Aasimar and Tiefling should be Themes or templates, not races

[variant]

One of the things that really irked me when it came to these planetouched races is that they always seem to be human. In Forgotten Realms there were elven, orc, and dwarf counterparts with completely different names. So if the human version is going to be included in a core rule book, why should the human version the only available option?

So since Themes seem to be an aspect of 5e, I think planetouched should simply cover them, instead of dedicating whole races to them.

It is also much easier for a DM to ignore a single Theme than a whole race. The Theme could also be placed in the DMG or MM as something exotic.

 

[Grydan]

We don't really know yet exactly how much impact a theme has on your character... nor do we know how much impact race has, for that matter.

Until we have a clearer picture of where they're headed with both of those, it's hard to say whether or not a theme would actually achieve what people want out of writing "aasimar" or "tiefling" on their sheet.

 

[TwinBahamut]

Can't we contain all of these "variant has a strong opinion on racial options" posts to one thread? This is getting a bit much...

More to the point... I just dislike Aasimar and Tieflings. Much like Shifters, they're just a terrible way of diluting a decent racial concept (like playable lycanthropes, angels, or demons) in order to fit D&D's rather constrained racial mechanics. They're the consolation prize for being unable to play a proper racial choice. "Sorry, you can't play as an angel, so here is a human who is vaguely angel-like if you squint your eyes and use your imagination. Hope that works for you!" I'm not a fan of that kind of thing.

Still, I'm not really a fan of throwing anything and everything into being a Theme. Racial options should be racial options. Class options should be class options. Thematic options should be thematic options. I don't want the good and interesting Themes to be crowded out by a laundry list of things that would have been fun races or classes, especially if they were only written up as themes to appease people who want to ban those options from their games.

If you want to ban Aasimar (Devas?), Tieflings, or whatever, then don't bother specifying how you want them in the game. Let the people who actually want to use them specify how they should exist in the game, since they're the ones who actually have to live with the decision.

 

[variant]

Can't we contain all of these "variant has a strong opinion on racial options" posts to one thread? This is getting a bit much...

I considered it, but I figured the threads would be a bit too chaotic.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

Here's the way I see it. Assuming magic items aren't an assumed part of the math, then there's likely to be a system for determining adjusted character level. For example, if a Level 2 character has a +2 sword, he might have an effective level of 4. This shouldn't affect XP or leveling directly, but is intended as a DM tool for building encounters.

If such a system exists, then it's possible to have more powerful races, templates, themes, or whatever. Letting a player be a Drow or a Tiefling is simply a matter of giving the other players an equal advantage to keep player balance, and adjusting encounters accordingly.

 

[underfoot007ct]

I don't believe that making all the classes & races which you might not like in to THEMES is the best future of 5E-Next. If you wish to play with Fighters, Clerics, & Wizards then you may chose to.

We know:...quote, "Common or uncommon classes. So for example fighters, clerics, wizards and clerics might be commmon while warlocks, bards, and paladins fall into uncommon and something like the assassin might be rare. Some of the classes labeled rare might be a bit more complex or difficult to pick up."

So if you only want the basic classes & races you can chose to play the "Common" modual. Then the rest of us can chose "uncommon" or maybe even chose to play "Rare" races & classes.

 

[Shemeska]

They didn't start off in 2e as "human only". Tieflings as presented as PC races in Planescape were a race unto themselves because tieflings on the planes tended to be often far removed from the original fiendish mating that produced their bloodline. And what's more they often tended to be of mixed origins, combining multiple fiendish and multiple mortal races in their family history. It was never a human stock with different versions of elven tieflings or dwarven tieflings. There was also the fact that fiendish blood tended to dominate and wash out the contributions of whatever singular or multiple mortal races might have contributed to a planetouched's family tree.

Late 3e started going a different direction with them, at least by one interpretation, with a few different WotC books containing things like the durzagon, the tannaruk, and fey'ri*. That sort of muddied things a bit, and since then there seems to be this odd assumption that tieflings (and aasimar) are exclusively human. I'd prefer 5e take steps to bring tieflings and other planetouched to where they began.

Then 4e went off the rails and not only made it human based, but only diabolic in origin. I really hope this idea gets dropped.

*though technically this doesn't count since they were described not as elven tieflings, but as a distinct line of true-breeding tieflings of gold elf and tanar'ri stock

 

[Minigiant]

Until we see the extent of change a theme puts on the character, I'll have to wait to make the opinion.

BUT MINIGIANT ALWAYS PRO-MORE RACES!

 

[avin]

Aasimar and Tieflings must be their own races, thank you.

 

[avin]

They didn't start off in 2e as "human only". Tieflings as presented as PC races in Planescape were a race unto themselves because tieflings on the planes tended to be often far removed from the original fiendish mating that produced their bloodline. And what's more they often tended to be of mixed origins, combining multiple fiendish and multiple mortal races in their family history. It was never a human stock with different versions of elven tieflings or dwarven tieflings. There was also the fact that fiendish blood tended to dominate and wash out the contributions of whatever singular or multiple mortal races might have contributed to a planetouched's family tree.

Late 3e started going a different direction with them, at least by one interpretation, with a few different WotC books containing things like the durzagon, the tannaruk, and fey'ri*. That sort of muddied things a bit, and since then there seems to be this odd assumption that tieflings (and aasimar) are exclusively human. I'd prefer 5e take steps to bring tieflings and other planetouched to where they began.

Then 4e went off the rails and not only made it human based, but only diabolic in origin. I really hope this idea gets dropped.

*though technically this doesn't count since they were described not as elven tieflings, but as a distinct line of true-breeding tieflings of gold elf and tanar'ri stock

What Shemeska said.