D&D 5E Race-Class Combinations

Mercurius · Jan 26, 2015

I'm curious how other DMs handle race-class combos. I generally have an "anything goes" approach in that while certainly dwarf monks don't really exist in my world, certainly one could. There are always exceptions. But I also like the idea of differentiating what could be called preferred, common, and rare combinations. For example:

Dwarf
Preferred: Fighter
Common: Cleric, Paladin
Rare: Barbarian, Bard, Druid, Monk, Ranger, Rogue, Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard

I'm tempted to say that preferred combos give a +10% XP bonus, common none, and rare -10%, but that seems an unnecessary penalty and bonus that would be rather prohibitive. But any thoughts on how to differentiate beyond just descriptive? Or is it more problematic than it is worth?

ppaladin123 · Jan 26, 2015

Mercurius said:
I'm curious how other DMs handle race-class combos. I generally have an "anything goes" approach in that while certainly dwarf monks don't really exist in my world, certainly one could. There are always exceptions. But I also like the idea of differentiating what could be called preferred, common, and rare combinations. For example:

Dwarf
Preferred: Fighter
Common: Cleric, Paladin
Rare: Barbarian, Bard, Druid, Monk, Ranger, Rogue, Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard

I'm tempted to say that preferred combos give a +10% XP bonus, common none, and rare -10%, but that seems an unnecessary penalty and bonus that would be rather prohibitive. But any thoughts on how to differentiate beyond just descriptive? Or is it more problematic than it is worth?

Do you want to penalize players for going against type? That seems like it would cut down some interesting role play activities. You could probably just deal with this in terms of NPC expectations and prejudices: half-orcs are dumb there is no way they can be competent wizards; dwarves are boorish and the idea of a dwarven bard is laughable; elves are too dainty to swing a great axe (barbarian). Whatever. So then players might have to prove themselves to earn respect.

Mercurius · Jan 26, 2015

ppaladin123 said:
Do you want to penalize players for going against type? That seems like it would cut down some interesting role play activities. You could probably just deal with this in terms of NPC expectations and prejudices: half-orcs are dumb there is no way they can be competent wizards; dwarves are boorish and the idea of a dwarven bard is laughable; elves are too dainty to swing a great axe (barbarian). Whatever. So then players might have to prove themselves to earn respect.

Good stuff, yeah, that's pretty much my thinking. I guess I just want to signify in some way which are the classic/preferred, common, and rare classes. But maybe this is all a bit of a distraction.

Authweight · Jan 26, 2015

I would focus on doing this in the story rather than in the mechanics. Push your players to develop their story about why they break the mold, and use that story to inform how other characters in the world respond to them. Make it part of your game, but not by changing XP around.

Minsc · Jan 26, 2015

Do you still get +10% XP if you have 16 or higher in your prime requisite(s)?

Shiroiken · Jan 26, 2015

I generally use the social aspect, rather than mechanical. For example, a Halfling Barbarian (Berserker) is going to get a lot of snickers, and a Dwarf Mage is going to be mocked as bookish ("NERD!!!"). Playing against type can be a lot of fun, but there are always social ramification for the outcasts (that many of use should understand very well).

Kobold Stew · Jan 26, 2015

I think you don't need to enforce it with respect to the players: eve if they are all choosing what you see as under-represented combinations in the world, all that means is that they won't meet others like them -- as a sample size, the PCs are such a small portion of the world anyways.

I really feel that penalizing less viable options will only discourage players: what's it to you if someone wants to be a Half-Orc Wizard? Sure, they can't start with a +3 Int bonus -- surely that's penalty enough. A ~20% xp differential would be huge.

steeldragons · Jan 26, 2015

I used to simply ban them. It's just the easiest thing.

Having softened in my years, now more are allowed than they were...players all know what they are...and the wip World of Orea rpg is going to limit options by race...they're just noted/treated as unusual or outcast [outlawed in some cases]. The kind of common/uncommon/rare distinctions you suggest in the OP are basically just understood.

If someone came to me and just really really haaaad to (long as they weren't whiny and annoying and entitled about it) I'd probably just let them do it with the understanding they are actually the only one in existence. Of course, this lends to the special snowflake-ism [tm] that whiny entitled players are generally looking for...but if/when it ever actually happens and becomes a problem, I'll let you know.

BRKNdevil · Jan 26, 2015

Halfling Barbarian

and one badass dwarf mage from the not as of yet published Mushoku Tensei

TarionzCousin · Jan 26, 2015

Mercurius said:
For example:

Dwarf
Preferred: Fighter
Common: Cleric, Paladin
Rare: Barbarian, Bard, Druid, Monk, Ranger, Rogue, Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard

Shiroiken said:
... and a Dwarf Mage is going to be mocked as bookish ("NERD!!!").

From what I've seen, Dwarven wizards are relatively common in 5E!

I wouldn't penalize a player for playing against type. That seems cruel to me. As someone upthread noted, it is enough of a penalty to not get the racial bonus to your primary stat, IMHO.

D&D 5E Race-Class Combinations

Mercurius

Legend

ppaladin123

Adventurer

Mercurius

Legend

Authweight

First Post

Minsc

Explorer

Shiroiken

Legend

Kobold Stew

Last Guy in the Airlock

steeldragons

Steeliest of the dragons

BRKNdevil

Explorer

TarionzCousin

Second Most Angelic Devil Ever

Similar Threads