D&D 5E 5th Edition and the "true exotic" races ...

[MechaPilot]

The exotic races are optional, as called out in the PH itself.

And the other races aren't? Isn't every single race, class, spell, feat, subclass, magic item, and piece of mundane equipment in the books optional? When everything is optional, and everything is, calling something out as being super-mega-ultra-optional is moronic.

 

[Zardnaar]

I like the idea of Tiefling's, and do not see a problem with their inclusion. Half orcs make sense, considering the classic idea of what orcs do for fun. Gnomes are interesting, but have a valid reason for not being seen in most settings (they're shy. They're there, just hidden).

Dragonborn confuse me. Particularly their inclusion in the PHB, when they are basically described as "They were just thrown in.". They don't have a story, a history, or really anything special, aside from the fact that they have a Dragon head. Does anyone know the actual story on dragonborn? Were they in the Sword Coast before 5E, or were they just thrown in after a kind of timeskip between the editions?

They had their origins in a 3.5 splat called Races of the Dragon AFAIK. They were thrown into the 4E realms.

They were fleshed out a bit more in 4E Dragon IIRC on the PDFs. The Tiefling/Dragonborn thing was kind of cool judged under its own merits but it would have been better off IMHO as their own world a'la Eberron rather than the core rules of the game. Arkosia/Bael Turoth and the 4E PoL worlds judged on its own merits was fine.

 

[MechaPilot]

. . . at what point does it stop being D&D and become a different game?
. . .

I isolated that part because it's very important to remember that people do not see the identity of D&D the same way.

Some people think it's not D&D without some kind of Vancian casting. I hate Vancian casting and replace it with spell points every chance I get because that feels to me more like the way magic should work. The people who have invested part of their personal opinion of what D&D is into Vancian casting might say that I was no longer playing D&D at that point, while I would disagree.

Who is right?

Both of us would be, because each of us holds the identity of D&D to different standards.


Also, the very game itself encourages us to make our own worlds and alter the rules as we see fit for the sake of fun. It does this in 5e and has done this in at least the two editions prior to 5e; I actually feel pretty safe in saying the game has done that in every edition, but I'm only going back to 3e because I no longer have me pre-3e D&D books for reference. If the game itself tells us this is your world, make of it what you will, what grounds does anyone have for criticizing the "D&D-ness" of another's game world?

Now one could certainly say "that's not very FR" (or whatever setting they want to choose to compare it to) because each of those settings are their own defined places that have been pretty well fleshed out over the years, but who cares? Unless you're actually trying to run a game that's very true to the history and lore of FR (or insert setting here), that comparison is utterly meaningless.

 

[MechaPilot]

You mean with Dragonborn as the first race in the book? I dunno, I think there'd be a few oldschool gamers who'd go "Oh, they're still trying to push these newschool monster races? I don't think this game is for me." Actually, that's probably the exact reason they didn't just put them in alphabetical order.

They could have just put them in the PHB in the order in which they were included in PHBs of various editions, omitted the optional tag, and then reminded players that they need to talk with their DMs about what is and is not allowed because the DM makes the final decision on that.

 

[MechaPilot]

Including trhem as otional is a way to allow DB and Tieflings to be excluded but also allows Gnomes and HAlf Orcs to be excluded for the 4E purists I suppsoe. Had they only put Tieflings and Dragonborn as optional its aimed at 4E in particular.

Nothing in AL is banned from the PHB so its really only for home games and maybe for setting down the track like Darksun.

Gnomes and half-orcs were in 4e too. They didn't show up in the first PHB, but I've never heard of a 4e DM discriminating against a PC race based solely on what number of PHB it came out of.

 

[Nellisir]

You mean with Dragonborn as the first race in the book? I dunno, I think there'd be a few oldschool gamers who'd go "Oh, they're still trying to push these newschool monster races? I don't think this game is for me." Actually, that's probably the exact reason they didn't just put them in alphabetical order.

Aasimar.

 

[Zardnaar]

Gnomes and half-orcs were in 4e too. They didn't show up in the first PHB, but I've never heard of a 4e DM discriminating against a PC race based solely on what number of PHB it came out of.

Races take up very little page count. Hell they could have put the magic items in the thin DMG and added more races and classes. Not really sure what they were thinking by excluding almost half the the 3.5 PHB classes (5/11)

 

[MechaPilot]

Races take up very little page count. Hell they could have put the magic items in the thin DMG and added more races and classes. Not really sure what they were thinking by excluding almost half the the 3.5 PHB classes (5/11)

That is a point where you and I agree.

 

[Zardnaar]

That is a point where you and I agree.

Well if they removed warlord and warlock thats another 2 classes, move magic items thats another 2-3 thats all the missing classes maybe room for 1 more and gnomes and half orcs take up 4 pages.

 

[MechaPilot]

Well if they removed warlord and warlock thats another 2 classes, move magic items thats another 2-3 thats all the missing classes maybe room for 1 more and gnomes and half orcs take up 4 pages.

No.



Also, Jeff Albertson, again man, any time you want to actually join the conversation, come on in and tell us what's so hilarious.