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

[Maxperson]

Well, aside from aggressive, primal intuition, and powerful build vs relentless endurance, menacing and savage attacks, but Max said that those aren't racial traits, so... [emoji2369]

Not me. WotC. I've assumed this whole time that they were racial abilities and I will continue to treat them as racial abilities. I was surprised that WotC failed to list them.

 

[Remathilis]

Soooooo, one of the arguments here has been that the loss of racial bonuses means that every race will be human. I guess it was already that way.

When you restrict racial traits down to just asi, age, alignment, size, speed, and languages, everything looks pretty much the same.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

Sure, but those people would play those races before Tasha too.

I’m a fairly big optimizer. I like to role play but not at the expense of a good character. So before this rule I would always pick a race that got plus 2 to the classes primary stat. To me most racial features beyond stats are negligible. So if I needed charisma I chose between the charisma races almost entirely based on roleplaying. But I dislike this rule because it means I pretty much only want to play Mountain Dwarves and Half-Elves now.

it might have been slightly annoying before that everything was a stereotype. All Bards were like 4 races and anything else but at least that felt appropriate. Those races were naturally more charismatic and seeing them in a charismatic role felt right. Now all classes will be played by Dwarves. At least by me and likely a couple more people I know. That’s going to suck the fun of the game for me. But playing a worse race is just something I won’t do unless I’ve got an excellent concept.

 

[Remathilis]

Not me. WotC. I've assumed this whole time that they were racial abilities and I will continue to treat them as racial abilities. I was surprised that WotC failed to list them.

You DO realize that those traits were called out because they are common to every race, while the unique elements like darkvision and such aren't listed because they don't appear on every race, right? The list on the beginning of the race chapter isn't all inclusive.

 

[Remathilis]

I’m a fairly big optimizer. I like to role play but not at the expense of a good character. So before this rule I would always pick a race that got plus 2 to the classes primary stat. To me most racial features beyond stats are negligible. So if I needed charisma I chose between the charisma races almost entirely based on roleplaying. But I dislike this rule because it means I pretty much only want to play Mountain Dwarves and Half-Elves now.

it might have been slightly annoying before that everything was a stereotype. All Bards were like 4 races and anything else but at least that felt appropriate. Those races were naturally more charismatic and seeing them in a charismatic role felt right. Now all classes will be played by Dwarves. At least by me and likely a couple more people I know. That’s going to suck the fun of the game for me. But playing a worse race is just something I won’t do unless I’ve got an excellent concept.

Wow, talk about your Kobayashi Maru situations...

Playersl: I wanted to play X race and Y class, but I can't get a 16 in my classes primary ability score...
WotC: okay, uh, why don't you just put your modifiers wherever you want?
Player: anywhere I want? But now I have to play a half-elf or mountain dwarf because they have the most modifiers! Thanks a lot WotC!
WotC:. [emoji2357]

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

Wow, talk about your Kobayashi Maru situations...

Playersl: I wanted to play X race and Y class, but I can't get a 16 in my classes primary ability score...
WotC: okay, uh, why don't you just put your modifiers wherever you want?
Player: anywhere I want? But now I have to play a half-elf or mountain dwarf because they have the most modifiers! Thanks a lot WotC!
WotC:. [emoji2357]

I’d like to disagree but that’s the way it is. Balance is hard because as long as there is a “best” option the rest of the options don’t really matter. This change narrowed the choices by putting all the races on an even playing field and removing any advantages certain races had.

i was a big proponent during the 5e playtest of lowering and spreading out stat modifiers in order to limit the benefit you get from having a high stat. That way the difference between a low and high stat would be less pronounced which would minimize the need to choose a particular race.

 

[Chaosmancer]

There you go, making stuff up again. I've never said the new rule would "break" the game. For that matter, while some others have expressed more dislike for the rule, I'm not sure if anyone has said that it will break the game despite your apparent need to exaggerate other people's positions.

I think the new rule takes away more from the game than it adds. That's all.

Fine, you haven't said that, but others most certainly have. People have mentioned "broken combos" repeatedly which is why I keep showing people that nothing we are now getting is actually broken or even new.

I kind of thought it would be a split - mountain dwarves for any class that could benefit from medium armor, half-elves for everything else. Of course the prejudice against being short runs deep so you may be right.

I doubt I will use this in my home game in any case. The other thing that bothers me is the complete lack of surveys, UA, any attempt to get feedback from the community at large for a change this fundamental.

"any class that could benefit from medium armor"

ie Rogues, Wizards and Sorcerers (Warlock's have hexblade and potenially that new heavy armor invocation) . And Wizards could already get medium armor from Githyanki. So really just Sorcerers and Rogues... and Dragon Sorcerers have a native ability that lets them get an 18 AC if they decided to invest in Dex. So really just rogues? Nah, I'll let Sorcerers stay, 20 Dex on a sorcerer is a bit much to ask. Though it isn't too much for a Rogue, who would then match half plate.. so only sorcerers.

So, Sorcerers will get a +2 AC from their normal. That is it.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ho but we are. We absolutely are. But the debate has drifted almost immediately towards the ASI. This is why we say that races will now be generic and blendless.

hmm, here is that thing I keep getting told no one is saying. Strange how it keeps showing up.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It does. Occam's Razor clearly tells me that the lower stat numbers for PCs is purely for balance reasons and that they are in fact the same race. The PHB tells me that abilities like Martial Advantage vs. Save Face aren't racial abilities, so Occam's Razor doesn't even apply to that portion.

So here are also the real facts.

1) The racial traits in the MM are Str, Dex, Con and Int for those special members that would rise to be a captain(or perhaps a PC).
2) Hobgoblins are not a PC race. They are specifically a monstrous race that Volo's provides rules for just in case the DM wants to allow monsters to be played. Had they been a PC race, they would have been placed with the Character Races a the beginning of Volo's.
3) The designers felt that the PCs were exceptional members of the race and gave Con and Int.
4) You are adding racial abilities that don't exist in the game, like Martial Advantages and Save Face.

Interesting, we are now saying that there are PC races for players to chose under character races, and Monster Races that players can choose under races.... and that those are allowed to work differently because clearly PC races are designed for players to play, unlike those Monster races that players can play.

By the way, what is the definition of PC in DnD again?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And then they rewrote and changed the race... s... Oh wait. They didn't.

So.. an issue is only real if they change something in response to it?

Good news. DnD they changed something in response to it. The issue was real.

I have watched you argue with many on here. About how it only applies to PC's. Yet clearly the language in here states it is not just the PC's, but the entire race.
Lastly, you accuse me of cherry picking or not placing everything on the board. I listed the entire statements from all the races. All of the statements. To not list the other stuff is not to mislead, and you know that. We all know the PHB. It is to point out the language the writers used, and how that language clearly demonstrates exactly the opposite of what you have said. Here it is again:

I will do what you did. Turning to one at random, the halfling states their traits are in common with all other halflings. Notice it doesn't say in common with all other halfling characters. It says halflings. Here is another random one: half-orc character has certain traits deriving from your orc ancestry. Read the passages and take what you want from them. But I said it earlier, it is disingenuous to play devil's advocate or argue for the sake of arguing without at least stating that is what you are doing. You are clearly wrong on this. Clearly. To say, "Huh, I didn't look at like that, but it is apparent that's what they meant," would be a mature step.

And all other halfings are about 3 ft tall and weigh 40 lbs. All halflings do mature around the age of 20 and live to around 150 as their natural lifespan.

But does that mean that every halfling in the entire multiverse is lucky? Actually no. Because I can use the commoner statblock to represent a halfling farmer per the rules in the MM and I don't need to include Lucky. I can, but I do not have to to make him a halfling.

What about speaking common? Does every single halfling across all time and space take the time to learn the Common Trade Tongue? Well, common sense tells me that... no. Even in countries with a heavy emphasis on learning foreign languages, you have people who might not have learned a second language.

So, some of these things apply to every halfling. Some of these things don't. Is +2 Dexterity in the first category or the second? Well, it could be either. It depends on what +2 dexterity means.

And, while you are saying it would be a "mature step" to say that they mean what you want them to have meant... the designers themselves have said they meant it for PCs only. So, your "mature step" would involve me calling them liars. And, since when I look at all three core books together, it seems fairly blatant that they did not mean for the PC racial stuff to be universally applied to members of the race no matter what, I think it is fair to assume that they are telling the truth.

If you want to debate its effects or even how the cap institutes the irrelevance of solidified versus floating ASI's or how the lore will not change. That's cool. I'm all ears.

I did discuss how the lore will not change. I was told that I was clearly wrong, because of the ASIs being tied to the lore. Which when I dug into it... I was told the lore doesn't matter. Right around the time I was showing fairly clearly that those ASIs were not really tied to solid lore.

I've also shown that the lore won't change because the DM can choose not to change it, since they still and always have complete control of the NPCs. I was told that I was wrong, and that the lore would change despite the DM, or that I was wrong because the DM has always had this power so still having it doesn't change anything?

I mean, I've discussed a lot. For a long time at this point. And it keeps coming back to shifting goal posts and being straight up ignored.

Not sure why I should abandon this position in favor of just getting jerked around some more.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I’m a fairly big optimizer. I like to role play but not at the expense of a good character. So before this rule I would always pick a race that got plus 2 to the classes primary stat. To me most racial features beyond stats are negligible. So if I needed charisma I chose between the charisma races almost entirely based on roleplaying. But I dislike this rule because it means I pretty much only want to play Mountain Dwarves and Half-Elves now.

it might have been slightly annoying before that everything was a stereotype. All Bards were like 4 races and anything else but at least that felt appropriate. Those races were naturally more charismatic and seeing them in a charismatic role felt right. Now all classes will be played by Dwarves. At least by me and likely a couple more people I know. That’s going to suck the fun of the game for me. But playing a worse race is just something I won’t do unless I’ve got an excellent concept.

Why?

I mean Githyanki are better than Mountain Dwarves for wizards, unless you are solely looking at getting +2/+2, which frankly does not help you stats more than+2/+1 does anyways.

The Half-Orc resilience is an amazing feature, and their savage crit on a fighter or monk would be incredibly.

And, as I showed above, medium armor is able to be achieved by nearly every single class in the game. It is a meaningless ability for 10/13 classes.

So, really, why Mountain Dwarves? What are you getting that is so good?


Edit:

I’d like to disagree but that’s the way it is. Balance is hard because as long as there is a “best” option the rest of the options don’t really matter. This change narrowed the choices by putting all the races on an even playing field and removing any advantages certain races had.

i was a big proponent during the 5e playtest of lowering and spreading out stat modifiers in order to limit the benefit you get from having a high stat. That way the difference between a low and high stat would be less pronounced which would minimize the need to choose a particular race.

So... it is literally the ability to get a 17/16 instead of 16/16?

Man, that doesn't change your stats. You still need an ASI to hit 18, so unless you happen to have a half feat you really want, that gives you zero benefit in your build.

Half Elf is a little more understandable, considering that they can get their third stat up by a +1... but that is their tertiary stat. I'd give up a +1 to my third most important stat for booming blade on a rogue any day of the week (High Elf) or the ability to more easily hide (Halfling or Wood Elf) or the ability to guarentee surviving an attack (orcish resilience)

Or how about a level 1 feat?

There are s many options that I can easily give up a +1 to my third most important stat.

 

[Maxperson]

Interesting, we are now saying that there are PC races for players to chose under character races, and Monster Races that players can choose under races.... and that those are allowed to work differently because clearly PC races are designed for players to play, unlike those Monster races that players can play.

Oh, this ought to be good. Since you believe that monstrous races are the same as character races, why is it that you think that they didn't put monstrous races in with character races again?

 

[Maxperson]

I’d like to disagree but that’s the way it is. Balance is hard because as long as there is a “best” option the rest of the options don’t really matter.

This has been false in every incarnation of the game. Just because you won't ever pick and play any option but the best, doesn't mean that everyone else view things the same way. The rest of the options do in fact matter, just not to you.

This change narrowed the choices by putting all the races on an even playing field and removing any advantages certain races had.

This is also false. All that changes with people like you who will always choose the best race for the class they want to play, is that now they will look at the non-ASI racial abilities to decide which races are best for which classes.

Note: I'm not saying that playing the way you like to play is wrong or bad. I'm just saying that making ASIs float doesn't really change how you will build PCs. It just changes which race is best for a particular class.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

ie Rogues, Wizards and Sorcerers (Warlock's have hexblade and potenially that new heavy armor invocation) . And Wizards could already get medium armor from Githyanki. So really just Sorcerers and Rogues... and Dragon Sorcerers have a native ability that lets them get an 18 AC if they decided to invest in Dex. So really just rogues? Nah, I'll let Sorcerers stay, 20 Dex on a sorcerer is a bit much to ask. Though it isn't too much for a Rogue, who would then match half plate.. so only sorcerers.

The first character I made was a Mountain Dwarf Warlock so that I could get the medium armour. I wanted to be a genie warlock and it saved my Invocations for other things giving me more power.

And all other halfings are about 3 ft tall and weigh 40 lbs. All halflings do mature around the age of 20 and live to around 150 as their natural lifespan.

But does that mean that every halfling in the entire multiverse is lucky? Actually no. Because I can use the commoner statblock to represent a halfling farmer per the rules in the MM and I don't need to include Lucky. I can, but I do not have to to make him a halfling.

Actually yes. The lore behind halflings in the Forgotten Realms is that the god that created them made them all naturally lucky. That informed the races abilities in 5e. The MM specifically says that to modify the stat blocks for things like commoner you should add racial traits like lucky to give them the flavour of the race.

I did discuss how the lore will not change. I was told that I was clearly wrong, because of the ASIs being tied to the lore. Which when I dug into it... I was told the lore doesn't matter. Right around the time I was showing fairly clearly that those ASIs were not really tied to solid lore.

I've also shown that the lore won't change because the DM can choose not to change it, since they still and always have complete control of the NPCs. I was told that I was wrong, and that the lore would change despite the DM, or that I was wrong because the DM has always had this power so still having it doesn't change anything?

Here’s the deal, everything in those stat blocks are partially based on balance and partially on lore. Races needed to have nearly equal numbers of stat modifiers and abilities to balance the game. So some races were given a bonus to a stat that they might not be particularly “good” at just to make sure they had the same bonuses as other races. so while you can point towards some aspects of a race and say “look, that’s not lore based exactly”, that doesn’t mean none of it is low based.

Mechanics and lore go hand in hand though. If a race gets +2 to int people will think of it as the smart race no matter how many times the text says otherwise. So the DM doesn’t really have full control as to whether the lore changes or not. People come to your game with all sorts of impressions from various D&D books and novels and even lore from outside of D&D. Those impressions don’t change immediately when you tell them to ignore them. It isn’t a black and white situation. Each thing that changes in the mechanics shifts perceptions of players and that changes the lore.

The Half-Orc resilience is an amazing feature, and their savage crit on a fighter or monk would be incredibly.

And, as I showed above, medium armor is able to be achieved by nearly every single class in the game. It is a meaningless ability for 10/13 classes.

So, really, why Mountain Dwarves? What are you getting that is so good?

Edit:

So... it is literally the ability to get a 17/16 instead of 16/16?

Man, that doesn't change your stats. You still need an ASI to hit 18, so unless you happen to have a half feat you really want, that gives you zero benefit in your build.

Half Elf is a little more understandable, considering that they can get their third stat up by a +1... but that is their tertiary stat. I'd give up a +1 to my third most important stat for booming blade on a rogue any day of the week (High Elf) or the ability to more easily hide (Halfling or Wood Elf) or the ability to guarentee surviving an attack (orcish resilience)

Or how about a level 1 feat?

There are s many options that I can easily give up a +1 to my third most important stat.

Stat bonuses are too important. An increase to your con modifier gives you more hitpoints and even one hitpoint can make the difference between living and dying especially at first level but it is 20 more hitpoints over the lifetime of your character.

As a Mountain Dwarf you can get a 17 and a 17 and that might not be more useful than a 17 and a 16. But at level 4 you now have 2 18s and they either have 18/17 or 19/16. Or it’ll free up enough points in point buy to increase your Dex to 14 to max out your medium armour, reducing all the damage you take, increasing your most valuable save, and your initiative bonus while also bringing your con up to an even number for more hitpoints. The extra one point is always enough to put you one even stat ahead of anyone without it (though it might take you to 4th level to get ahead).

I’ll take those benefits over most of the other racial features, most which are have an actual effect rarely.