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

[Maxperson]

Are there "tons of other characters" mechanically?

Because we're down to three or four classes from the PHB in 5e. Fighter, barbarian, rogue, and possibly monk. Everyone has to be one of the three classes because all the other classes are spellcasters - and you also don't want Arcane Tricksters, Eldritch Knights, and Four Element monks (not that you want the latter anyway, but that's a mechanical issue).

He didn't say it was only the PHB. Add in the other books and there are plenty of subclasses for those classes. Everyone can be something different. Add in the UA and there's even more.

What's more, there could be magic. The real world has witches, warlocks, sorcerers, wizards, psychics, clerics and more. Some believe it's real and some don't, but in a D&D version of the Hundred Years War it absolutely can be real.

You then have no healing magic to justify D&D's absurd hit point rules. You have no magic. Your combat is D&D Cinematic Combat with the absurd consequence-free hit points. And you've basically nothing tying you to the world.

Not everyone feels like the hit point rules and healing are absurd. And that last sentence is just outright wrong. I mean, if you can't create a backstory to tie your character to the world just because there isn't magic(and we don't know that there isn't), then that's some serious imagination fail.

If someone wants to run a game without spellcasters that's more than fine - there are plenty of games where you don't have roughly 40% of the player facing rulebook made up out of spells. If someone wants to do it using D&D rules that makes me seriously question their competence as a DM. It's like trying to use the claw on the hammer head as a screwdriver.

You've assumed no spellcasters, but as I point out above, there absolutely can be. In any case, pointing out that roughly 40% of the PHB is made up of spells is a Red Herring. It's meaningless on whether or not D&D is suited to playing a non-magical game.

 

[Maxperson]

Can't exactly call it cinematic. Last and only time I've seen two characters swinging swords at each other with no blood for half an hour was in Episode 3.

In D&D the combat would take under 30 seconds and involve blood after 6-18 seconds, so...

 

[Minigiant]

Maybe. Is your point not "players have a right to play any race they like, irrespective of how appropriate it is to the campaign's setting, genre and theme, and anyone who plays differently is having bad-wrong-fun"?

If it's not that, then yes, I'm missing it.

You are missing it then

 

[jasper]

Playing D&D where you eject well over half the material on your shelves is kinda like using a PS5 to play Pong. Sure, you can do it, but, what a waste. Why not use something that's actually designed to run Pong, rather than using something where you're only using about 10% of its potential?

Y...

Please Mr. Hussar put down that pistol. For sure I going to play this platform game, but please know I am terrible at platform games since Atari came out. Which was after Pong. And my Pong had 4 settings and two players.
Please Mr. Hussar put down that pistol. Sure I be on your clan in Call of duty. My best K/d ration is .33 is that okay?
Hussar let people play and dm how they want. Hinting at they are doing badwrongfun is insulting. I have left lots of material on my shelves because I didn't like it for various reasons. I Did have DM with lots of material because it was an official D&D product and due to the social contract. I really did have lots of fun with during those sessions.

 

[Neonchameleon]

He didn't say it was only the PHB. Add in the other books and there are plenty of subclasses for those classes. Everyone can be something different. Add in the UA and there's even more.

So you have three classes and more than a total of seven subclasses

What's more, there could be magic. The real world has witches, warlocks, sorcerers, wizards, psychics, clerics and more.

Last time I checked real world clerics couldn't Cure wounds and real world psychics kept getting debunked.

Some believe it's real and some don't, but in a D&D version of the Hundred Years War it absolutely can be real.

Even if "there could be magic" would it be D&D magic (and especially WotC D&D magic) with its short casting times, reliable casting, and very very limited and rare backlash?

I'd be much more inclined to see a WFRP-like magic system than D&D as reflective of the way magic was perceived round the 100 years war.

Not everyone feels like the hit point rules and healing are absurd.

And some people believe in homeopathy. I have no problems calling that absurd. When it comes to modelling the real world the D&D hit point/healing rules are absurd unless they are mostly stamina or Hollywood physics.

And that last sentence is just outright wrong. I mean, if you can't create a backstory to tie your character to the world just because there isn't magic(and we don't know that there isn't), then that's some serious imagination fail.

There is nothing in D&D that ties you to the world. When you create a backstory that ties you to the world you are doing it more despite than because of D&D (OK, with 5e providing a minor token). Compare, for example, the WFRP careers system. Or the Blades in the Dark turf system. Or Apocalypse World's bonds. Or GURPS' social status rules.

You've assumed no spellcasters, but as I point out above, there absolutely can be

Question: Do you believe in real world magic?

Question 2: Do you believe that real world magic is anything like D&D magic?

Because if the answer to either of those is no then if you use D&D magic you aren't playing a 100 years war game, you're playing a D&D/100 years war mash-up which looks a lot like D&D with a coat of 100 years war paint over the top.

 

[TwoSix]

Please Mr. Hussar put down that pistol. For sure I going to play this platform game, but please know I am terrible at platform games since Atari came out. Which was after Pong. And my Pong had 4 settings and two players.
Please Mr. Hussar put down that pistol. Sure I be on your clan in Call of duty. My best K/d ration is .33 is that okay?
Hussar let people play and dm how they want. Hinting at they are doing badwrongfun is insulting. I have left lots of material on my shelves because I didn't like it for various reasons. I Did have DM with lots of material because it was an official D&D product and due to the social contract. I really did have lots of fun with during those sessions.

It's not "badwrongfun" to point out that there might be better ways to achieve your aims in play. I think that's called "being helpful". If I see you loading boards into your Mini Cooper every day for your construction business, it's not mean to point out you might be better off with a pickup truck.

 

[Minigiant]

I am no longer addicted to D&D and gaming. So I am not longer hurt when a player dumps me. I rather have a player dump me in session 0 because they hate my restriction; than play along while griping, trying to hurt my campaign etc. No Gaming is Better, than Bad Gaming.

That's how it should be.

It just that there are many DMs who say they don't get offended then say "How DARE you call a world with only classic traditional races and classes boring!".

 

[DND_Reborn]

Wow, I just noticed this thread is at 120 pages... crazy, the last time I read any of it was way back on page 23! I'll check back in after another 100 pages or so.

 

[TwoSix]

You've assumed no spellcasters, but as I point out above, there absolutely can be. In any case, pointing out that roughly 40% of the PHB is made up of spells is a Red Herring. It's meaningless on whether or not D&D is suited to playing a non-magical game.

I think there's a pretty large gap between "can be used for" and "suited for".

I mean, we can bridge almost any gap between our system and our desired story by using ad-hoc narrative negotiation between the DM and the player(s). Hell, you can have a satisfying RP experience with no rules at all, simply by proposing ideas and letting the DM adjudicate the result. But most of us want to play with rules for a reason, and it's worth interrogating those reasons when we have to use ad-hoc negotiation quite often to keep our settings cohesive because our rule set isn't guiding play.

And if that reason is "I like most of the game to be negotiation between the DM and players", more power to you! OD&D is like 80% DM-player negotiation, and lots of people love it for precisely that reason.

 

[Oofta]

That's how it should be.

It just that there are many DMs who say they don't get offended then say "How DARE you call a world with only classic traditional races and classes boring!".

Well, there have been a lot of claims that unless you run a kitchen sink campaign or give players carte blanche to do world building that the game will be automatically boring.

You have no clue if my campaign is boring. My players certainly don't think so. It may not be the campaign for you, but yes I get tired of baseless accusations. Want to do kitchen sink? Go for it if you have fun. Tell me my campaign is crap or that my player's PCs are cardboard cutouts because I don't run it exactly like you do? Yeah, you're going to get pushback.

There is no one true way to run games. Every DM, every group, needs to develop a style that works for them.