D&D 5E What is the appeal of the weird fantasy races?

[Maxperson]

Once a Generation! That is plenty frequent for people to know about them. Especially if it had been going on for two hundred or three hundred years.

You overestimate people if you think they're going to remember Tabaxi or what they are like if they come by that infrequently.

I'm sorry, so there are elves, halflings, dwarves and humans living in this remote village in the middle of nowhere... but a catman is going to be treated with fear and suspicion? This is a cosmopolitan town with four different races living together in harmony, yet seeing someone unusual is going to cause them to freak out?

In a world full of various cat monsters? Absolutely. They aren't going to know a Tabaxi from a Weretiger(or other were cat) from a Rakshasa from other similar creatures. It's not as if they're going to give the benefit of the doubt and risk death.

Ignoring the fact that the Elves and Dwarves have seen multiple tabaxi over their lives, if one comes every twenty years and the those elves and dwarves are likely 200 to 300 years old.

Yep! Some NPCs will know about them. Most, since villages are primarily human in most campaigns, will not. Maybe the Tabaxi gets lucky and first meets an elf...........that has enough monster knowledge to tell the difference between a Tabaxi and any of the above.

There are times when I dislike the fact that I can't cuss people out on this sight, and I rarely cuss. The assertion that your first option is the one you would enjoy the most, and therefore your enjoyment is impacted by the loss of that option in no way what so ever should ever indicate that you are too limited creatively to enjoy more than one thing.

At any given time I have probably a dozen or more ideas that I'd love to play. I'd be a complete arsehole if I insisted on playing the one that reduced the DM's fun. Same with other players. Pick an idea that doesn't negatively impact someone else.

I disagree. I have disagreed, I will continue to disagree. If the DM has so much authority and power, that means they need to compromise more, not shove out players who don't agree with them.

One has to go. Negatively impacting anyone's fun is unacceptable. Between the DM and one player, the choice is obvious. If the DM leaves, all the players lose out. The player can go find a game where he can play his ideal PC without disrupting things.

So, it isn't a mechanical change... because why? It just isn't? Removing mechanics from the game is still changing the mechanics Max.

You aren't changing any mechanics. The mechanic of race + class = PC is as intact with one race as it is with twenty. That the races have bubbles of mechanics associated with them doesn't alter the mechanics of game play at all. Think of it like this. We both go out and buy the same make, model and year car. You don't want blindspot sensors so you get a model without them. The car still functions as a car just as well as mine does, even though mine has those sensors. Did you remove something mechanical? Yes. Did you alter the ability of the car to drive? Not at all.

"A tabaxi resembles a lithe, graceful, athletic human with a leopard or jaguar-like head and a tail. Instead of skin, they have beautiful spotted fur pelts that ranged in color from light yellow to brownish red. They have sharp teeth and retractable claws, which are their primary weapons in combat."

"Tabaxi were taller than most humans at six to seven feet. Their bodies were slender and covered in spotted[2] or striped[3] fur. Like most felines, Tabaxi had long tails and retractable claws."


Seems the info was sourced from the Fiend Folio and the Fires of Zatal adventure. So since an excerpt from a novel counts, these should count to support my side.

So since a Medusa had an instant save or die ability in prior editions, they should also have it in 5e, right? Fireball in 3e gained 1d6 per level the Wizard went up, so it should do that in 5e, right? Things have changed for 5e.

In my game, though, if you brought that to me, I'd give you retractable claws. That would be my personal game ruling. It wouldn't affect what is written, though.

 

[Chaosmancer]

So, that's fine, in principle, but I have a few questions for that player:

You really can't play that character with any of the races I'm offering? (This is mainly to see if they know I have a list ...)

You're really fine being the only thing like you a given person has likely seen--and with the fact the strongest reaction you'll likely get is puzzlement (people in a fantasy world plausibly see lots of things they didn't know existed)? (This is kinda getting at why they wanna play that ...)

You're OK with the fact that I have no knowledge of the source material, so your character's story in play is very likely going to differ greatly from the source material? (This is getting at why I might not be the right DM for them to try that character, though I'm game if they are ...)

And those are fine questions to ask.

And, depending on your list, you may have the closest race to the concept I'm thinking of. A changeling.

And if you did. the very nature of being a Changeling deals with two.

But the entire point of the example was #3. Players often have source material the DM is unfamiliar with, which makes it so that sometimes a curated list of options from the DM doesn't cover things they are interested in exploring. And being unfamiliar with the source material isn't bad, it can mean that you have found a chance to expand your horizons and find something new you enjoy, because that player is likely to talk your ear off about it.

And maybe you won't enjoy it. But just like Green Eggs and Ham, you can't know until you try.

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

So, that's fine, in principle, but I have a few questions for that player:

You really can't play that character with any of the races I'm offering? (This is mainly to see if they know I have a list ...)

You're really fine being the only thing like you a given person has likely seen--and with the fact the strongest reaction you'll likely get is puzzlement (people in a fantasy world plausibly see lots of things they didn't know existed)? (This is kinda getting at why they wanna play that ...)

You're OK with the fact that I have no knowledge of the source material, so your character's story in play is very likely going to differ greatly from the source material? (This is getting at why I might not be the right DM for them to try that character, though I'm game if they are ...)

And those are fine questions to ask.

And, depending on your list, you may have the closest race to the concept I'm thinking of. A changeling.

And if you did. the very nature of being a Changeling deals with two.

But the entire point of the example was #3. Players often have source material the DM is unfamiliar with, which makes it so that sometimes a curated list of options from the DM doesn't cover things they are interested in exploring. And being unfamiliar with the source material isn't bad, it can mean that you have found a chance to expand your horizons and find something new you enjoy, because that player is likely to talk your ear off about it.

And maybe you won't enjoy it. But just like Green Eggs and Ham, you can't know until you try.

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

It was a fantastic experience for me when I was eight. Now it just makes me laugh. The proliferation of the fantastical in popular media has left most things that are meant to be fantastic fall flat. Kind of like how the Death Star Trench Run was a big deal when I was a kid, now it's poor special effects are laughable at best. Bright shiny CG monsters fighting each other is not a substitute for good storytelling. GoT didn't gain mainstream popularity because of all the nifty non-human characters running around, it gained mainstream popularity because of the character stories it was telling.

And Steven Universe's Storytelling relied heavily on things that human's cannot do or be.

I just watched Beastar that story literally could not work as a story about humans, though a lot of the allegory and symbolism could.

RWBY would lose massive parts of its stroy without the Faunus

I want to watch Kipo and the Age of Wonderbeasts. I'm betting there are aspects of that story that are going to rely on non-human characters. In fact, I'll probably turn on the first episode here soon. I've heard good things.


Just because Game of Thrones told a good story with an only human cast, does not mean that other stories can't be equally good or better with a cast that includes non-humans. The very concept is wrong to me, because it would imply that somehow any story with a non-human cast is immediately lesser quality than a story with an all-human cast. And that is not true and cannot be true.

 

[Oofta]

"Encouraging new DMs to follow the ideas of Old DMs" isn't about the DMs wishes and desires.

It is the New DMs seeing a debate like this and getting the idea in their heads that if they want a coherent and well-built world (why, shock! They do want to make a quality world!) the only way they can do that is by limiting the options to the core four.

After all..,. what were some of the arguments we've seen?

1) There is no story you can tell with a race that you can't tell with humans?
2) Fantasy Racism is expected and natural, because humans will freak out over unusual races
3) Anyone who wants to play something that isn't core four are just power gamers and won't admit it
4) They want to "fly their freak flag" and be special snowflakes.

These sort of arguments aren't going to show a DM they can do what they want, it is telling them "this is the best way forward, just do what I do." And that isn't fine.

Right. The answer is that you have the answer, don't listen to anyone that says you should run a game you will enjoy.

No one true way here. No sirree. Oh, and your ageism bias is loud and clear.

 

[Zardnaar]

Anything goes is totally a thing. I even offer it as an option. Well it's more or less anything goes no flyers. Even then I might do the PHB+1 theory.

Depends if I have prepped a game or bought a setting etc. If there's time and the player tells me in advance I'm more open to saying yes.

If I've just dropped $300 bucks on a campaign setting the odds of anything outside that setting is essentially zilch.

 

[prabe]

And those are fine questions to ask.

And, depending on your list, you may have the closest race to the concept I'm thinking of. A changeling.

And if you did. the very nature of being a Changeling deals with two.

But the entire point of the example was #3. Players often have source material the DM is unfamiliar with, which makes it so that sometimes a curated list of options from the DM doesn't cover things they are interested in exploring. And being unfamiliar with the source material isn't bad, it can mean that you have found a chance to expand your horizons and find something new you enjoy, because that player is likely to talk your ear off about it.

And maybe you won't enjoy it. But just like Green Eggs and Ham, you can't know until you try.

I don't have Changelings on my world, alas.

OTOH, if part of the idea--the reason they want to play a Changeling--is they ... aren't exactly what they seem, I have a race on my world who are souls kept by the world (which is ... slowly awakening to sentience) who look exactly like (and are in fact born to) humans. If the inside-not-matching-the-outside is the important part of the character, as opposed to the shapechanging part, that might work well--and I'd probably pitch it to a player, if the shapeshifting wasn't the main draw (or if they didn't tell me the shapeshifting was the main draw).

 

[Minigiant]

"Encouraging new DMs to follow the ideas of Old DMs" isn't about the DMs wishes and desires.

It is the New DMs seeing a debate like this and getting the idea in their heads that if they want a coherent and well-built world (why, shock! They do want to make a quality world!) the only way they can do that is by limiting the options to the core four.

After all..,. what were some of the arguments we've seen?

1) There is no story you can tell with a race that you can't tell with humans?
2) Fantasy Racism is expected and natural, because humans will freak out over unusual races
3) Anyone who wants to play something that isn't core four are just power gamers and won't admit it
4) They want to "fly their freak flag" and be special snowflakes.

These sort of arguments aren't going to show a DM they can do what they want, it is telling them "this is the best way forward, just do what I do." And that isn't fine.

That's one of my fears.
My fear that New DMs will just copy Old DMs and continue the cycle until anexternal source nudges new ideas into the forefront to challenge the old.

For example, I have a campaign idea where the gods have animal motifs and act like the personality people give the animals. Their blessing turn humans, halfings, and goliaths into beastmen. Basically everyone is Yuan ti by for other animals. So the only races are

• Unblessed
  • Human
  • Halfling
  • Goliath
• Blessed
  • Arakocra
  • Changeling
  • Dragonborn
  • Kobold
  • Orc (Pig faced orc)
  • Kenku
  • Leonin
  • Lizardman
  • Loxodon
  • Minotaur
  • Satyr
  • Shifter
  • Tabaxi
  • Yaunti

Many DMs say this race lineup is fine since its my game. However according to a lot of discussions in this thread, it doesn't make sense to some and doesn't appeal to many. Now I'm a veteran confident DM, so that wouldn't affect me. However what about newer DMs just thrusting out their ideas?

 

[Jack Daniel]

These sort of arguments aren't going to show a DM they can do what they want, it is telling them "this is the best way forward, just do what I do." And that isn't fine.

That's the chip on your shoulder? "Oh, please, won't someone think of the children"? Get real.

The world will not end if your personally preferred DMing style doesn't become the most popular one.

 

[prabe]

That's one of my fears.
My fear that New DMs will just copy Old DMs and continue the cycle until anexternal source nudges new ideas into the forefront to challenge the old.

For example, I have a campaign idea where the gods have animal motifs and act like the personality people give the animals. Their blessing turn humans, halfings, and goliaths into beastmen. Basically everyone is Yuan ti by for other animals. So the only races are

• Unblessed
  • Human
  • Halfling
  • Goliath
• Blessed
  • Arakocra
  • Changeling
  • Dragonborn
  • Kobold
  • Orc (Pig faced orc)
  • Kenku
  • Leonin
  • Lizardman
  • Loxodon
  • Minotaur
  • Satyr
  • Shifter
  • Tabaxi
  • Yaunti

Many DMs say this race lineup is fine since its my game. However according to a lot of discussions in this thread, it doesn't make sense to some and doesn't appeal to many. Now I'm a veteran confident DM, so that wouldn't affect me. However what about newer DMs just thrusting out their ideas?

So, I'll address this kinda backward.

I'd probably play in that campaign. It seems well thought-out, and there are reasons for your choices--since most of what you're allowing don't (that I remember) have subraces, you're probably more restrictive in total numbers than I am. The fact the races have reasons to exist in the setting that don't bring some of the lore I don't care for is a bonus.

OTOH, if someone wants to play, e.g., a gnome, and tries to sell you on gnomes being in the setting after you've put some thought into it, that seems to me like kinda dickish behavior.

---

As to new DMs ...

One of my campaigns has two players who were new to the game when they started in the campaign. Both of them have done some DMing. Both of them have done things as a DM that I wouldn't--things I wouldn't mainly because I don't like them. I'm 100% behind everything they're doing as DMs.

So, I guess what I'm saying is that new players don't always end up doing the same things as the old DMs they play with, when they sit on the other side of the screen.

 

[Chaosmancer]

You overestimate people if you think they're going to remember Tabaxi or what they are like if they come by that infrequently.

People remembered Hailey's Comet, and it comes by only every 75 years. Hard to imagine Tabaxi every 20 is harder than that.

In a world full of various cat monsters? Absolutely. They aren't going to know a Tabaxi from a Weretiger(or other were cat) from a Rakshasa from other similar creatures. It's not as if they're going to give the benefit of the doubt and risk death.

Max, I know you aren't seriously trying this again.

Rakshasa's would be even more rare than Tabaxi, so they would have no reason to suspect that, because they have no idea what those even are. Plus, Rakshasa are shapeshifters. Stories about them would emphasize that aspect. Meaning confusing them with a Tabaxi would be kind of silly.

Also, Weretigers are neutral, not evil, also shapeshifters, and would be even more rare than Tabaxi yet again. Since we are comparing "human cursed with this power" to "entire race of people"

So, I'm not finding two "I'm usually human but can turn into a cat man" examples, only one of which is evil and both of which would be far more rare than Tabaxi as convincing at all.

Yep! Some NPCs will know about them. Most, since villages are primarily human in most campaigns, will not. Maybe the Tabaxi gets lucky and first meets an elf...........that has enough monster knowledge to tell the difference between a Tabaxi and any of the above.

"Hmm, I don't know. You look like a cat man, but how do I know you aren't a shapeshifter who didn't bother shapeshifting to hide their nature in this racist town?"

At any given time I have probably a dozen or more ideas that I'd love to play. I'd be a complete arsehole if I insisted on playing the one that reduced the DM's fun. Same with other players. Pick an idea that doesn't negatively impact someone else.

Unless you are the DM, then it doesn't matter if your ideas reduce people's fun, as long as you are having fun that's all that matters.

And, as I said to Oofta. Just because I have three ideas doesn't mean that it isn't frustrating to have my favorite idea nixed.

One has to go. Negatively impacting anyone's fun is unacceptable. Between the DM and one player, the choice is obvious. If the DM leaves, all the players lose out. The player can go find a game where he can play his ideal PC without disrupting things.

And if they can't, who cares, they aren't at your table making you feel bad anymore.

Glad you don't allow selfish people at your table Max, no one is allowed to impact another persons fun, that is completely unacceptable.. unless you are the DM, then you kick out the people who aren't having fun until everyone tells you they are having fun.

I mean, you can see the hypocrisy here, right? You can see that saying that you won't stand for selfish people who negatively impact fun, yet at the same time saying the DM is so indispensable that they can negatively impact people's fun and the players just have to deal with that, is hypocrisy.

You aren't changing any mechanics. The mechanic of race + class = PC is as intact with one race as it is with twenty. That the races have bubbles of mechanics associated with them doesn't alter the mechanics of game play at all. Think of it like this. We both go out and buy the same make, model and year car. You don't want blindspot sensors so you get a model without them. The car still functions as a car just as well as mine does, even though mine has those sensors. Did you remove something mechanical? Yes. Did you alter the ability of the car to drive? Not at all.

See that bolded part? That is acknowledgement of a mechanical change. See that underlined part, that is you saying that if it functions just the same, it doesn't matter.

The exact argument you said you weren't making.

So since a Medusa had an instant save or die ability in prior editions, they should also have it in 5e, right? Fireball in 3e gained 1d6 per level the Wizard went up, so it should do that in 5e, right? Things have changed for 5e.

In my game, though, if you brought that to me, I'd give you retractable claws. That would be my personal game ruling. It wouldn't affect what is written, though.

Interesting, so I'm supposed to take a novel written in 2003, which would have been during 3rd edition, as proof.

But, providing you proof from wiki's and older sources doesn't count, because things can change for 5e.

That is a double standard. I provided proof, both logical and from game sources, the same as you, yet my evidence is to be considered weaker... just because it would make your position worse that I was right.

Because Volo's does not say one way or the other, unlike the medusa gaze being changed explicitly, or spells being changed explicitly, this was not changed explicitly, and could still remain true. In fact, it is a detail that would make no sense to retcon. But, if it were true, you'd be wrong, and you can't have that.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Right. The answer is that you have the answer, don't listen to anyone that says you should run a game you will enjoy.

No one true way here. No sirree. Oh, and your ageism bias is loud and clear.

So, you just ignore @zarionofarabel saying literally what I said was being said, and instead want to accuse me of ageism? Sure, go ahead. I'll just keep pushing back against the idea that playing what you like isn't wrong, it doesn't make you an naughty word, and that non-traditional races have value.