D&D 5E Jeremy Crawford Discusses Details on Custom Origins

[ph0rk]

The 5e PHB outright tells you that it is because of the race as a whole.

And now Tasha's will say that's optional. By your own logic, it's in the books now, so there's little else to discuss.

If your argument now boils down to "it's in the books" - well, the books have been expanded.


Because of bounded accuracy, there is no way for a player character elf to surpass a dex of 20 by racial modifiers alone. Thus, a player character elf cannot, ultimately, be more dextrous than a player character dwarf or human can be. Nothing is lost by letting the racial bonuses float, as far as character construction. If the developers are unable to make the races distinct from each other in ways beyond stat bonuses in a bounded accuracy system, perhaps there are too many races.

 

[Maxperson]

Because of bounded accuracy, there is no way for a player character elf to surpass a dex of 20 by racial modifiers alone. Thus, a player character elf cannot, ultimately, be more dextrous than a player character dwarf or human can be.

This...

Nothing is lost by letting the racial bonuses float, as far as character construction. If the developers are unable to make the races distinct from each other in ways beyond stat bonuses in a bounded accuracy system, perhaps there are too many races.

Does not equal this. You don't care about what is lost, but something is in fact lost. You can't make a change without losing something.

 

[Remathilis]

First, I'm not looking at the MM for racial bonuses. Second, balance plays a part in things, too. WotC has many rules that don't make complete sense until you factor in balance. That the PCs get a lower bonus than the MM version due to balance does not negate what I am saying. You don't get to say, "But the MM version is even more dexterous than the PC version, so therefore PCs should get a dex bonus, and the dex bonus they get didn't come from their race as a whole."

Let's look at Aarakocra. The MM race has a very high dex as a race. The PCs get +2 dex. Their next highest stat is wisdom. They get +1 wisdom as PCs. The racial bonuses for PCs match the racial advantages of their race. I'm sure if I examined the other "exceptions" you mention, I will find them to be similar.

So lets thought experiment that...

First off, I'm disqualifying Satyr, Minotaur, and Centaur; they come from M:TG books and its very easy to say "but that's the Magic version of them, not the D&D one) so off they go. Second, to qualify it has to be the "X" as a monster, no variants. (so "hobgoblin" counts, but "tabaxi minstrel" doesn't). Lastly, we'll assume a base score of 10 or 11, whichever seems more applicable.

Aarakroca - MM gets +4 Dex, +1 Wis, ability to summon an air elemental when with 4 other non-PC Aarakroca (a PC and four monstrous aarakroca apparently doesn't qualify)
Bugbear: +4 Str, +4 Dex, +2 Con (-2 Int, -1 Cha), has brute (extra wpn damage), lacks powerful build and long limbed. Apparently, MM bugbears have stubby limbs.
Changling: Monster version has -2 Str, +4 Dex, +1 Con, +4 Int, +6 Cha (PC has +2 Cha, +1 any) and has unsettling visage (which PC versions once got in the playtest). Monstrous ones can appear as scary, but PCs cannot.
Duergar: MM +4 str, +4 Con. Surprisingly close on the remainder, assuming the MM version is effectively equivalent a "5th level" character...
Drow: +4 Dex, +1 Cha. Same as Duergar.
Gnome: Svirfneblin: +4 Str, +4 Dex, +4 Con, +1(!) Int, -1 Cha. Not even close to the +2 Int, +1 Dex of the PC. Also, the MM version is equal to a 4th level PC who took the Gnome Deep Magic feat.
Goblin: +4 Dex, but -2 to Str, Int, and Cha. (The PC race makes out better on this with +1 con). Apparently, MM goblins lack anger management issues, as they don't have Fury of the Small the PCs do. (Maybe they become adventurers due to all that pent up aggression).
Hobgoblin: +2 Str, +1 Dex, +1 Con (vs the PCs, +2 Con, +1 INT?!). MM hobgoblins get extra damage with allies (martial advantage) but are less obsessed with appearance (no saving face).
Kalshatar: +1 Str, +4 dex, +1 Con, +2 Int, +4 Wis, +4 Cha (vs the PCs +2 Wis, +1 Cha). Everything else looks the same.
Kenku: +6 dex, that's it. MM kenku though are excellent ambushers, something PC ones lack.
Kobold: +4 dex (the rest are below 10). I at least the PC ones are consistent. Of course, the PC ones can Grovel, Cower and Beg; something their MM brethren never learned. (Maybe PCs used it first on WotC to get better ability scores?)
Lizardfolk: +4 Str, +2 Con, +1 Wis (penalty to Int/Cha). The artisan lizardfolk are the adventurers since PCs can all craft simple weapons and shields, and they also are the hungier ones since they get temp hp for biting. That said, the regular lizardfolk learned how to bite and swing a weapon at the same time...
Orc +6 Str, +1 Dex, +6 Con, (Int penalty). Well, the old Volo one as fairly accurate, and the newer one better. Of course, the MM lacks powerful build as well.
Shifter: the monstrous one is a longtooth (bite attack) so we'll use that subrace. +1 Str, +6 Dex, +4 Con, +4 Wis. Based on the formula (lvl + con) for shifting, all monstrous Shifters are 3rd level.
Tortle: +4 Str, +1 Con +2 Wis, +1 Cha. Fairly close otherwise.
Yuan-ti Pureblood: +1 Dex, +2 Int, +4 Cha. A monstrous YTP can only use the poison spray cantrip 3/day (vs the PC using it infinitely) but of course, the MM has multi-attack to more than make up for it.

So, some races I agree with you; they are close. Some are wildly off not just by how much but what scores are bumped. As for the remaining "racial" traits, it's a toss-up; some races have abilities PCs never get, and some PCs have racial traits their NPC brethren never get. I think it supports my point though; the PC stats aren't supposed to be "representative" of the race in general, but instead a collection of abilities that the player will find useful without being overpowering. You simply cannot assume that since the PC race "gets" a specific trait, its universal for all members of that race.

 

[Maxperson]

So lets thought experiment that...

First off, I'm disqualifying Satyr, Minotaur, and Centaur; they come from M:TG books and its very easy to say "but that's the Magic version of them, not the D&D one) so off they go. Second, to qualify it has to be the "X" as a monster, no variants. (so "hobgoblin" counts, but "tabaxi minstrel" doesn't). Lastly, we'll assume a base score of 10 or 11, whichever seems more applicable.

Aarakroca - MM gets +4 Dex, +1 Wis, ability to summon an air elemental when with 4 other non-PC Aarakroca (a PC and four monstrous aarakroca apparently doesn't qualify)
Bugbear: +4 Str, +4 Dex, +2 Con (-2 Int, -1 Cha), has brute (extra wpn damage), lacks powerful build and long limbed. Apparently, MM bugbears have stubby limbs.
Changling: Monster version has -2 Str, +4 Dex, +1 Con, +4 Int, +6 Cha (PC has +2 Cha, +1 any) and has unsettling visage (which PC versions once got in the playtest). Monstrous ones can appear as scary, but PCs cannot.
Duergar: MM +4 str, +4 Con. Surprisingly close on the remainder, assuming the MM version is effectively equivalent a "5th level" character...
Drow: +4 Dex, +1 Cha. Same as Duergar.
Gnome: Svirfneblin: +4 Str, +4 Dex, +4 Con, +1(!) Int, -1 Cha. Not even close to the +2 Int, +1 Dex of the PC. Also, the MM version is equal to a 4th level PC who took the Gnome Deep Magic feat.
Goblin: +4 Dex, but -2 to Str, Int, and Cha. (The PC race makes out better on this with +1 con). Apparently, MM goblins lack anger management issues, as they don't have Fury of the Small the PCs do. (Maybe they become adventurers due to all that pent up aggression).
Hobgoblin: +2 Str, +1 Dex, +1 Con (vs the PCs, +2 Con, +1 INT?!). MM hobgoblins get extra damage with allies (martial advantage) but are less obsessed with appearance (no saving face).
Kalshatar: +1 Str, +4 dex, +1 Con, +2 Int, +4 Wis, +4 Cha (vs the PCs +2 Wis, +1 Cha). Everything else looks the same.
Kenku: +6 dex, that's it. MM kenku though are excellent ambushers, something PC ones lack.
Kobold: +4 dex (the rest are below 10). I at least the PC ones are consistent. Of course, the PC ones can Grovel, Cower and Beg; something their MM brethren never learned. (Maybe PCs used it first on WotC to get better ability scores?)
Lizardfolk: +4 Str, +2 Con, +1 Wis (penalty to Int/Cha). The artisan lizardfolk are the adventurers since PCs can all craft simple weapons and shields, and they also are the hungier ones since they get temp hp for biting. That said, the regular lizardfolk learned how to bite and swing a weapon at the same time...
Orc +6 Str, +1 Dex, +6 Con, (Int penalty). Well, the old Volo one as fairly accurate, and the newer one better. Of course, the MM lacks powerful build as well.
Shifter: the monstrous one is a longtooth (bite attack) so we'll use that subrace. +1 Str, +6 Dex, +4 Con, +4 Wis. Based on the formula (lvl + con) for shifting, all monstrous Shifters are 3rd level.
Tortle: +4 Str, +1 Con +2 Wis, +1 Cha. Fairly close otherwise.
Yuan-ti Pureblood: +1 Dex, +2 Int, +4 Cha. A monstrous YTP can only use the poison spray cantrip 3/day (vs the PC using it infinitely) but of course, the MM has multi-attack to more than make up for it.

So, some races I agree with you; they are close. Some are wildly off not just by how much but what scores are bumped. As for the remaining "racial" traits, it's a toss-up; some races have abilities PCs never get, and some PCs have racial traits their NPC brethren never get. I think it supports my point though; the PC stats aren't supposed to be "representative" of the race in general, but instead a collection of abilities that the player will find useful without being overpowering.

The vast majority of those differences, though, are in non-stat abilities. When they design a PC from a monstrous race, they have a few choices. Balance them against the PHB races, go the 3e route and let them keep the super-powerful goodies and just charge phantom levels, or just let them be super overpowering.

5e has opted for simplicity, so they balanced them against the PHB races. That means the loss of a lot of stats, while still giving racial stat bonuses to the PCs that have direct correlation to the best stats of that race. The loss/changes to non-stat racial abilities is also balance related.

You simply cannot assume that since the PC race "gets" a specific trait, its universal for all members of that race.

It's not an assumption, though. The PHB straight up says it. Also, if you look at the Racial Traits section of the PHB, it lists the following as Racial Traits. 1) Ability Score Increases. 2) Age. 3) Alignment. 4) Speed. 5) Languages. 6) Subraces.

Apparently the abilities you are mentioning like the Aarakocra elemental summoning and Hobgoblin extra damage are not racial traits. Nowhere in that section are things like Lucky and Naturally Stealthy.

 

[ph0rk]

This...

Does not equal this. You don't care about what is lost, but something is in fact lost. You can't make a change without losing something.

Nothing of value is lost.

20 dex is still 20 dex, and anyone that wants their character to have a 20 can have it. Once they do, there is no other race with the same equipment and class build that will have more, barring the use of expendable manuals.


What's more, all that fabled grace does not lead to a player character having an insurmountable advantage on dexterity at level one. With point buy, an elf can have a 17; or a +3 modifier. A human can have a 16 - also a +3. As far as mechanics, they function the same. At level 4? Both can have a +4. At level 6 (if fighters) both can have a +5.

All that fabled grace and they are no more dextrous than a human.

The racial modifiers don't do all that much, mechanically - they can't, without breaking bounded accuracy.

 

[Remathilis]

The vast majority of those differences, though, are in non-stat abilities. When they design a PC from a monstrous race, they have a few choices. Balance them against the PHB races, go the 3e route and let them keep the super-powerful goodies and just charge phantom levels, or just let them be super overpowering.

5e has opted for simplicity, so they balanced them against the PHB races. That means the loss of a lot of stats, while still giving racial stat bonuses to the PCs that have direct correlation to the best stats of that race. The loss/changes to non-stat racial abilities is also balance related.

It's not an assumption, though. The PHB straight up says it. Also, if you look at the Racial Traits section of the PHB, it lists the following as Racial Traits. 1) Ability Score Increases. 2) Age. 3) Alignment. 4) Speed. 5) Languages. 6) Subraces.

Apparently the abilities you are mentioning like the Aarakocra elemental summoning and Hobgoblin extra damage are not racial traits. Nowhere in that section are things like Lucky and Naturally Stealthy.

You are contradicting your own point. Narrowing it down to one example:

Fact: the racial traits (per the PHB) of a given race are universal to all members of the race. We'll accept this as given.
Fact: the hobgoblin PC race and MM entry have contradictory ability scores being modified (Str/Dex/Con vs Con/Int) and different racial traits (Martial Advantage vs Save Face).
Therefore: either the PC racial traits are not true of all hobgoblins (as the MM hobgoblin clearly shows) OR the PC hobgoblin is a distinct species different from the MM hobgoblin.

Occam's razor should tell you which is correct.

 

[Sir Brennen]

Here is the PHB quote.

"RACIAL TRAITS
The description of each race includes racial traits that are common to members of that race. The following entries appear among the traits of most races."

Ability bonuses are one of those racial traits that are COMMON to MEMBERS of that RACE. I mean, you can believe their lies if you want, but the truth is in print.

Common != All. Simple as that. So even the PHB wording still allows for variance.

Black coloring is a racial trait common to ravens. Yet white ravens exist, so not all ravens are black.

Some players just want a white raven for a character. Let ‘em.

 

[Maxperson]

Common != All. Simple as that. So even the PHB wording still allows for variance.

Common also =/= PC. Not even remotely close to it.

Black coloring is a racial trait common to ravens. Yet white ravens exist, so not all ravens are black.

Yep, which is why dwarves with a 20 dex as PCs happen.

I already allowed for PCs to achieve things that the race as a whole cannot.

Some players just want a white raven for a character. Let ‘em.

First, Dwarves can already do that, without getting a +2 dex bonus. Second, I already suggested +2 for racial bonus and a floating +2 for the white ravens out there.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Exactly.
The possibilities are endless.

Can I ask you a serious question? Would you be okay with it, if at every level, a player could choose any class level (that they are presently on) and take those powers? For example, a 2nd level thief turns 3rd level and takes all the stuff from a 3rd level wizard. Then at 4th level, they take Barbarian. Then at 5th level they take Bard. Is this okay?

I am using a bit of hyperbole, but wouldn't this allow ALL players to play whatever they want? Because I know a few players that would have a lot of fun with that. For many it would ruin what a class is. But, why would that matter if everyone gets to play what they can imagine?

Boundaries. When do they break? For some, it's allowing Tasha's rules. For others, even the above would be approved. That is all anyone is asking from the people here - understand boundaries matter.

Assuming it somehow remains fairly balanced, I’m fine with that. I don’t think the player whose concept of classes is somehow ruined by another player being able to mix and match class levels is being remotely reasonable.

 

[Scott Christian]

Assuming it somehow remains fairly balanced, I’m fine with that. I don’t think the player whose concept of classes is somehow ruined by another player being able to mix and match class levels is being remotely reasonable.

And that is the point. You are fine with it. Cool. Others are not. So if they implemented something like this, there should be a debate prior to implementation. Maybe even a test. Maybe it should be played. Like a... play... test.
Or do the work and rewrite the PHB.