Tiefling and half-orc should not be in the PHB

[avin]

I know the Forgotten Realms book gave players a lot of variety in how their tieflings could look, and aasamir had a similar selection.

But hey, that's the glory of your games, players can look however they want without having to be explicitly THOSE tieflings. I am totally down with customization.

It wasn't a FR thing, Planescape tieflings did look different from each other, due to difference heritage, so 4E tieflings came from the same place and killed that idea.

 

[Sunseeker]

It wasn't a FR thing, Planescape tieflings did look different from each other, due to difference heritage, so 4E tieflings came from the same place and killed that idea.

I only referenced FR as I'm not familiar with Planescape.

But I'm still kinda 2 minds about the subject, I allow my players a wide berth of vanity customization, but I like the idea that there is a standard "look" for a species.

 

[Klaus]

Maybe the 4e tieflings were the origin of the term that now applies to the varied "fiend-descended" mortals of the cosmos. That way you can have your devil-cake and eat it, too!

 

[underfoot007ct]

1. Your own Wikipedia quote demonstrates that 2-3e Tieflings are one thing, and 4e tieflings another.

2. I'm not calling the race silly, I'm calling the name Tiefling silly. The "ling" ending is diminutive in nature, like halfling or dragonling. It doesn't send the "badass" quality they were looking for.

3. I didn't say anything was wrong with Heavy Metal albums, now did I? Do they or do they not look like something from one?

4. When I attempted to run 4e, I called them Turathi, after the city. I've even heard a few other EnWorlders use the term.

4E Tieflng god a small descriptive change, I think the spirit is still the same. What differences do you consider major ?

Yes, I agree that Tiefling name could be tougher sounding, more "badass".

I played a Tiefling pre 4E, and we just called fellow Tieflings "Tainted" which sounded better. I doubt any heavy metal band will ever name themselves TIEFLING ?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UqFPujRZWo&feature=like-suggest]D&D 4th Edition: Tiefling & the Gnome - YouTube[/ame]

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I can't believe people complain that Tieflings got "changed" because some art shows them with bigger horns and tails.

Imagine these humans:

Elderly Australian Aborigine Woman
Young Japanese Girl
Middle-aged Finnish Man
Adult Nigerian Man

These are HUMANS.

Our Tieflings ought to be able to have some variety, shouldn't they?

We're supposed to have imaginations, us gamers.

 

[Hassassin]

4E Tieflng god a small descriptive change, I think the spirit is still the same. What differences do you consider major ?

Appearance didn't change much but they changed from various unconnected descendants of fiends to a people who made a pact with devils.

 

[Klaus]

Appearance didn't change much but they changed from various unconnected descendants of fiends to a people who made a pact with devils.

Which has zero effect on a campaign without Bael Turath. The fiery theme of the tieflings can be attributed to any number of Lower Planes, and a simple notation changes it to cold (for Caina) or thunder (for Pandemonium), for instance.

 

[hikaizer]

I wonder if part of the problem has been that up until 4E that Players Handbooks were written in mind of a specific default setting. 3E was clearly Greyhawk given its deity listing and 2E was less obviously so. 4E on the other hand didn't really feel much like it was really developed formally. We got hints from various adventure modules but there wasn't really any proper setting. Furthermore the theme and feel (at least to me) seemed to shift and change from the first, to the second and then unto the third Players Handbook.

So if the 5E one has some kind of basic setting in it, then the races in the core rules should reflect that. Having a basic character creation or race section with limited options, and then another chapter or section with more advanced options would seem logical and cater to both groups in the discussion.

My personal opinion is that as long as I can have access to those extra races in the core package I'm not that fussed whether it's in the core PHB, whether that be all encompassing or split into a "Basic" and "Advanced" set, or if it's in a separate book or not. I just want them to be present in the core package.

Also I think perhaps Dragonborn and Tieflings should be separated a little from the other core races. They've got their fans from 4E to be sure, but they're the new kids on the block as far as the whole history of DnD goes. Perhaps making an optional section, including them there and noting that they can fit in, or be excluded at the GM's discretion from the default setting (if it's even as developed as the Points of Light one).

On a side note, if the Points of Light setting did get a better write up than the promo material and small notes in various 4E materials I'd like to know where to find it!

 

[Ratinyourwalls]

Few things irritate me more than spending hours and hours preparing a plot plot outline in a particular setting in which what's available has already been defined beforehand, only to set it before the players and have That One Guy throw a tantrum because he can't make his Tainted Half-Dragonborn/Half-Shifter FactotumNinjaSorcerer concept work within the parameters of the campaign.

And it's always That One Guy who does it. Every group has one--the guy who gets his jollies from playing nothing but oddball character concepts and rebelling against anything he defines as "too Normal." It's like he's going through some sort of personal identity crisis and has this driving psychological need to set himself apart and constantly remind everyone around him that he's not just another sheep in the flock like they are. He demands the spotlight, often in social situations within the story, and gets off on all the drama that surrounds NPCs being revolted by his unusual and generally monstrous PC, detracting from the fun of everyone else around the table, who probably just want to get on with the campaign's storyline and make some progress towards achieving their goal. He just wants the whole campaign to be about everybody celebrating his diversity.

Tell him "No," or "You can't do that," or "That's not available," and he flies off the handle, wanting to do it all the more now because he was told that he can't, adding the appeal of rebellion to the appeal of the Weird.

I don't get this guy at all. To him, D&D is something very different than it is to me. He hates anything and everything old and traditional; if it's not cutting-edge and totally whacked-out Strange, it can't hold his interest. What made him this way? What was his early experience with the game like? What turned him off so much on the Things That Make D&D What It Is?

I think your problem is that you tell your players "NO!!!!" when you should be telling them "Yes but..."

 

[boredgremlin]

I disagree. Custom powers are a open door to unbalance and a headache for DMs. That space would be better spent with more races. This comes from someone used to Gurps psionics/magic and Mage (storyteller).

I thought MAGE was frigging awesome personally and not a headache at all.

And anyway the solution for that problem is advice on how to be a better DM, not stifling creativity in favor a bunch of dumb races that could just be MM entries. And anyway I said to include a mathematical system for how to create those things so that they stay balanced.