D&D (2024) Elf

[UngeheuerLich]

Generally speaking. All of the 1DD (UA OneD&D) races reduce to a design space of about feat.

This small amount of design space is a regression. For example, the Dragonborns in Fizbans have more design space than the one in 1DD does. Likewise the Astral Elf in Spelljammer has more design space than the Elf in 1DD does.

While a design space of a little more than one feat seems plausible (+1 skill + 1 free inspiration), I am still not convinced that the dragonborn is a regression. They have darkvision and we don't know the wording of 1DD extra attack.

 

[Starfox]

But otherwise, the Elf trance, charm resistance, and skill proficiency are all less valuable than what the Tiefling gets: better resistance plus extra decent cantrip. But generally, you can see how the designers are at least aiming to balance both races with each other.

That of course depends on the game, but its good to see you think so as it makes elf balance more reasonable. I find one odd resistance not so valuable, while Perception and charm resistance are both very good and trance is good. But then, my game features more fey and thieves than dungeons and dragons.

We are level 7 now, and the artificer used Absorb Elements for the first time last session.

 

[Starfox]

Surprisingly, 5e never quite defines term "humanoid", despite it being central to the game.

Monster Manual p 6 defines creature types. Humanoids are on p 7.

"Humanoids are the main peoples of the D&D world, both civilized and savage, including humans and a tremendous variety of other species. They have language and culture, few if any innate magical abilities (though most humanoids can learn spellcasting), and a bipedal form. The most common humanoid races are the ones most suitable as player characters: humans, dwarves, elves, and halflings. Almost as numerous but far more savage and brutal, and almost uniformly evil, are the races of goblinoids (golbilins, hobgoblins, and bugbears), orcs, gnolls, lizardfolk, and kobolds. A variety of humanoids appear throughout this book, but the races detailed in the Player's Handbook- with the exception of drow-are dealt with in appendix B. That appendix gives you a number of stat blocks that you can use to make various members of those races."

 

[Yaarel]

Monster Manual p 6 defines creature types. Humanoids are on p 7.

"Humanoids are the main peoples of the D&D world, both civilized and savage, including humans and a tremendous variety of other species. They have language and culture, few if any innate magical abilities (though most humanoids can learn spellcasting), and a bipedal form. The most common humanoid races are the ones most suitable as player characters: humans, dwarves, elves, and halflings. Almost as numerous but far more savage and brutal, and almost uniformly evil, are the races of goblinoids (golbilins, hobgoblins, and bugbears), orcs, gnolls, lizardfolk, and kobolds. A variety of humanoids appear throughout this book, but the races detailed in the Player's Handbook- with the exception of drow-are dealt with in appendix B. That appendix gives you a number of stat blocks that you can use to make various members of those races."

I guess that passage from the 2014 Monster Manual is the most "official" text describing the Humanoid creature type.

Probably the most useful part is: "Humanoids have language and culture".

For such a brief and vague description, it still has numerous difficulties. I assume the Dragon creature type also has culture, but perhaps they dont, if dragons behave by pure instinct and are unable to learn new things.

Perhaps nature spirits like Giant and Fey lack innate culture, and actually reflect and echo Human cultures.

The term "savage" in contrast to "civilized", along with a reference to "uniformly evil races", seems antiquated by todays ethical sensibilities that strive to avoid echoing the racist tropes from the 1800s and 1900s.

The assumption that Humanoid races are bipedal is typical enough, but seems to beg for exceptions to the rule. Even in the same book, the Merfolk list as a nonbipedal Humanoid race that lacks legs.

The description also mentions vaguely how "few if any" have "innate magical abilities". Perhaps the Elf race is one of these few humanoids who are innately magic. Yet even within the Human race itself, the Sorcerer class describes innately magic humans, typically from a nonhuman source, but possibly native. Likewise, where psionic is a source of magic, it is native to the humans.



Generally, 5.5 requires a deep reassessment about what the Humanoid creature type is, exactly.

The name itself is, these races share characteristics that are "humanlike".

Probably, ethical freewill, along with the capacity of learning, language, and culture to form new behaviors that override instinctive behaviors, are part of a more useful definition for Humanoid.

 

[Yaarel]

That of course depends on the game, but its good to see you think so as it makes elf balance more reasonable. I find one odd resistance not so valuable, while Perception and charm resistance are both very good and trance is good. But then, my game features more fey and thieves than dungeons and dragons.

We are level 7 now, and the artificer used Absorb Elements for the first time last session.

In my experience, the Charm is relatively rare. Poison and fire happen often and are valuable resistances. Necrotic can be valuable depending on the frequency of undead.

The difficulty with Perception is, the background and often the class can grant the Perception skill. So even tho Perception is the best skill, the race is moreorless granting any of the leftover top five to seven skills.

Trance is a ribbon. Its main benefit is to keep watch while resting. But nonelves taking turns to keep watch is equivalent.

Generally, the Tiefling stats are somewhat better. But the Tiefling and Elf are in the same 1DD ballpark.

 

[Yaarel]

While a design space of a little more than one feat seems plausible (+1 skill + 1 free inspiration), I am still not convinced that the dragonborn is a regression. They have darkvision and we don't know the wording of 1DD extra attack.

The value of Darkvision is situational. Generally it is less useful if the team is using lightsources anyway.

Nevertheless, I consider Darkvision as a solid cantrip: less good than cantrips like Guidance, Minor Illusion, or Mind Sliver, but better than Dancing Lights and Mend. If choosing between a Darkvision cantrip and the Mage Hand, Firebolt, or Prestidigitation cantrip, it is a tough choice.

Heh, certainly players arent breaking down the door to take Darkvision as slot 2 spell. It works more adequately as a cantrip.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

The value of Darkvision is situational. Generally it is less useful if the team is using lightsources anyway.

Nevertheless, I consider Darkvision as a solid cantrip: less good than cantrips like Guidance, Minor Illusion, or Mind Sliver, but better than Dancing Lights and Mend. If choosing between a Darkvision cantrip and the Mage Hand, Firebolt, or Prestidigitation cantrip, it is a tough choice.

Heh, certainly players arent breaking down the door to take Darkvision as slot 2 spell. It works more adequately as a cantrip.

The emphasis was on: we don't know the wording of extra attack.

 

[MechaTarrasque]

I guess that passage from the 2014 Monster Manual is the most "official" text describing the Humanoid creature type.

Probably the most useful part is: "Humanoids have language and culture".

For such a brief and vague description, it still has numerous difficulties. I assume the Dragon creature type also has culture, but perhaps they dont, if dragons behave by pure instinct and are unable to learn new things.

Perhaps nature spirits like Giant and Fey lack innate culture, and actually reflect and echo Human cultures.

The term "savage" in contrast to "civilized", along with a reference to "uniformly evil races", seems antiquated by todays ethical sensibilities that strive to avoid echoing the racist tropes from the 1800s and 1900s.

The assumption that Humanoid races are bipedal is typical enough, but seems to beg for exceptions to the rule. Even in the same book, the Merfolk list as a nonbipedal Humanoid race that lacks legs.

The description also mentions vaguely how "few if any" have "innate magical abilities". Perhaps the Elf race is one of these few humanoids who are innately magic. Yet even within the Human race itself, the Sorcerer class describes innately magic humans, typically from a nonhuman source, but possibly native. Likewise, where psionic is a source of magic, it is native to the humans.



Generally, 5.5 requires a deep reassessment about what the Humanoid creature type is, exactly.

The name itself is, these races share characteristics that are "humanlike".

Probably, ethical freewill, along with the capacity of learning, language, and culture to form new behaviors that override instinctive behaviors, are part of a more useful definition for Humanoid.

I would say dragons are a non-social or minimally social intelligence. Basically, really smart, but has to figure out most everything by themselves (maybe with draconic as a genetically implanted language, or a gift from Io). Interestingly enough, the current en vogue theories of anthropology suggest that early man and his predecessors were probably like that (smart because each one had to figure out most everything by themselves). Kind of depressing that cavepeople were tougher, stronger, and smarter (on an individual level) than we are. Collective intelligence (written word, mass produced written word, the Internet--yes, your smartphone really does make you dumber) are all associated with decreased individual cognitive ability, because figuring out stuff is expensive (in terms of calories if nothing else), and the body had better use for those calories (like getting fat).

Of course, the lifespan of beloved anthropology theories being what it is, they will probably collectively decide caveman were dumb as rocks by Halloween, but for today...

At least in the FR, giants seem to have cultures implanted in them by the giant gods (worked for demon lords at least through 5e, so why shouldn't giant gods do it?).

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

For what it is worth, the 1DD Tiefling race feels more powerful than the 1DD Elf race.

Yeah... the resistance alone does a lot more than the elf getting multiple ribbons.

On restricted design, Dragonborn always betrayed how they really did not understand what made them a solid pick in 4e - you cannot just copy them over with only resistance + breath weapon as their features, if you then make their breath a full action and pretend its tiny damage does anything in a game without 1hp minions! Or maybe it was spite, because they were a 4e thing.

Fizban's Dragonborn was finally where the race needed to be to be worth picking (though they unnecessarily split the features into three lineages). To see 1DD show how that was just an accidental sidestep, we didn't really mean it, was... disheartening.