D&D 5E Ability Score Increases (I've changed my mind.)

[Maxperson]

What marks something as a subrace of elf. Are there not features which identify the overall category of elf?

Yes, but in 5e there is no generic elf that stops at that point. All elves are <features from overall category of elf> + <features from specific subrace>. There are only elven subraces that are all equally an elf.

Hypothetically, would an orc cleric of Lolth be deemed a member of the Drow Faction? ...as a subrace of elf?

Is a character who is a different subrace of elf but chooses to worship Lolth considered drow?

No and no.

 

[Maxperson]

With my option, you don't need to negate the racial ability scores. You can choose your stats, so your elf, halfling, drow, etc, can have anything you want. In my option, there is no racial attribute bonuses. None needed if you get to place the number you want in the attribute. So literally, both sides can have their version.

It doesn't really give myside its version. Picking a 20 dex or 20 whatever doesn't say anything about how the race as a whole is. Elves as a whole are more dexterous on average than humans. That's represented by the +2 dex. It's not represented by PCs just choosing stats.

 

[Yaarel]

Do you add a bonus feat choice for choosing a racial feat?

The Custom Lineage format in Tashas looks solid.

Judging by the UAs, the ability score improvements standardize to +2 and +1.

Languages now depend on the culture rather than the race.

The tweaks I want are:
• Allow nonhumanoid creature types.
• Allow Large, which determines body space only. Gain reach etc. from a feat.
• Trait is a choice between darkvision, cantrip, or any proficiency.



So, the elf race will look simple, like the following:

ELF
Creature Type. Fey humanoid.
Size. Medium.
Speed 30.
Ability Score Improvements. One ability score improves by +2, an other by +1.
Trait. Choose between darkvision, any cantrip, or any proficiency.
Feat. Choose one elf race feat from among the choices below.

Then each feat, does the heavy lifting to define each concept of an elf.

Backgrounds (proficiencies, languages, noncombat asset) build each culture.

Note, elven cultures are magical cultures, so a background can include magical abilities like "shape living plants", and other noncombat magical abilities.

Abilities → Race → Background (≈ Culture) → Class (≈ Combat Style)

 

[Crimson Longinus]

A consequence of my extreme lumping, means, the elf has NO subraces. There is only the elf race. Any elf can be whatever they want.

What helps define the character concept of an elf is the choice of an elf race feat. These feats can include features like Bless, Misty Step, Detect Magic at-will, Invisibility, Darkness, Mage Armor that can appear like silky elven chain, Elven Accuracy, some kind of flight that is balanced at level 1 and improves while leveling, waterbreathing, alternate beast form, expertise for a choice of skill or tool, and so much more. There are so many tropes for an elf concept to explore.

I actually agree with you overall approach here. This is how I did races for my current campaign. For example whilst the eldri have certain mechanical features shared by all the eldri and whilst they have several different cultures, the cultures themselves are not tied to any specific mechanics. There simply is a pool of certain extra features all eldri can choose from.

 

[Scribe]

Hypothetically, would an orc cleric of Lolth be deemed a member of the Drow Faction? ...as a subrace of elf

And this is where we essentially jump the shark.

We are taking what has been for decades, a race/subrace with a general direction, and redefined it for what?

Why the mental gymnastics? Clearly it's not a drow, unless we are just changing definitions on a whim.

A cat isn't a dog just because we say so, and a follower of lolth isn't a drow, if they are a human.

The UAs suggest new races will be more elegantly designed. Perhaps old 5e races can update.

Lazy, is not elegant. 'Do whatever.' is lazy.

It (Tasha's) was an attempt to appease people who couldn't do what the rules already told them they could do, it's not elegant at all.

 

[Yaarel]

Of course he will say that! He's not gonna say that he designed a rule that causes terrible balance issues even if it was true, would he?

The simple fact is that under Tasha's system some races get a lot more useful stuff than others. If that's not imbalance I don't know what is!

The Players Handbook races and subraces were noticeably imbalanced to begin with.

Tashas gives a perk to mountain dwarf. So now the mountain dwarf is more balanced with the half elf. No problem.

They should have done that when they introduced this system. Not it is an awkward incomplete kludge.

I dont see the awkwardness, in the sense that only players who need the swaps for a certain character concept will use them. Moving an improvement from Strength to Intelligence? Not difficult. Swapping a longsword for alchemist tools? Not difficult.

If I understand correctly, the designers have said they plan to make a clearer distinction between race and culture. I assume that means background proficiencies.

But the way things are now − use Tashas if you need it − are workable enough.

I have really no issue with dwarf mages, but I have an issue with them simply being better at it than other races as a result of a fix that was supposed to stop some races being better for certain classes!

The mountain dwarf Artificer is now as good as a half elf Artificer.

 

[abirdcall]

Racial ASI are a legacy of class and level restrictions for races, which had the intent and more of the effect of actually creating characters who fit within archetypes (because RAW you literally could not make anything else). For example, from 2e:



View attachment 142225View attachment 142226

I think what @ad_hoc meant is that if you start several 5e campaigns, with set racial ASI you will tend to get human, high elf, and gnome wizards, thus leaning into archetype. Whereas if you float the asi, you might have on campaign where the wizard is human, but another where the wizard is dwarf, then dragonborn wizard, etc, and the archetype fails to be meaningful.

As far as I'm concerned, that ship has long sailed; moving from set to floating racial ASI is not a big inflection point in the change of game design. You can use standard array and make a Dwarf wizard with a +2 to Int or a Gnome wizard with a +3 to Int. They'll both basically feel like wizards, but the former will still feel weird because of the likely preconceptions that players bring to the table, not because of the ASI. More importantly, since the 3.5/pathfinder days, you may well have a party consisting of a human, a bugbear, a changeling, a halfling, and an anthropomorphic bat. I get not being into the world that such party compositions imply (I'm not either, tbh), but it's not a change that will be created by racial asi, but rather one that's been here for a long time already. The game design is just finally catching up to that by ditching what was already an atrophied legacy of Ad&d

If you really want to go against type try having your dwarf not speak in a Scottish accent. That'll really throw people off.

I would rather there weren't racial ASIs and we had more flavourful abilities for races.

But we don't, so we have what we have.

Personally what I most want to see at tables are many humans and for other races to be less commonly played and to feel very distinct from humans when played.

I don't care for the situation where everyone is a bizarre race but they're all in effect just humans when played.

Whatever design decisions are made to encourage the former and discourage the latter I'm on board with. I think floating racial ASIs create the latter so I'm against them. That's essentially my position in a nutshell.

 

[Yaarel]

Hypothetically, would an orc cleric of Lolth be deemed a member of the Drow Faction? ...as a subrace of elf? Is a character who is a different subrace of elf but chooses to worship Lolth considered drow?

Heh, Lolth herself is a racist supremacist, so all of that is out of the question.

On the other hand, if there is no elf subrace, then it is her faction whose rules define everthing.

The identities of drow, uda, loren, aeven, high, gray, sun, moon, wood, grugach, wild, athas, eladrin, shadar-kai, etcetera, will all be cultures.



The relationships between these cultures will look like a tree, like a taxonomy of languages.

Uda, Loren, and Aeven are closely related cultures and within the Drow family of cultures.

The setting determines which elven cultures are present where.

 

[Umbran]

It (Tasha's) was an attempt to appease people who couldn't do what the rules already told them they could do, it's not elegant at all.

Great loaded language there, "...appease people who couldn't do..."

So much judgement, with so little demonstration of understanding in those five words.

 

[Scribe]

Great loaded language there, "...appease people who couldn't do..."

So much judgement, with so little demonstration of understanding in those five words.

Fair. Loaded language, apologies.

What does Tasha's do mechanically that the DM could not apply with the following.

"Put +2 and +1 into any 2 different attributes of your choice."