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

[Maxperson]

Right? I mean I'm all about the Blood War, cultists, Outer Planes, all that jazz.

That's the only hook I need.

But they decided that Teiflings needed to all be under Asmodeus and that Asmodeus was a god now and blah blah I hate all that.

Ahem...point being, if that's the draw, fine I guess. Just seems extremely unappealing to me, to have these shallow races main draw be they just look so wildly divergent, without a depth of history to them.

I un-Asmodeused my Tieflings. I like the 2e version of them, so that's what they still are.

 

[Azzy]

I un-Asmodeused my Tieflings. I like the 2e version of them, so that's what they still are.

As did I. However, in my new homebrew setting (which is still a work in progress), I want to do something else with them (as I'm not using the Great Wheel cosmology—I'm going minimalist instead). I like some elements of the "cursed" tieflings of the PHB, but I'm not going to have them be a race as such (and there's no Asmodeus in my setting), but born randomly to humans (and tieflings) that descended from an ancient nation that trafficked with demons/devils/other fiends (which are treated the same in my setting) and tried to create an army of super-soldiers using arcane magic and fiendish ichor. I'll still keep their looks varied, like in 2e.

 

[FrozenNorth]

So what is the draw to Dragonkin or Teifling, beyond "I want to be a Dragon/Fiend"?

Tiefling:
I want to be an outcast for my heritage.
I want to be a hunter of my own kind.
I want to be an atoner for the sins of my forefathers.
I want to be a charming sophisticate pining for Bael Turath.
I want to play a character that leverage devilish heritage and high Charisma to intimidate people.
I want to have a cool rivalry and banter with the party dragonborn.
I like horns.

I’m sure @EzekialRaiden can respond (and has in several previous posts) about playing a dragonborn.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I don't think it really matters. If he designed them to be at odds, then it makes sense for his story for them to be at odds. He does not have to explain "enough" of why it happened to end up that way for it to be perfectly fine. Fast forward to D&D and if it draws from Tolkien, that's fine as well.

Completely wrong. Well, okay, it is "fine" to have a story where things are not well explained, but it is poor writing at a minimum.

You could write a story where the small folk and the humans hate each other, and there could be no reason for it. They just do. But, that is a weak justification for it, it is weak worldbuilding. Things need reasons, that is the entire basis for "truth is stranger than fiction" because the world of fictional writing requires a lot more thought and for pieces to hang together in coherence than the real world.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Well what's the alternative? To make the non-Tolkien races not weird? The moment they're perceived as mundane, people who want to play spiffy-new-unique-interesting won't want to play them anymore.

Sure, but not everyone wants to play them just because they are new/unique.


I like Shifters and Tabaxi because I find Beast-Folk incredibly interesting from a thematic stand-point, and they aren't new or unique to my mind, because I've read dozens of fantasy stories that feature beast-folk, they are nearly mundane in that respect.

A lot of people playing Tieflings or Aasimar are more interested in the idea of playing a partially infernal or celestial being than they are playing something "new".

It comes down to people's motivations, and for a lot of us, making them more common would be a boon, not a bane.

 

[Maxperson]

Completely wrong. Well, okay, it is "fine" to have a story where things are not well explained, but it is poor writing at a minimum.

You could write a story where the small folk and the humans hate each other, and there could be no reason for it. They just do. But, that is a weak justification for it, it is weak worldbuilding. Things need reasons, that is the entire basis for "truth is stranger than fiction" because the world of fictional writing requires a lot more thought and for pieces to hang together in coherence than the real world.

Meh. I didn't need an explanation about a Weave for magic. Magic was just fine without being explained. I also didn't need the Force to be ruined by Midichlorians. Loved it up until then, now it has been diminished for me.

 

[Chaosmancer]

What is the overwhelming trope for Lizards or Teifling? Pre-4th, Teifling had a much better thing going imo, but neither of them at this point (Dragonkin/Teifling) have anything that screams unique to me, they just dont have enough history or weight in the world.

Which is weird for me to type, because I love playing as Teiflings, but I dont like what 4th did to them at all.

So what is the draw to Dragonkin or Teifling, beyond "I want to be a Dragon/Fiend"?

For Tieflings?

Being a person born of dark powers can be interesting. Also, despite your other post Mordenkainen's gives us Tieflings for each of the Nine Archdevils, giving a bit of a wider spread.

The Blood War aspect can be interesting, but I find the Blood War boring as Hell myself.

Lizardfolk tend to be a simpler, more tribal people. Swamp-based which can throw a few bones to a player. But the biggest draw I can see is the idea of using their fallen foes to craft items and armor, which is an interesting gimmick and can lead to a very utilitarian style of life.



But, if your point is that there isn't much lore.... well, yeah? But there isn't exactly a plethora of lore for Halflings, Gnomes and Humans either. Sure, each setting has some unique kingdoms and settlements for humans, but if you asked "what is the overwhelming trope for humans" you'd probably get some confused looks. Maybe a vague "We are adaptable" or "we are driven" but nothing strong.

And, if the races aren't made available to play because they don't have lore, then there is little reason to build their lore, then they won't see play, and we have a vicious cycle on our hands. Not that every setting is this way though. The Lizard Folk of the Cold Sun Alliance are fascinating in Eberron and have some huge draws, but that is Eberron.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Meh. I didn't need an explanation about a Weave for magic. Magic was just fine without being explained. I also didn't need the Force to be ruined by Midichlorians. Loved it up until then, now it has been diminished for me.

Okay but the Weave and the Force are fundamental forces of their universes. Comparing them to the enmity of Dwarves and Elves is like saying "Well, I didn't need an explanation for Gravity, so why do I need an explanation for why the Soviet Union and the United States of America hated each other"

One is a fundamental part of the world, the other is geo-politics combined with culture and expressed through hundreds of thousands of individuals. They require different levels of explanation.

 

[Maxperson]

Okay but the Weave and the Force are fundamental forces of their universes. Comparing them to the enmity of Dwarves and Elves is like saying "Well, I didn't need an explanation for Gravity, so why do I need an explanation for why the Soviet Union and the United States of America hated each other"

One is a fundamental part of the world, the other is geo-politics combined with culture and expressed through hundreds of thousands of individuals. They require different levels of explanation.

A lot of people don't know why the countries hated each other and don't need an explanation. It was sufficient to know that they did. YOU might want these details, but they aren't necessary.

 

[Scott Christian]

I'd agree except for the fact that we have a 4000+ post thread, that we're both posting in right now, talking about how anything that isn't straight from Tolkien is "weird". Dwarves and elves are perfectly acceptable in human taverns, but a tabaxi would be killed on sight.

For no other reason than the fact that the game is chained to the corpse of the Professor. The negative connotations are entirely intentional. If we weren't chained to it, then this thread wouldn't exist.

Oh Hussar...
A tabaxi causing difficulty at a tavern was just one of the many stated reasons why it might be difficult for a DM to just allow a race. The other terms used (for just this one little example) were: distrust, worship, fetishize, etc. Not everything is killed on site. But, as you know, that was one of a list of reasons why the DM might not allow the race.
I get it, you don't agree with the reasons. That's cool. Do what works for your table. Allow other tables to do what is best for them.