saying. I'd like to hear some examples that may change my mind. Usually, people don't get specific about this topic, so it's hard to judge....but generally speaking, it seems that the restrictions usually boil down to personal preference and little more.

I think that an all human or all elf, etc. campaign can have a specific feel. But I don't think that's nearly as true of a no dragonborn or no halfling campaign.

To me, once you've let the dwarf and the elf in, you may as well let them hold the door for the dragonborn and tiefling.

hawkeyefan said:

Do you think that the lack of gnomes (or orcs or trolls or a myriad of other non-playable races) really brings all that much to Dark Sun? etc.

Click to expand...

Yes. A setting is a collection of ideas to provide a specific narrative feel and tone. Dark Sun feels very different from Forgotten Realms for exactly this reason. For the choice of races, magic, items, rarity of resources all set this tone.

Dragging a race into such a setting "just 'cause" is disrupting to the tone and narrative.

The lack of Dwemer (dwarves) in the Elder Scrolls is a perfect example of how a race missing creates an interesting narrative feel.

The problem with gnomes is that in most games halflings and gnomes are somewhat interchangeable -- just like half-elves don't necessarily fill an interesting niche.

Your argument about removing races could be the same for low magic vs high magic or including lasers and power armor in a particular game.

A proper session 0 can satisfy most of these types of issues to make sure everyone at the table is on the same page. However, the DM still puts in most of the work and if the DM isn't on board with a particular option the game suffers (or falls apart).

Also 99% of the time, the character concept a player is going for easily fits in the whatever setting restrictions are in place.

That being said, I personally use more of a carrot than a stick. I run a point buy system starting a 20 points and then based upon race/class/alignment choices players can get up to 32 points.

So a player that wants to play a Chaotic Evil Kenku will have to work with 20 points. A Lawful Good Cleric of Human/Dwarf/Elf can get 32 points. I have found this tends to cut down on the menagerie effect. The points change though depending on the setting -- a Spelljammer setting works fine thematically with a party that looks like it belongs to a clown show.

hawkeyefan said:

I have yet to see a strong enough justification by a DM for removing a PC race from play. “Because the setting....” doesn’t cut it.

Look at Dark Sun; perfect example of a setting with some alternate race options, and some of the standard ones removed. Now add a gnome PC. Athas does not come crashing down because of the presence of a gnome. There are still plenty of races that can be cited as having been hunted to extermination by the sorcerer kings. The other, far more important elements of the setting, remain unchanged.

Homebrew worlds aren’t really going to be any different. The setting will get by if you allow a tiefling or a dragonborn or a drow. None are so game changing as to undo the feel of a setting. Or perhaps if they are, then there really isn’t much to the setting to begin with. To lean on Dark Sun again as an example, when asked to describe the setting of Athas, how many people will list “there’s no gnomes” first in their description? Zero.

Even @lowkey13 would put that behind “no paladins”.

There are two exceptions that I can think of; the first being a quasi-historical setting that requires only humans. The other is the “all one race” game, like we’re all drow or we’re all dwarves, or whatever. These limits do seem to be justified in the sense that a specific feel can be attained. But both examples actually advocate for the removal of ALL other race options and not just one or two. And both of these examples also seems much more likely to have recieved some level of player buy in prior to play. They’re large enough departures from what’s expected to warrant letting the players know. By comparison, a DM not liking drow because of Drizzt, and barring them from play seems much more like something that will only come up once someone says “I’m gonna make a drow.” Which is a dick move.

Click to expand...

I'm in a game right now and as far as we know our village is the last of the humans. So far we have encountered Dwarves and Tieflings, both races that really needed our help to survive. We helped the dwarves first and became trading partners with them, etc. In our game the dwarves are now a playable race. We recently helped the tieflings escape their dying planet and if all goes well they will eventually become a playable race as well.

So in our setting, our actions as players tend to determine what other races become available for us. So far the only races we have encountered have been wood elves, mountain dwarves and tiefling and most of those haven't been playable for most of the game.

I wouldn't have this campaign any other way.

I'm all for half-elves and half-orcs, I simply wish they were human with variant features as opposed to entirely new races unto themselves.

Having half elves and half orcs be variants of humans seems to be a common theme. How would people go about creating them? I'd probably base it off the variant human but with set abilities instead of a specific feat/skill. Ability increases I'd probably still keep as variable rather than setting them to str/con for half orc and cha/? for half elf.

You could blend the current PHB Half-Elf and Half-Orc with the Human Variant. Maybe something like:

Half-Elf (Human subrace)
Ability Score Increase. Your Dexterity or Charisma score increases by 1, and one other ability score of your choice increases by 1.
Age. (as PHB Half-Elf)
Alignment. (as PHB Half-Elf)
Size. (as PHB Half-Elf)
Speed. (as PHB Half-Elf)
Darkvision OR Fey Ancestry (replaces Human Variant Feat)
Skills. You gain proficiency in one skill of your choice.
Languages. (as PHB Half-Elf)

Half-Orc (Human subrace)
Ability Score Increase. Your Strength or Constitution score increases by 1, and one other ability score of your choice increases by 1.
Age. (as PHB Half-Orc)
Alignment. (as PHB Half-Orc)
Size. (as PHB Half-Orc)
Speed. (as PHB Half-Orc)
Darkvision OR Savage Attacks (replaces Human Variant Feat)
Menacing. (as PHB Half-Orc)
Relentless Endurance. (as PHB Half-Orc)
Languages. (as PHB Half-Orc)

Keeping Relentless Endurance is because the player does not get to choose a skill, they must accept the Intimidation skill (from Menacing).

I would start with something like those and tweak them as desired.

WaterRabbit said:

Yes. A setting is a collection of ideas to provide a specific narrative feel and tone. Dark Sun feels very different from Forgotten Realms for exactly this reason. For the choice of races, magic, items, rarity of resources all set this tone.

Dragging a race into such a setting "just 'cause" is disrupting to the tone and narrative.

Click to expand...

How so? I know what makes a setting. You listed several thinga that are, in my opinion, much more important to a setting than the available PC races.

So what race would disrupt what kind of tone? I’m unfamiliar with Elder Scrolls and the absence of dwemer/dwarves.

I fully get how laser guns and power armor would disrupt a D&D type setting (Barrier Peaks aside). But races seem far less disruptive. I mean, take elements from sci-fi and put them into fantasy, and you’ve changed the tone, if not the entire genre. But take a race from a sci-fi story and drop it into fantasy....let’s say Wookies or Klingons....they pretty much fit right in.

WaterRabbit said:

A proper session 0 can satisfy most of these types of issues to make sure everyone at the table is on the same page. However, the DM still puts in most of the work and if the DM isn't on board with a particular option the game suffers (or falls apart).

Also 99% of the time, the character concept a player is going for easily fits in the whatever setting restrictions are in place.

That being said, I personally use more of a carrot than a stick. I run a point buy system starting a 20 points and then based upon race/class/alignment choices players can get up to 32 points.

So a player that wants to play a Chaotic Evil Kenku will have to work with 20 points. A Lawful Good Cleric of Human/Dwarf/Elf can get 32 points. I have found this tends to cut down on the menagerie effect. The points change though depending on the setting -- a Spelljammer setting works fine thematically with a party that looks like it belongs to a clown show.

Click to expand...

I agree about session 0. And your last comment about a clown show seems to be hinting at what I’m trying to understand. At least I think. What do you mean by clown show?

In te games my group tends to play, there are few restrictions. We don’t mind differing alignments or an odd collection of classes and races among the characters. I can’t think of any games that lost the tone they were going for....not for player choices of game options anyway.

FrogReaver said:

I'm in a game right now and as far as we know our village is the last of the humans. So far we have encountered Dwarves and Tieflings, both races that really needed our help to survive. We helped the dwarves first and became trading partners with them, etc. In our game the dwarves are now a playable race. We recently helped the tieflings escape their dying planet and if all goes well they will eventually become a playable race as well.

So in our setting, our actions as players tend to determine what other races become available for us. So far the only races we have encountered have been wood elves, mountain dwarves and tiefling and most of those haven't been playable for most of the game.

I wouldn't have this campaign any other way.

Click to expand...

That’s a cool take on how to handle it. I suppose there’s a high amount of character turnover? Are players regularly exercising the new options?

It’s definitely a cool idea. Kind of like level up options for the campaign.

hawkeyefan said:

That’s a cool take on how to handle it. I suppose there’s a high amount of character turnover? Are players regularly exercising the new options?

It’s definitely a cool idea. Kind of like level up options for the campaign.

Click to expand...

Yes, it's a fairly deadly game and I think the DM's idea was to give us options we could unlock or not unlock. Only 1 player that's been playing the whole time hasn't lost a PC yet. Deaths don't just come about by combat either. But the deaths are often very memorable and meaningful events. Saving the tieflings involved giving up one of our "tickets home". We weren't forced to do so but two players decided they would and we had a rather comical scene of who was going to give theirs to the tieflings sun God first.

The first PC that died was to a dryad essentially turning him into part of the forest, he went willingly but didn't understand the full consequences of his actions at the time. He's made the fey essentially non-hostile to humans and now is an NPC ent and is ultimately the source of the wood elves even though they aren't quite playable yet. Funny story is that in trying to stop him from going with the Dryad the wizard successfully cast sleep on him, stopping him from going but she picked him up and carried him away from us into the forest as everyone else looked on. (It's kind of quite fitting that elves are immune to sleep magic in our game...)

Our wizard on his death magically merged some of his consciousness with his spell book becoming an artifact book and seeks a way to live again. The book itself is also able to recall details the party provide it and can show the party and others those details later. He contains the history of the party and nearly everything that has happened to them as they bring the book every where they go.

We just recently got a Dwarf available, the first non-human race we could play and a player has already made a dwarf wizard. I imagine someone will play a tiefling not long after they become an available PC race.

Outside of races, feats were banned in the game, but feats (and homebrew ones) can become available to PC's by working at them. Our rogue kept on looking for herbs and things that could heal us. Would try to make potions and bandage us up. The DM gave him a choice at level 4 of an potion making style feat or the healer feat if he wanted one of those instead of his normal ASI. At some point he may even pass that knowledge on enough to make the feat available to other PC's.

So our campaign has started out very restricted in options but through roleplay and character decisions we often are able to get new options unlocked.

WaterRabbit said:

The points change though depending on the setting -- a Spelljammer setting works fine thematically with a party that looks like it belongs to a clown show.

Click to expand...

Are you implying that Spelljammer isn't a clown show? /jk