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

[cbwjm]

Well actually I can. I don't need a reason, I always do though. Sometimes it's as simple as I don't like the race. Might be the mechanics,might be fluff might be whatever.

I said no to Tritons with no explanation. Partly mechanical partly because I had a plan for them.

My current game I'm running i said no monstrous races (orcs, goblins, etc) because I wanted there to be a clear split between the good guys and bad guys at the start of the campaign. People were fine with this, ended up with a halfling, warforged, half-elf, dragonborn, and eventually a lizardfolk when someone joined part way through.

 

[Zardnaar]

My current game I'm running i said no monstrous races (orcs, goblins, etc) because I wanted there to be a clear split between the good guys and bad guys at the start of the campaign. People were fine with this, ended up with a halfling, warforged, half-elf, dragonborn, and eventually a lizardfolk when someone joined part way through.

Fair enough. If you said that I would check the dragonborn and lizardfolk.

 

[Older Beholder]

Ask 'what is the appeal of fantasy'?
And the answer to ''what is the appeal of fantasy races' will not be far behind.

 

[Maxperson]

Ask 'what is the appeal of fantasy'?
And the answer to ''what is the appeal of fantasy races' will not be far behind.

Sure, but it's not all or nothing. One can find appeal in the fantasy races of Elf, Dwarf and Halfling, without liking the Gnome, Dragonborn or Tabaxi. We all have different preferences and levels of like and dislike.

 

[cbwjm]

Fair enough. If you said that I would check the dragonborn and lizardfolk.

Lizardfolk was added quite a bit later, I think when I limited things and said no monstrous races, I still allowed the PHB races + a few others. There is a lot to be said for just sticking to the basic races in the PHB though, it can be much easier to create a cohesive world.

In another game (when PHB was all that existed) I let the players choose their races and make their characters from whatever and built the world from that. No dragonborn players so ended up turning them into a warring empire with the dragon gods encroaching on the domains of the player's nations.

 

[Scott Christian]

Heck yeah. Plus the largest D&D streams on Twitch are -very- RP focused. That's where most people are going to get their D&D kicks these days, these online games, and especially these streams pulling in thousands of views a day. They colour how people see D&D

I would caution this with the reason they are RP focused is because it is entertainment to groups other than the people playing. Very few focus on pure dungeon crawl because it is much more boring to watch a fight happen than to watch a fight happen where the audience has a vested interest in characters.

 

[Scott Christian]

But, my Fiend Pact warlock is directly linked to demons and has no problems getting a drink. And, again, you're focusing on a single example. There are about a dozen sub-classes that have gross physical changes. Do you similarly limit these as well? If not, why not? And, if not, how is that not a pretty clear contradiction? It's perfectly okay to be descended from a Red Dragon as a sorcerer, but, not perfectly acceptable to be descended from a Red Dragon as a dragonborn at the same time?

See, this is why you folks have been getting so much push back in this thread. It looks, from the outside at least, like you guys have actually given this extremely little thought, but, simply said, "Well, this is what I did back then, so, why not now?" with any apparent contradictions just conveniently ignored.

I feel the need to interject. It is only a contradiction based on how the world reacts to it. If the world's reaction is the same to:
- Look at that person change into a bear!
and
- Look at that person change into a werewolf!
Then there is contradiction. Heck, I have had bandit orcs fell at the sight of a druid shapeshifting. It is, and should look like a scary thing to the unknowing. So should encountering a werewolf. That said, it might change if the druid changes in front of a wizard. They know transmutation exists.
This same logic goes with everything else. Consistency is key.

 

[Scott Christian]

Thus my point. The folks that are limiting races; are you also limiting classes? Do you have the same stringent requirements?

If you allow fiend pact warlocks, suddenly tieflings aren't exactly much of a stretch. And, if your idea of a tiefling is a cambion, well, at that point, what's the difference? Potato potahto. Ok, my tiefling is called a cambion. Sure. Yeah, like that made such a huge difference.

I would add this. Many choose to only use the PHB. Tieflings exist. So the warlock is fine. Dragonborn exist. So do Drow, wood elves, gnomes, etc.
I think it is easy to create an argument when someone says the core Tolkien races exist (If this is the case, I do not know why you wouldn't just use MERP or the Middle Earth 5e books?) and then promote the argument. It is much harder to have that argument when a DM says the core PHB races exist, have at it. Here are their histories and how they treat each other based on each region.
I feel most DM's that limit races fall more into the second camp than the first. (Is there anyone here that falls into the first camp?)

 

[prabe]

I would add this. Many choose to only use the PHB. Tieflings exist. So the warlock is fine. Dragonborn exist. So do Drow, wood elves, gnomes, etc.
I think it is easy to create an argument when someone says the core Tolkien races exist (If this is the case, I do not know why you wouldn't just use MERP or the Middle Earth 5e books?) and then promote the argument. It is much harder to have that argument when a DM says the core PHB races exist, have at it. Here are their histories and how they treat each other based on each region.
I feel most DM's that limit races fall more into the second camp than the first. (Is there anyone here that falls into the first camp?)

I'm playing (for now) in a campaign where the DM said "PHB only." I'm not digging the campaign much for reasons that I think have nothing to do with that.

As I said above, I made a choice to allow virtually everything in the PHB, both races and classes, and I'm being a little pickier about things from elsewhere.

 

[Scott Christian]

I'm playing (for now) in a campaign where the DM said "PHB only." I'm not digging the campaign much for reasons that I think have nothing to do with that.

As I said above, I made a choice to allow virtually everything in the PHB, both races and classes, and I'm being a little pickier about things from elsewhere.

Sorry you are not into yet. Hopefully, there will be a turning point that makes it more fun for you. That is such a bummer when that happens. I have been soooooo lucky, in that it hasn't happened in a campaign in 10 or so years. And that's playing with 7 or 8 different groups! I count my blessings.