D&D 5E Races that make a better class than yours.

[Horwath]

Some races are better with some classes, that just the way it works. But not at any gamebreaking amount.

Wood elf is better shadow monk, as they focus on stealth and shadow jumps.

Same as a half orc is a best champion fighter.

 

[schnee]

Tabaxi is the only class in 5E that feels 'broken' to me.

It gets 1d4+STR claws, and a Dragonborn doesn't? Utterly stupid.

It gets the two single most desirable skills in the game as race skills? A bit too much.

The burst of speed which is as fast as an 18th level Monk, at 1st level? When the other classes have +/- 5 feet, and spells give 10'? And the 'drawback'? The Tabaxi bursts up to someone, attacks, and if the other characters tries to disengage to take advantage of that 0' movement? Free Attack of Opportunity. A powerful combo that will easily be gamed around.

Munchkin class.

I can see why you're a bit concerned, but if the player takes them in a different direction - say, Four Elements instead of (for the sake of argument, your) Shadow, then you'll be a powerful, complementary team that will devastate the battlefield.

If they choose the absolute same skillset, have a talk with that DM and player, because that's indescribably lame.

 

[Wednesday Boy]

My concern really is as a monk that my roll is to get in and out fast or get to an enemy location fast etc and there is no arguing that the Tabaxi race is insane when it come to its ability with a monks speed and manoeuvrability. Elf's have a few other things yeah but maybe i'll lose my main role.

If I was in your shoes I would be more concerned with the potential for another monk to encroach on my niche than the other monk's race. If it's enough of a worry it might be worth talking with the other monk's player about your concerns, see if there would be too much overlap, and work on a solution.

On the other hand, having a second stealthy, speedy character will let you do all sorts of tactics that you couldn't accomplish on your own. It might be fun to have a partner in crime, even if there are slightly different capabilities, like speed.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

Tabaxi is the only class in 5E that feels 'broken' to me.

It gets 1d4+STR claws, and a Dragonborn doesn't? Utterly stupid.

It gets the two single most desirable skills in the game as race skills? A bit too much.

The burst of speed which is as fast as an 18th level Monk, at 1st level? When the other classes have +/- 5 feet, and spells give 10'? And the 'drawback'? The Tabaxi bursts up to someone, attacks, and if the other characters tries to disengage to take advantage of that 0' movement? Free Attack of Opportunity. A powerful combo that will easily be gamed around.

Munchkin class.

I can see why you're a bit concerned, but if the player takes them in a different direction - say, Four Elements instead of (for the sake of argument, your) Shadow, then you'll be a powerful, complementary team that will devastate the battlefield.

If they choose the absolute same skillset, have a talk with that DM and player, because that's indescribably lame.

Good post, but I liked/thanked you by accident in the mobile app by simply scrolling, and can't seem to undo it...not a great app design.

I'm my campaign world there are races that are just better. Although almost always relegated to NPCs.

I don't have a problem with somebody having a stronger race when I do allow it, but I also get why it's necessary to balance it for a published game. This does seem a bit much from that regard, although no more so than an aarakocra for most campaigns.

 

[MrHotter]

It does look like the Tabaxi was custom made for monk. The only wasted trait is the +1 charisma. The unarmed strike does the same damage as the level 1 monk martial arts, but it can be slashing damage when needed.

That being said, the wood elf is still a good choice for shadow monk. You get a +1 wisdom, and if you are doing point buy then it's actually saving you two points since you will have a wisdom of more than 12. That should mean that you will have one more AC, spell save DC, and perception over the Tabaxi.

Your trance, mask of the wild, fleet of foot, and fey ancestry can all be useful as a monk. The only 'wasted' racial feature I see is the elven weapon proficiencies since longswords and bows don't count as monk weapons. If you could talk your DM into letting you use your longsword (katana) proficiency for a monk weapon, then you would actually have an advantage over other races.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

On the other hand, having a second stealthy, speedy character will let you do all sorts of tactics that you couldn't accomplish on your own. It might be fun to have a partner in crime, even if there are slightly different capabilities, like speed.

Exactly.

My concern really is as a monk that my roll is to get in and out fast or get to an enemy location fast etc and there is no arguing that the Tabaxi race is insane when it come to its ability with a monks speed and manoeuvrability. Elf's have a few other things yeah but maybe i'll lose my main role.

If I was in your shoes I would be more concerned with the potential for another monk to encroach on my niche than the other monk's race. If it's enough of a worry it might be worth talking with the other monk's player about your concerns, see if there would be too much overlap, and work on a solution.

I know there are lots of different play styles out there, but I have to say that I've never really understood or had this problem.

First, you can still do exactly what you want. Just because somebody else can, it doesn't stop you, even if they can do it "better." Is it because you won't be able to take the first shot? I guess that only matters if the tabaxi can drop the opponent, but that means you can each take a different target and be twice as deadly.

The tabaxi move works without shadows. That's a benefit. But they can only do it once every other round at best. If there are shadows, then you can shadow step the same distance it can move in that turn, plus you can still move your regular distance. And you can do that every round.

If they also have shadow step, that's a great combination. But they can move twice as far as you every other round, then only shadow step the following round if they want to have the extra movement back. Otherwise, they are the same as you until they don't move for a round.

It's a great combination on the first strike. But after that it's not that much difference.

This is really the issue I have with "roles" that have been around for a while, but were codified in 4e. With a TTRPG (and especially the 5e design) you don't need a narrow role that pigeonholes you into a certain place. More importantly, roles are almost always focused around combat, which doesn't need to be the entire focus of the game.

I'm not saying you're doing it wrong - whatever you find as enjoyable is the way to do it. I just think it's putting too much focus on what ultimately becomes fairly repetitive - Combat? Yay! I move in quick, attack, and shadow step out.

I've had a few players in my campaign in the past (one in particular), where their focus was always on the "cool" aspects of race/class, etc, as opposed to the character themselves. And they inevitably grew bored of their collection of special abilities and wanted to do something different. Or a new supplement would come out and they wanted to do that now. Or a movie or a game (Assassin's Creed was one) that would have the "perfect" character. But perfect was always based around the special abilities (almost always centered on combat), and once the combo had been used a few times, it grew old (to them).

Again, nothing wrong with that, but most of my players have characters that grow and develop over many years. The characters have shared history and stories, have an impact of some sort on the world around them, and feel more like real people. On the other hand, he (the player) had shared stories with the group, but no character to go with that history. Over time even he couldn't always remember which character experienced what, largely because none of them really had much lasting impact on the game world, party, or story.

I also think it might have something to do with the DM's style. Combats are rarely that predictable in my campaign. While it's natural for people to gravitate toward their strengths, and to have a sort of "go-to" approach, the environment, conditions, and tactics of the opponent are all working against that. But even if it does work: move in, attack, shadow step - it's so predictable and expected at that point, I wonder why it becomes such a focus for measuring enjoyment of the game.

And I guess that's the part I just don't get. Combat should be exciting, and tense, but not really because of specific (and probably repetitive) tactics, but because you might fail. What I find most enjoyable in and out of combat are the things that are unexpected. That make me think and figure out how to succeed. The things that make the usual tactics not work and I have to come up with something else.

The other issue that's at play here, is that the rules have changed for the campaign in terms of races (and probably archetypes too). Personally, I allow only certain races and classes in the campaign, and adding something later is a group decision. But it's very rare (almost never). For me it's a function of world-building. Before this there were no tabaxi, and now there is? That has a lot of potential ramifications in the game world itself. If you're in the middle of an adventure that takes you to Chult, and you need to add a new character, then I'd be less concerned about adding a tabaxi character from the game world side of things, but then we have to deal with any issues that the players might have.

As I look at the design of the race a little more carefully, I don't have a problem with the abilities as much as the design.

The movement ability of the tabaxi doesn't make sense to me. Explain in-world why it can sprint for 6 seconds, and then can't sprint again until it stops moving at all for 6 seconds. If the combat takes two hours of in-game time, it still can't sprint again until it stops moving for 6 seconds. It can do anything else it wants, just not move.

I get it, they want to give it a burst speed, and needed to find a way to limit it. I just think it's a poor design. So I'd either allow a faster move speed, grant them the ability to dash as a bonus action (which incidentally would fix the shadow step conundrum, although they'd still have it at a lower level and - gasp! - now they step on the rogue's toes), come up with another solution, or drop the move ability altogether.

I don't have an issue with stealth and perception, it's a cat person after all. It's just two free proficiencies, and I hand proficiencies out for all sorts of other reasons anyway. It frees them up to get some other proficiencies, but I don't see that as a huge deal either.

The claw attack? I don't see that as remotely game breaking, and while I don't disagree with [MENTION=16728]schnee[/MENTION] about the dragonborn, I think that the entire design of dragonborn is utterly stupid and they don't appear in my campaigns anyway. It obviously makes the monk a preferred class, which I'm fine with. The idea of a tabaxi paladin in full plate with a great sword? Not so much. Oddly, they also seem to be pushing them in the direction of bards too.

The reality, though, is that a tabaxi character in my campaign would have all sorts of other non-combat issues to deal with. To start with, just because they are intelligent and humanoid, doesn't mean they will share any culture, beliefs or language with other humanoids. While the game attempts to differentiate them by making them loners and wanderers, (which essentially says "not a good choice for an adventuring party" to me), they still are treated as humans in a cat suit. It says they have little attraction for wealth, but an insatiable desire to find ancient relics and magic items. I agree with the gold (without agriculture, being carnivores, they likely wouldn't have developed towns and cities, nor mining, nor a monetary-based society), but the ancient relics thing perplexes me. Why would they care about the ancient relics of other races? I don't think they'd have many of their own, and certainly not in distant lands outside of their homelands.

They are travelers that act as minstrels and trade interesting objects in human lands? Why? They aren't above discreet theft? Do they even share the same concept of ownership as human societies? If not, there is no theft. None of this makes sense to me. What are they trading for? Wandering creatures have to carry everything they own with them. They seem to be modeling them after stereotypical gypsies here. Except that gypsies shared a human culture, but had no permanent home. Why would cat-people share a human culture?

All of this is written solely to fit a game where they can have the same classes and roughly the same behaviors as humans. It just doesn't make sense to me. Of course, they must speak common since they can communicate with other races. To me, the appeal of a race like tabaxi is to explore something different. Develop a campaign around them and start from there.

This has almost always been the case with the game, because it has to be. The new playable races have to work with the same classes, and with all other races. Hey, it's a game, fair enough. Just not the way I would handle it, or care to.

Regardless, I think that adding new race and class options to an existing campaign with existing characters is something that is a more complicated than just allowing them. In part because of [MENTION=6865035]FrostyFire[/MENTION]'s concerns. In my campaign, the player and I would have quite a challenge coming up with a reasonable explanation for including the race at all. And as an exception, that would have to gain unanimous agreement from the rest of the table. Because not only might it be the only tabaxi, but it might be the only exception race allowed in the group.

 

[GreenTengu]

Tabaxi is the only class in 5E that feels 'broken' to me.

It gets 1d4+STR claws, and a Dragonborn doesn't? Utterly stupid.

It gets the two single most desirable skills in the game as race skills? A bit too much.

The burst of speed which is as fast as an 18th level Monk, at 1st level? When the other classes have +/- 5 feet, and spells give 10'? And the 'drawback'? The Tabaxi bursts up to someone, attacks, and if the other characters tries to disengage to take advantage of that 0' movement? Free Attack of Opportunity. A powerful combo that will easily be gamed around.

Munchkin class.

I can see why you're a bit concerned, but if the player takes them in a different direction - say, Four Elements instead of (for the sake of argument, your) Shadow, then you'll be a powerful, complementary team that will devastate the battlefield.

If they choose the absolute same skillset, have a talk with that DM and player, because that's indescribably lame.

Well, I am not sure comparing what Dragonborn have is particularly appropriate. Giving characters with that race every advantage that 8' tall fire-breathing scaley skinned razor clawed winged dragon-people should have over humans would make them a truly over-the-top broken race. It was stupid to make Dragon-people a basic common race to begin with, it is kind of difficult to have any sort of antagonist who is going to be a conceptually bigger threat than that character regardless of the numbers written on the paper. It absolutely never should have been a valid PC race from the get-go, it should have been a primary antagonist race that maybe could be an appropriate choice some time after level 12. There most certainly should not be any bog-standard level 1 equivalent Dragonpeople in the world period. Its like having an Ogre with 4 HPs.

However, 1d4 natural attack is... not actually go bad. Its basically the equivalent of being armed with the worst 1-handed melee weapon (and should require you to have both hands free to use it, but I am not sure the rules account for that) at all times and you can't be disarmed (which in battle is an absolutely useless maneuver anyway as it drops the weapon to their feet and it is a free action for someone to just pick their weapon right back up anyway.)

Honestly, pretty much every single character class has a superior option to a 1d4 damage natural weapon available to them.

The movement is... maybe a little too good. But it basically just lets you borrow movement from a future turn to use it this turn. But, sure... it is better than what just about any other race gets in terms of a basic ability.

 

[Wednesday Boy]

I know there are lots of different play styles out there, but I have to say that I've never really understood or had this problem.

First, you can still do exactly what you want. Just because somebody else can, it doesn't stop you, even if they can do it "better."

For me it's something I'm cognizant of because it has the potential to steal some of the spotlight from my character. That doesn't mean it will steal the spotlight from my character, just that it has the potential. This isn't a concern exclusively for combat or mechanics. For me it's most often the archetype or dynamic of the character.

If I came to the table with a cleric of a storm god and another player did too, it might be fun for one of us to worship and emulate a Thor type god, while the other worships and emulates a Storm type goddess. We'd still get to play our core concept but we'd be different enough to not overshadow each other. Or maybe I would want to be more unique within the party and let the other player be the storm cleric while I play a cleric of one of the myriad domains that weren't chosen.

 

[ccs]

It does look like the Tabaxi was custom made for monk. The only wasted trait is the +1 charisma. The unarmed strike does the same damage as the level 1 monk martial arts, but it can be slashing damage when needed.

That being said, the wood elf is still a good choice for shadow monk. You get a +1 wisdom, and if you are doing point buy then it's actually saving you two points since you will have a wisdom of more than 12. That should mean that you will have one more AC, spell save DC, and perception over the Tabaxi.

Your trance, mask of the wild, fleet of foot, and fey ancestry can all be useful as a monk. The only 'wasted' racial feature I see is the elven weapon proficiencies since longswords and bows don't count as monk weapons. If you could talk your DM into letting you use your longsword (katana) proficiency for a monk weapon, then you would actually have an advantage over other races.

You see waste, I see options & things that reflect the race....

 

[ccs]

My concern really is as a monk that my roll is to get in and out fast or get to an enemy location fast etc and there is no arguing that the Tabaxi race is insane when it come to its ability with a monks speed and manoeuvrability. Elf's have a few other things yeah but maybe i'll lose my main role.

You won't lose your main role. At the worst you'll share it.