D&D 5E Wow! No more subraces. The Players Handbook races reformat to the new race format going forward.

[Minigiant]

I think if you roll stats that you can't be assured a 16 in your primary, but a 14 is hard not to have. The game's ease via bounded accuracy means that having a 14 still means that you do very well. That's why I say 14 or 14-16.

A paladin, wizard, druid, cleric, or bard with 14s in their primary, secondary, and tertiary scores can still be a beast.

Again the issue is the WOTC nudged players into thinking 16 or more in your primary was normal and they extremely emphasized the importance of ability scores.

And this backfired when the player base started to want to PCs other than racial stereotypes while also forcing playstyles on specific ability scores.

 

[Maxperson]

Nope, what’s that

It was a psionics book that contained the power Deja Vu. The great thing was that WotC has a sense of humor and reprinted the power on the very next page in the very same spot.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Why would I address something that isn't true. They are not a subrace of humans. Their lower planar differences are significant enough to make them a singular and independent race. Like how half-elves are not a subrace of both humans and elves.

Why not? Winged Elves have significant differences from elves, and I don't see those differences being lesser than the differences between a human and their tiefling child. Especially if I consider that being a Sorcerer doesn't make you a new and unique race, therefore having magical powers doesn't make you a new race.

And why AREN'T Half-Elves a subrace of humans and Elves? It certainly would make sense if they were.

 

[Maxperson]

Why not? Winged Elves have significant differences from elves, and I don't see those differences being lesser than the differences between a human and their tiefling child. Especially if I consider that being a Sorcerer doesn't make you a new and unique race, therefore having magical powers doesn't make you a new race.

There is no why or why not. They aren't. This is a fact of the game. There isn't a single edition where they haven't been released as independent races. Even those books with a planetouched category didn't include all the "planetouched."

And why AREN'T Half-Elves a subrace of humans and Elves? It certainly would make sense if they were.

Then make them that way for your game.

 

[Chaosmancer]

There is no why or why not. They aren't. This is a fact of the game. There isn't a single edition where they haven't been released as independent races. Even those books with a planetouched category didn't include all the "planetouched."

Then make them that way for your game.

So, there is no reason and you cannot define reasons. I will note that not all books that talk about "elves" included all the elves. Same with Dragons generally. And Giants. This information is often scattered about multiple sources, that isn't a point.

 

[Maxperson]

So, there is no reason and you cannot define reasons.

Once again you declare up to be down. I provided reasons. They are not one race, because they have never in the history been presented as a unified race, but they have in every edition been presented as individual races.

 

[HammerMan]

Nope, what’s that

there was a 3.5 book for psionics and they reprinted it twice one page after another as the exact same power...

 

[HammerMan]

And why AREN'T Half-Elves a subrace of humans and Elves? It certainly would make sense if they were.

I think 5e should have made half human races sub races... teifling aasimar and half elf

 

[UngeheuerLich]

A paladin, wizard, druid, cleric, or bard with 14s in their primary, secondary, and tertiary scores can still be a beast.

Again the issue is the WOTC nudged players into thinking 16 or more in your primary was normal and they extremely emphasized the importance of ability scores.

And this backfired when the player base started to want to PCs other than racial stereotypes while also forcing playstyles on specific ability scores.

I don't think a few example characters set the gold standard.
For a beginner it is not a bad choice however.

I also think a 14 is perfectly workable and if I play my Goliath bard, I will still put at least +1 into Strength, to get that nice 16 there. I will however probably use the +2 to get my cha and dex to 14.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Actually my wish would be that instead of +2 to any stat, would be just allowing a ability increase (which you can trade in for a feat).
And in addition you might get a +1 bonus (if you like to a fixed stat for race).