D&D General 5E species with further choices and differences

[Yaarel]

In 5E a 3rd level elf fighter looks very similar to a 3rd level human fighter.

The deemphasis of species seems intentional. The player characters are less about biological differences between species and more about the organizational differences between cultures.

In the context of 5e it is more helpful to think in terms of "origins": the background (ability improvements, proficiencies, and feat) in addition to the species. That said, the species is a hefty amount of design space, to elaborate on many posible concepts.

 

[DammitVictor]

The deemphasis of species seems intentional.

To the terrible detriment to the game, going on for almost as long as it's existed-- the game does just enough with the mechanic to get in the way, but nowhere near enough to justify its inclusion.

It's not just a WotC thing, either. It started with AD&D making race and class separate decision points-- and then adding subrace in Unearthed Arcana-- and then standardizing Fighter, Cleric, and Thief access in 2e years before Wizards removed all of the race/class restrictions in its editions. Tasha's and 2024 Core are just the final nails in the coffin.

PF1 and A5E are really the only steps i the right direction  forward as opposed to games hearkening back to the much more limiting-- but  impactful-- Classic race-as-class system.

 

[Yaarel]

To the terrible detriment to the game, going on for almost as long as it's existed-- the game does just enough with the mechanic to get in the way, but nowhere near enough to justify its inclusion.

It's not just a WotC thing, either. It started with AD&D making race and class separate decision points-- and then adding subrace in Unearthed Arcana-- and then standardizing Fighter, Cleric, and Thief access in 2e years before Wizards removed all of the race/class restrictions in its editions. Tasha's and 2024 Core are just the final nails in the coffin.

PF1 and A5E are really the only steps i the right direction  forward as opposed to games hearkening back to the much more limiting-- but  impactful-- Classic race-as-class system.

I view the recent species design an improvement.

The earlier ability score improvements were vague whence flavorless. The confusion with culture, like proficiencies with certain weapons, was awkward and cumbersome.

Now, the feat-like design space allows a species to exhibit substantial, distinctive, biological and magical traits.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

The deemphasis of species seems intentional. The player characters are less about biological differences between species and more about the organizational differences between cultures.

In the context of 5e it is more helpful to think in terms of "origins": the background (ability improvements, proficiencies, and feat) in addition to the species. That said, the species is a hefty amount of design space, to elaborate on many posible concepts.

And yet culture matters less, mechanically, than species--which hardly matters at all.

Like culture literally has no impact on your character. No mechanics, no ribbons, no fluff. Nothing.

If the intent actually is to make species mostly color and culture matter a ton, then 5.5e has objectively failed in this task.

I view the recent species design an improvement.

The earlier ability score improvements were vague whence flavorless. The confusion with culture, like proficiencies with certain weapons, was awkward and cumbersome.

Now, the feat-like design space allows a species to exhibit substantial, distinctive, biological and magical traits.

Personally, I see it as a significant step back in most ways, especially because feats are so bloody limited and competing with Dull Push Numbers Up ASI benefits.

Like feat-vs-ASI has become the new "magic items are boring". You get a choice between either having an actually cool/interesting/mechanically engaging thing, or dull but objectively more powerful options.

If feats weren't competing with ASIs, or you got more feats, or feats were powerful enough to actually compete with "make your core ability score better", then sure. But as it stands? No, not really. You should almost never take feats unless they're absolutely critical, until you're at least level 12. Which most groups will never reach, because higher-level play is radically unsupported and even less balanced than low-level play.

 

[Horwath]

The problem is that if you start gating important elements of a species behind feats (or something similar) then people will declare it a feat tax. Especially if it's something important like flight or large size or similar.

If some parts of those features are too powerful for first few levels(flight, usage of a 3rd level spell) that is a good way to have that gated behind a feat.

It can also describe in RP terms that you maybe posses a special genetic trait that is rare in your species.

Or is just too much for a "species budget" comparing to other species.

but, maybe the biggest problem in 5E is common pool for all types all feats and ASIs.

maybe it should be 3 pools:

Combat feats, non-combat feats, ASIs.

also idea that I have is that some species are just templates.
and you get them via 1st level feat(maybe later if it's RP appropriate).

1st: buff up 1st level feats to a "strong" full feat that you would like to take at 4th level without attached ASI and not feeling robbed.

then turn Aasimars, tieflings, warforged, shifters, dhampirs, etc... into 1st level feats.
with added 4th level upgrade with +1 ASI if needed or if it's too much for a 1 feat budget.

then you can have difference betweem human aasimars, and elven aasimars, elven tieflings(fey'ri) and orc tieflings, gnome warforged or human worforged, orc dhampirs or dwarf dhampirs. In both RP terms and mechanics.

Ofc, this can also be used for "half-species".
you get: Elven touched feat. and gain some or all elven features on your non elven species, making you a half elf.

also, I like the idea if A5E of later level species power, but it is too late and not that powerful, 5th level would be more appropriate so maybe all campaigns see those features.

 

[Kobold Stew]

You would be incorrect. For example, @Nixlord has a series of books that expands the options for races.

https://www.dmsguild.com/en/product/214641/character-options-talents-5e

https://www.dmsguild.com/en/product/223942/character-options-talents-ii-5e

https://www.dmsguild.com/en/product/311606/character-options-talents-iii-5e

I believe that Kobold Press has also explored this area, and possibly even Goodman Games.

I am sure there are many viable 3rd party products. I was talking only about WotC books. I should have been clearer.

 

[Tessarael]

And yet culture matters less, mechanically, than species--which hardly matters at all.
Like culture literally has no impact on your character. No mechanics, no ribbons, no fluff. Nothing.
If the intent actually is to make species mostly color and culture matter a ton, then 5.5e has objectively failed in this task.
[..]
If feats weren't competing with ASIs, or you got more feats, or feats were powerful enough to actually compete with "make your core ability score better", then sure. But as it stands? No, not really. You should almost never take feats unless they're absolutely critical, until you're at least level 12. Which most groups will never reach, because higher-level play is radically unsupported and even less balanced than low-level play.

Regarding culture being meaningless and having no mechanical benefit in D&D 2024, may I suggest A5E Cultures and Heritages as a much improved alternative? The A5E Cultures are well done and have significant mechanical benefit and flavor for your character.

Regarding feats, I think D&D 2024 did an excellent job with feats. It significantly improved over 5E, by having most D&D 2024 feats give +1 in an ability score with better power balance between feats.

In 5E D&D, there are a lot of sub-par feats that you should avoid taking until at least you have 20 in your primary ability score. As you commented, this means that typically your level 4 and level 8 feats go into adding +2 to your ability score each time to raise it from 16 starting to 18 at 4th level to 20 at 8th level.

In D&D 2024, given that most feats now provide +1 to an ability score, you may want to start with an odd ability score at level 1, say 17 in your primary ability, then at level 4 pick a feat that gives some nice benefit and +1 to that primary ability score.

I like the origin feats that they added in D&D 2024. Making it so that everyone gets an origin feat at level one does add that feat at an early level to add some mech and flavor to your character. I just don't like that they tied the origin feats to particular backgrounds, but that issue has been well hashed out already in another thread.

 

[CreamCloud0]

If some parts of those features are too powerful for first few levels(flight, usage of a 3rd level spell) that is a good way to have that gated behind a feat.

alternatively, they could also just be part of their innate features and locked behind a level threshold rather than the price of a feat, it's not like the 24' designs haven't started dipping their toes in 'at X level your species gains Y', mostly it's just been uses of higher level innate casting but there's no reason it couldn't be applied to flight or other things.

 

[Corinnguard]

And yet culture matters less, mechanically, than species--which hardly matters at all.

Like culture literally has no impact on your character. No mechanics, no ribbons, no fluff. Nothing.

If the intent actually is to make species mostly color and culture matter a ton, then 5.5e has objectively failed in this task

Culture should mean something more in D&D, not less. Anything your characters learns while growing up in a particular culture, like the ones presented in A5e, shapes your character's origin within a given setting by giving them traits with mechanical benefits (weapon and armor proficiencies, language, skill proficiencies, bonus spells, resistances).

5.5 didn't so much as fail by not making culture matter as it left the task up to the players to fill out. As a result, they had to come up with fluff on what their culture was like, or they decide to ignore culture because there was no mechanical benefit for doing so. A5e otoh gave you something of a helping hand by giving the player some cultural benefits for their character.

 

[Horwath]

alternatively, they could also just be part of their innate features and locked behind a level threshold rather than the price of a feat, it's not like the 24' designs haven't started dipping their toes in 'at X level your species gains Y', mostly it's just been uses of higher level innate casting but there's no reason it couldn't be applied to flight or other things.

sure, that works, but maybe you could get something extra.

IE:
Fire legacy:
requires Tiefling or Fire genasy. 4+ level
+1 int, wis or cha
you know the Fireball spell
you can cast it once per Long rest. you can also cast it with any spell slot 3rd level of higher as normal.