D&D 5E Race/Class combinations that were cool but you avoided due to mechanics?

I've got a few ideas I'm eager to try out. A half-orc Warlock, a dwarf of some sort, maybe an Eberron drow without Sunlight Sensitivity.

Let’s state the problem.

1. We all want mechanical differentiation
2. Different people draw the line on what is appropriate mechanical differentiation in different places - this is a subjective preference.
3. Different people draw the line on what are playable Mechanical differences in different places - this is also a subjective preference.

The only class I actively avoid without the right stats is monk.

That said the characters i remember the most aren’t the highly optimized ones, it’s the strong conceptual ones even if they are a little weaker.

Charlaquin said:

I agree that playing against type is cool. I disagree that removing the mechanical disincentive towards playing against type makes it less cool. The type still exists, now you can just play against it without being at a disadvantage compared to those who play to type.

Click to expand...

IMO maybe In the short term

long term I think removing mechanical disadvantage will remove the ability to play against type.

Gnome Bear (badger) Barbarian: Resistance on most damage, advantage on Dex saves, advantage on Wis, Int, Cha against spells.

FrogReaver said:

IMO maybe In the short term

long term I think removing mechanical disadvantage will remove the ability to play against type.

Click to expand...

I think the types are far too deeply ingrained in the genre to be eroded by something as simple as removing ability score adjustments. As long as people are reading/watching Lord of the Rings, nimble elven archers and stout dwarven warriors will be the baseline from which people deviate.

Sacrosanct said:

Another side thought based on the changes in TCoA and the decoupling of several racial features from races. Has anyone thought of a cool concept of a PC they wanted, but when creating the character, saw that the mechanics of how racial features didn't really support it well from a mechanical standpoint? I'm not just talking about optimization, but in general. With bounded accuracy, every modifier counts, so have you ever been swayed to avoid a particular concept that you would do if features were decoupled?

Click to expand...

nope. Not at all.

Halfling barbarian and dwarf rogue are both combinations I’ve wanted to play but passed on due to the mismatched bonuses.

My brother in law was running a game where he made a big deal about how Feats were available (nobody ended up taking any), and I had planned to play a Variant Human Wizard. Then I rolled 6 odd Attributes, and went with a normal Human, I had no choice.

Charlaquin said:

Halfling barbarian and dwarf rogue are both combinations I’ve wanted to play but passed on due to the mismatched bonuses.

Click to expand...

A Stout Halflings is actually not bad for a Barbarian: Longsword held with both hands is a solid d10 still.

Sacrosanct said:

Another side thought based on the changes in TCoA and the decoupling of several racial features from races. Has anyone thought of a cool concept of a PC they wanted, but when creating the character, saw that the mechanics of how racial features didn't really support it well from a mechanical standpoint? I'm not just talking about optimization, but in general. With bounded accuracy, every modifier counts, so have you ever been swayed to avoid a particular concept that you would do if features were decoupled?

Click to expand...

I mean really they're pretty countless but the biggest one is like "Genasi/Anything" for me. There's tons of times I wanted to play a Genasi in 5E, but didn't, because they have weird modifiers AND totally rubbish racial abilities.

Or Kobolds. I love Kobolds. I'd love to play a Kobold. I'm not, however, playing a race which has a totally unnecessary penalty that other races don't have, and nothing to make up for it - and less than +3 to the other stats (including no +CHA which means Kobolds don't even make good Sorcerers, despite it being the classic combo). Terrible racial abilities top of that too.

Clerics are dreadful for this because virtually no races I want to play a Cleric of have +WIS. I have got past that before, but pretty begrudgingly, I can tell you. Druids don't have it quite as bad but it's not great. The lack of +2 WIS races in general is kind of "a thing".

I could go on. Every character I've created in 5E included me considering and dismissing certain races because they didn't have any applicable mods, despite seeming like a cool concept. Whether I'd have finally picked that race is another question, but I think I would have in at least some cases.

Parmandur said:

A Stout Halflings is actually not bad for a Barbarian: Longsword held with both hands is a solid d10 still.

Click to expand...

Not bad isn't really the same as good, though, and as you go on with playing them, the situation gets worse - the Halfling can never get GWM, which if Feats are in the game, is going to be a huge source of damage to any 2H Barbarian with the faintest hint of optimization.

FrogReaver said:

That said the characters i remember the most aren’t the highly optimized ones, it’s the strong conceptual ones even if they are a little weaker.

Click to expand...

Trouble with this is, remember and enjoy playing are two different things. There are several totally ineffectual characters my group remembers really well. Pretty much none of the people actually playing them enjoyed them in the long term, though (and every single one of them had a short career). We all remember the rubbish Dragonborn Assassin who ended up getting thrown out of an airship, perhaps better than we remember the hyper-competent Dwarf Cleric. Reason she got thrown out of an airship though was that the player was just totally done with playing her. And we don't remember either as well as the exceptionally well-roleplayed Gith (I forget what kind) Shaman (who was secretly highly optimized).