D&D (2024) How to import "race" flavor into D&D 2024 inclusively

Yaarel

He Mage
This is a timely topic; I've been mulling this over for my next D&D campaign. I want the players to have as much customization as possible for their characters, but I also don't want to muddle everything together so much that every character is essentially the same. I'll be following this thread with interest.
I interpret the concern to be the use of options for the purpose of mechanical optimization. In this way, many players gravitate toward the same most powerful options.

Otherwise, customization encourages individuation, uniqueness, and diversity. Normally, customization is the opposite of samey.

With regard to mechanics. When the designers make sure all the available options are equally powerful compared to each other, it allows mechanically minded players to pursue different options − including for the sake of an interesting narrative.

Ultimately, the way to cure homogenization is solid game balance.

A DM who has a good sense of mechanics might even "fix" a certain poor option in order to make it more appealing to a player who has some interest in it but is turned off by its poor mechanics.


So far, I've gathered the following ideas from this thread.

Ability Score Increases
A character's ancestry will give a single +1 ASI to one stat of the player's choice. It will otherwise be per the "Custom Lineage" framework in Tasha's Cauldron of Everything.
A character's background will give them another +1 ASI. This will usually be a choice between two different stats--characters with the Soldier background will gain a +1 to their choice of Strength or Constitution, for example, and characters with the Sage background will get a +1 bonus to Intelligence or Wisdom.
A character's class will give them a third (and final) +1 ASI. Like background, the player can choose between a narrow list of options. Paladins start with a +1 bonus to Strength or Wisdom, Artificers start with a +1 to Intelligence or Constitution.
Here there is a +1 Score to each, for the Species, Background, and Class. I assume these pluses cant be added to the same Score.

I would make these − Species Culture, Background, and Personal Interest − so the third pick is freeform for any situation. Obviously, the player will want a boost for the Class, but it might already come from the culture choice or background choice.

It is impossible to separate Species from Background. A Species can include many ethnicities, each of which has an array of culture, local, regional, and national. But one can emphasize the traditions of the ethnic culture where one grew up, and the background experience as what was one doing while growing up. These aspects entangle, of course.

With regard to balance, three +1s are fine. The UA allows a +2 to one stat, and a +1 to an other. There have been times when three +1s were available as an alternative. I dont think three is the case anymore, but it is balanced to do.

The assignment of pluses reminds me of the assignment of languages. The UA grants the character three choices of languages. Typically, but not necessarily, the first language is Common, one language is for the Species cultural community, and one language is for the Background endeavor. Ultimately it is the players choice and depends on the character concept. For example, perhaps the normal daily spoken language is Elvish − the first language. Then Common is the foreign language when interacting with Human cultures as part of the Background. Then the third language might be Elemental as a magical language for magical research for the class.

Maybe it is better to think of the Score improvements and the corresponding languages, as follows.
• A Personal Interest
• A Species Ethnic Culture
• A Background Utility

Re the Species and Background. I would avoid coercing a specific Ability or else it will become samey. For example, if every Soldier is either Strength or Constitution, where is the Dexterity Solider who is a sniper or artillery?

The stereotyping of Species is even more sensitive and awkward. The removal of the Dexterity oppression from the Elf Species is the greatest relief that I have experienced since the beginning of 5e, with regard to frustration with certain rules. Every culture can have prominent ways to further develope any of the six Abilities.


I would approach the Species and Background in a way that invites customization, narrative, and individuation. In other words, encourage the player to create a Background, if the player doesnt already find an official Background that suits the character concept.

For example, suppose I have something like an Elf Soldier character. I add one Score boost to actualize what kind of Elf he is, the Species ethnic cultural heritage. I add an other Score boost to actualize what kind of Soldier he is, the Background experience.

Actually, I want this character to be a Wizard or Bard, a spellcaster. But, he is a high Strength mage, with combat experience before he turned 20 at level 1. He is a native to the Feywild plane, so Elvish is his spoken language. But he isnt an Eladrin ethnically. His Astral Elf family immigrated to the Feywild. He is Eladrin culturally. His family also speaks Celestial. In fact, he is a Wizard − because he inherits a family tradition that studies wizardry directly from the Ancestor, Corellon themself. Corellon is loyal but requires personal freedom, and encourages the same. This Wizard training typically happens via encounters during Trance. But the family saga includes a number of events engaging Corellon in person, both in the Aster and in the Fey. The character considers Corellon a loved family member, and a close friend. I also want the character to speak Common, and to explain how he got combat experience before turning 20, which is highly unusual for Elves. So. The combat was between Fey Elves and Humans. There is a Fey Crossing that sacred to Elves. The nearby Human government expanded its territory, and when recently discovering the Crossing is trying to claim and control it and to enforce its sovereignty over it. He and his family were there when the Humans attacked. The Elf is Intelligent and learned Common quickly, but still has an accent. He is proficient in the Athletics fighting style that his community of Elves is known for, with its gymnastic jumps and parkour stunts. I might go Bladesinger Wizard at level 3, but I want to doublecheck how Strength and Bladesinger synergize mechanically. In any case, I plan to use the extreme Strength mobility for "kiting" as a ranged spellcaster, while remaining competent in melee when advantageous. Martial combat is typically unknown to Eladrin, however many of the communities around Fey Crossings have close relations with the High Elves who have developed strong Martial traditions from adapting alongside Human Martial traditions. The soldiery of the characters Eladrin community from the High culture influence. Especially because Corellon is the Wizard mentor, I feel their Chaotic impusle that prioritizes freedom and individualism will influence him. Re genderfluidity, Corellon is sometimes androgynous, sometimes highly masculine, sometimes highly feminine, and sometimes none-of-the-above, and chooses appropriate forms. He always recognizes Corellon regardless the shapeshift. The player character himself feels mainly masculine. Charisma is highly important for beauty, esthetics, persuasion, and the traditional values of his Elven heritage, especially his Eladrin culture. The Charisma aspect will be for the Species emphasis, whence he himself experiences a culture of luxurous art and political persuasion. Studying Wizardry from Corellon is the personal interest between the two, thus Intelligence − education, analysis, and intuition − is a theme of the Trances.

This character concept could go Bard or Celestial Warlock, but I want the character to do magic in an analytic protoscientific way, and his family member Corellon who is one of the most powerful Wizards in existence, is a way to make this concept work.

Not only do I have the mechanical choices in place, there is Background narrative to inform them. Now I will go thru the various options to pick a Background Feat that enhances the narrative. I will look at the Wizard skills to coordinate them with the remaining Background skill and toolset.

The rest of the details, with room for some later tweaking, can come as I start to play the character and hopefully to persue some of the Background adventure hooks. I will find out more about the Human culture at that location while see what the DM has in store.

• Species, Elf, Cha Score +1, language Elvish: ethnicity Astral, culture Eladrin
• Background, Soldier, Str Score +1, language Common: Athletics, gymanstic fighting style
• Personal, Wizard, Int Score +1, language Celestial: studies wizardry from Corellon during Trance
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
Epic
Lower damage for small characters was never popular in 3rd Ed. Not sure there is a good reason to bring it back even if it makes sense.
Lets be real about what classes the small races went to though, that was critical to why it wasn't "popular".

First you had halflings & other dexy races who used that yummy +dex size bonus to further their exciting career as a rogue who dealt sneak attack damage using a dagger where the critically important value was "19-20/x2".

Then you had gnomes who became wizards that didn't expect that sling or crossbow to actually hit & were not going to be too broken up if it did reduced damage because they were using it instead of another spell because the spell was not justified by the encounter.

From there it continued into PCs who used Level Adjusted monster statblocks to build a character that didn't fall very far from the tree (ie charisma based sorcerer instead of wizard)

The size based weapon damage was incredibly popular because monkey grip allowed some builds to bump their damage a good bit. Very few small characters were meaningfully impacted by the small weapon damage dice. With the affected PCs not really caring about the reduction it wasn't often used in that direction simply to avoid needing to consult a table that probably won't matter.
 

Yaarel

He Mage
As far as I can tell, 2024 should double down on the Carrying Capacity of Size.

This has vivid and fun flavor: "Sorry, Halfling, you are too small to push this chest of gold. Can you think of an other way to move it?" But 5e downplays Encumbrance generally, and normally it wont interfere with character options or advancement.

A Strength +5 Halfling is no problem, since the Halfling is strong for ones Size. Athletics checks function normally. Strength to attack and damage adds normally.


Lets look at the weapons weights.

The Heavy weapons are the polearms, including the greatsword. The reallife zveihaender sword is effectively a kind of polearm. Polearms that arent Heavy, are the spear and lance (longspear). Then there is the heavier maul hammer. The longbow and heavy crossbow are also Heavy, but it seems obvious a Halfling can conceptually use these ranged weapons effectively.

Mainly the polearms are the debate.

The greatsword isnt actually "heavy", a mere 6 pounds. The other polearms are similar. 2014 says the Halfling is about 3 feet tall at about 40 pounds. However, 3 feet tall is the size of a 2-year-old Human child, and is unlikely to even reach 30 pounds. In Forgotten Realms, some Halfling communities average about 3½ feet, and some even taller. 40 pounds is closer to roughly 3'8, about a 5-year-old Human child. So, suppose we are talking about an individual Halfling who happens to be stronger, taller and burlier, about 42 pounds. The greatsword is about one seventh of the body mass of the Halfling. No question, the Halfling can easily Lift and Carry the greatsword without Encumbrance.

A Halfling wielding a greatsword (6 pounds/42 pounds ≈ 14% bodymass) is something like a Human wielding a pike (18 pounds/ 180 pounds ≈ 10% bodymass).

Assume the Halfling is remarkably strong to steer the momentum of the greatsword swings. What do you think? Does the Halfling have enough bodymass to anchor the momentum of the greatsword swing? Is there a "dancing fighting technique" than can jump and leverage ones body with the swings?
 

CreamCloud0

One day, I hope to actually play DnD.
Otherwise, customization encourages individuation, uniqueness, and diversity. Normally, customization is the opposite of samey.
personally i don't think greater customisation really encourages individualism, all it does is enable a greater number of combinations, nothing really means those new combinations are going to be more unique than what came before, they're just going to be the same in a different way, is the 3e fixed +STR,+CON orc wizard fundamentally more or less unique than the 5e orc wizard who put their floating modifiers in INT and DEX?
 

Yaarel

He Mage
personally i don't think greater customisation really encourages individualism, all it does is enable a greater number of combinations, nothing really means those new combinations are going to be more unique than what came before, they're just going to be the same in a different way, is the 3e fixed +STR,+CON orc wizard fundamentally more or less unique than the 5e orc wizard who put their floating modifiers in INT and DEX?
For example, in my example in the post above, the Elf Wizard character with a Soldier Background, takes advantage of the official permission for the player to create ones own Background. The result is an individuating character concept: a high Strength Wizard, a Fey, being tutored in wizardry by a primordial Elf, speaking Celestial, with combat experience in the High culture fighting style. This Elf is "more unique" than other Elf characters. Being "different" is part of being "unique". More customization makes this individuation possible.

The Background is more than the sum of its mechanical parts. It is especially the narrative circumstances during which the character acquires these mechanics. These narrative implications can be highly relevant in certain encounters, and unique.

For this character, gaining level 1 in the Wizard class is about the most standard mechanic possible. But saying that the character reached level 1 by being tutored by one of the most powerful Wizards in the multiverse is something remarkable − campaign altering. The character maintains contact with Corellon during Trances. And it was the customization of the Background that arrives at this, reinforcing other mechanics such as Elf Trance and Celestial language.

While there are Eladrin Wizard schools, and Elven cultures of Intelligence development, the character isnt part of this. The character is more in the traditions of aristocratic arts and politics. That his Intelligence Ability is developing from the training by Corellion is genuinely unusual.

This Elf has zero Dexterity improvements.

The character Background isnt exactly a simple Soldier, nor exactly a Wizard School Student, nor exactly an Aristocrat. This character Background is something unique and personal. And yet, all of the elements of this Background are standard, Elf Wizard, Corellon, Elf Trance, Eladrin Fey Courts politics, Elven arts, Elf Fighter, Elf gymnastic fighting style, Elvish and Celestial languages, etcetera. These Elements are standard. But the permission to freeform customize a Background allowed something unique to happen.
 
Last edited:

Yaarel

He Mage
@CreamCloud0

Most players dont care about customizing their character. They decide on a Class, scan thru the Species and Backgrounds, pick one of each, and move on to play the game. Many have their friends recommend for them and go with whatever sounds appealing.

Whatever the "official defaults" are, is what D&D is, for the vast majority of the game experience.

There is no need to coerce a default. The existence of a default is coercion enough. It is the torrent of a river, and it typically doesnt matter what the individual snowflakes riding it do.

Each Species has various ethnic groups, each with an array of cultures and subcultures. It helps if each Species in the Players Handbook comes with a sampling of official default Backgrounds to highlight some of the popular D&D traditions about that Species. These defaults set the tone for what the Species "feels like". Most players go with this feel.

For players who care about customization, D&D 2024 has much to offer.


Ancestral Flavor
A LOT MORE WORK is needed for the framework in Tasha's Cauldron of Everything to be viable for all characters. Swapping out skill proficiencies and darkvision alone isn't going to make a werewolf (for example) feel unique.
I agree, there needs to be MANY more Feats to choose from for a Custom Species to be viable.

For one of the players I needed to create a Werewolf Feat. It felt like a satisfying Werewolf. If I find it, I will post what I did.

The Custom Lineage framework is a good start, but it needs more "signature features" for certain concepts.

The dragonborn's breath weapon is an excellent example: it's something that only dragonborn have. I'd like to see that expanded to all ancestries because in my opinion?

Beyond Class, the 2024 character has two big design spaces: Species and Background. In 2014, Background was little more than "pick two skills". But in 2024, the Background is huge, and the player has control over most of it. Some of the things that were in the 2014 "Race", are now in the 2024 Background and decidable by the player.

The Species design space is made out of 3 (!) Background Feats. Generally, it is balanced to spend two Background Feats in exchange for one powerful 2014 Level 4 Feat. 2024 likes to delay a powerful feat, such as a cantrip at level 1, a slot 1 per day at level 3, and a slot 2 per day at level 5. But when a DM is deciding on a Custom Species, a DM can use a full level 4 Feat at level 1, if it is important to a concept without too much worry, such as the Eladrin Misty Step per Short Rest. Things like Dragonbreath and certain kinds of flight can also be Background Feats or level 4 Feats.


Here is the design space in 2024:

SPECIES
• Creature Type
• Size
• Speed
• Lifespan
• 3 Background Feats

BACKGROUND
• Score Improvement: +2 to any, +1 to any other
• 3 Languages (typically Common, Species and Background)
• 2 Skills
• 1 Toolset
• 1 Background Feat

In total there are 4 feats here. This is plenty to create a concept. Three are for the "biology" of the Species. One is for any culture that is indigenous to the Species. Things that were 2014 "Subraces", can flesh out in more detail with more options as Backgrounds.

For the sake of the Custom Species, there needs to be many Feats to choose from, especially magical Feats that a Species concept might find useful. Obvious ones are Feats for flight, natural armor, dragonbreath, other special attack, etcetera. These Feats can be in the Players Handbook and elsewhere: in specific settings, other supplements, or in indy products. Plus, it is a feat − a DM with a sense of mechanics can invent one.

Generally
• Background Feat ≈ two cantrips ≈ slot 1 per day and slot 2 per day
• 2 Background Feats ≈ Level 4 Feat ≈ Xanathar Species Feats ≈ Tashas Psionic Feats

Often an innate spell can represent an important Species trait.


if you can't think of a single such feature for your concept, you probably don't need a whole new Ancestry to describe it.
Yeah!
 
Last edited:

I think Size bonuses and penalties are worthwhile if the DM is hoping for stereotypical species and class combinations in their specific campaign. Because if particular class selections are more useful based upon the species bonus or penalty... (general) your players will go along with it more often than not. The desire to play "off-brand" will be minimal if the penalties are just too onerous or the bonuses too worthwhile.
I would add that for size to be meaningful, speed has to be meaningful. Supposed these different species all have similar human-style tendons and muscles, speed is equally important. The goliath may be wielding a seven-foot-long axe with its head the size of a breastplate, but the halfling attacking with the dagger will almost always strike first assuming they are both trained. But since speed doesn't mean anything in D&D mechanics, and there are no crits, then making size mean something in combat seems to just penalize the little folks.
 

Ability Score Increases
A character's ancestry will give a single +1 ASI to one stat of the player's choice. It will otherwise be per the "Custom Lineage" framework in Tasha's Cauldron of Everything.
A character's background will give them another +1 ASI. This will usually be a choice between two different stats--characters with the Soldier background will gain a +1 to their choice of Strength or Constitution, for example, and characters with the Sage background will get a +1 bonus to Intelligence or Wisdom.
A character's class will give them a third (and final) +1 ASI. Like background, the player can choose between a narrow list of options. Paladins start with a +1 bonus to Strength or Wisdom, Artificers start with a +1 to Intelligence or Constitution.
Pathfinder 2nd edition already does something like this.

At 1st level, all of your ability scores start out at 10 before you add your ancestry's 2 ability boosts, 1 ability flaw and 1 free ability boost (which can be applied to any ability score that currently didn't receive the ability boost. You can even use it to cancel out the ability flaw) Any background you choose gives you one fixed ability boost (ex. STR) and allows you to choose another ability score to boost up. Then your class gives you another ability boost. Finally you get four more ability boosts to use at 1st level. All ability boosts are +2 and the ability score cap is initially set at 18, not 20. There are no odd number ability scores in PF2.

Level up otoh just gives you two ASIs (one fixed, one choice) in your background.
 

Bagpuss

Legend
Lets be real about what classes the small races went to though, that was critical to why it wasn't "popular".

Yes that's the point you could offset a lot of penalties of size by class choice, but then that's a restriction, and they got rid of racial stat mods, because it favoured certain classes so, having size modifiers favouring certain class options is going to be just as unpopular.
 
Last edited:

tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
Epic
Yes that's the point you could offset a lot of penalties of size by class choice, but then that's a restriction, and they got rid of racial stat mods, because it favoured certain classes so, having size modifiers favouring certain class options is going to be just as unpopular.
The other penalties to strength carry capacity & movement that came with size were things that the PC either needed to eat or buy off/compensate for with class abilities or whatever. Those were the parts that mattered. The weapon damage by size mechanic itself was quite popular because of monkey grip & LA monstrous PCs
 

Remove ads

Top