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

[Chaosmancer]

I kind of lean into this. Part of the fun of D&D is, Legolas and Gimli style, first establishing and then undermining the assumptions each race tends to hold toward each other, and therefore the assumptions that underlie racism as a world view, whether through the actions of pcs or npcs. I think you can have racism and prejudice in your game and depict it in such a way that it's not seen sympathetically. Likewise, you can have slavery in your game without supporting slavery, and without depicting it as a good thing. Especially when it's explicitly not all members of the race that are racist (and especially when it's never forced on pcs).

I agree that you can have it and it not be sympathetic. But the bolded part is the more important part, it has to explicitly be not all members of the race,

And elves being "haughty" is a really deeply ingrained stereotype. To the point where I'm not sure if it is explicitly not all elves or not, who are said to be this way. And paternalistically thinking "we need to care for and guide these lesser races" is still haughty, just not rude about it.

 

[Scribe]

If Genasi and Humans and Aasimar can be popular and successful races without having a type to play against, then why can't elves and dwarves?

I'd argue putting Genasi on par with Elves, Dwarves, and even Aasimar is questionable.

Aasimar do have a 'type'.

Good Alignment.
Near Holy.
Trusted (in contrast to Tieflings being distrusted).
Metallic eyes or hair.

The against type: Fallen, Evil, Anti-Hero.

Humans are the default of diversity, but even then there is type.

'Young' Race.
Full of vitality, in contrast to Elves and Dwarves.
Explorers.
Pushing back the wild.
Domination of the environment, instead of harmony.

 

[Chaosmancer]

This isn't necessarily directed at you; you're comment simply brought thoughts to mind.

In a game where Drow are a subset of Elf...
Drow currently have mechanical features, cultural features, and physical features as categories of features which mark them as being different from the standard Elf.

So, in a game where Drow are a subset of Elf...
This thread (and others) advocate for removing the differentiating mechanical features.
Upcoming books advocate for removing the differentiating cultural features.
There exists advocacy (some of which I understand and support) for widening the range of physical features for the category of Elf (to include features which are traditionally associated with the subcategory of Drow).

What remains as the defining features for saying that Drow -as a subcategory of Elf- exists?

Personally, if the only thing remaining to identify "Drow" is skin tone, I think that ends up being more racist and worse than currently identified issues. "Drow" almost becomes a racial slur at that point.

So, how do you go from removing the +2 dex from all elves, and the +1 charisma from drow, to also removing their innate magic? Are we saying that their magic is taught?

But, I guess if I take you at your point, and there is no difference between drow and high elves other than one being evil and the other not... then yeah, there is no point in keeping Drow. We don't have a special word for evil humans, so why would we keep them for evil elves? But I don't think we are going to quite get to that point.

 

[Stephen D. Patterson]

If we're talking any edition of D&D, how are elves terrible at strength?

Female elves used to have a maximum 16 Strength, as fighters. Male elves were ~ 18 / 50% strength or some such. Plus the level limits.

 

[Chaosmancer]

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 issue I've always had with this point is that they are no better than the Githyanki, who had a +1 to Intelligence.

People are just more aware of mountain dwarves I guess, which is the reason why this has become such a talking point when Medium Armored mages have been a viable concept, with an INT bonus, for years.

 

[Argyle King]

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)

Do you feel there's a benefit to breaking D&D character chunks into finer pieces versus playing a different system which already does that?

If it were me, I'd take a more D&D-4E-approach to race: one static bonus (elf always gets +1 to this thing); one flexible bonus (elf gets a floating +1 which can be added to a few options); and some special racial power.

On top of that would be a 5E background system which maybe has a little more meat but looks relatively the same as now.

I like the idea of more modular pieces for character building. Though, there's a point at which -for me- I start to look over at my Dungeon Fantasy boxed set and wonder why I'm not just playing that.

I think it would be an interesting experiment to run a different game at a con as "D&D 6E" and see how people respond.

 

[Yaarel]

If it were me, I'd take a more D&D-4E-approach to race: one static bonus (elf always gets +1 to this thing); one flexible bonus (elf gets a floating +1 which can be added to a few options); and some special racial power.

Not so different.

Both the +2 and the +1 are "flexible" (= floating) ability score improvements.

The racial power is a choice from several powers.

On top of that would be a 5E background system which maybe has a little more meat but looks relatively the same as now.

Agreed. Beefier background.

Possibly emphasize that this is a "cultural background". Thus the proficiencies and asset are specific to a given culture. Some cultural backgrounds can be widely shared like Farmer, Sailor, etcetera. Other cultural backgrounds can be highly particular like Aeven Conjured Clothing Designer, Living Wood Home Builder.

Despite the background being a silo for noncombat features, allow any weapon proficiency that is pertinent to a background like spear proficiency for a boar hunter, longbow proficiency for a deer hunter.

I like the idea of more modular pieces for character building. Though, there's a point at which -for me- I start to look over at my Dungeon Fantasy boxed set and wonder why I'm not just playing that.

While a player can mix-and-match freely, the options can be presented in flavorful "pregen" ways.

I think it would be an interesting experiment to run a different game at a con as "D&D 6E" and see how people respond.

There is a lot of talk about a 6e. I dont see it any time soon.

That said, there might be a defacto 5.5e, but it can be strictly backward compatible, and presented as a consolidation of all the options that 5e has developed across the last 10 years.

 

[ReshiIRE]

I do feel in some ways Tasha was a soft DND 5.1 or 5.2 (I'm not sure if there were things in books before Tasha's that really opened up significant rule changes that were not just minor optional rules?) and I can see a backwards compatible 5.5e book on the 10th anniversary rather than a 6.0. I think books like Level Up 5E will prove how much of a want for something similar is wanted.

(I also feel 6.0 will be different in a number of ways but will be heavily based on 5.0 and perhaps a major refinement or patch - in particular, I would hope weaker classes like Fighter get a boost, etc.)

 

[Chaosmancer]

I'd argue putting Genasi on par with Elves, Dwarves, and even Aasimar is questionable.

Why? Born with a connection to the elements is a massively popular story trope. At least equal to dwarves.

Aasimar do have a 'type'.

Good Alignment.
Near Holy.
Trusted (in contrast to Tieflings being distrusted).
Metallic eyes or hair.

The against type: Fallen, Evil, Anti-Hero.

Now, this is interesting. Because none of this is something that you can or can't do with certain classes. These are all story tropes. So, no matter what your ASIs or class, you could play "against type"

Humans are the default of diversity, but even then there is type.

'Young' Race.
Full of vitality, in contrast to Elves and Dwarves.
Explorers.
Pushing back the wild.
Domination of the environment, instead of harmony.

And yet I don't think I've ever heard people say that a human druid is against type.

 

[Yaarel]

I edited an earlier post to think about what a format for an elven culture might look like.

For the elf feat choice, one can pick two half feats without their +1 ability score improvements. Some potent feats like flight might be a full feat.

I think each culture should encourage at least three elf feats. A player can pick one of these culturally prestigious feats, or any other elf feat.



ELF (HIGH CULTURE)
Creature Type. Fey humanoid.
Size. Medium.
Speed 30.
Prestigious Abilities. Dexterity and Intelligence.
Prestigious Trait. Darkvision.
Prestigious Feat. Fey Knight, Fey Teleportation, or Elven Accuracy.

Fey Knight
• Trance. Immunity to sleep. Long rest for only four hours, meditating while alert.
• Perception Skill.
• Charm Resistance.
• Wizard Cantrip.
• Elfsword Cantrip. Longsword attacks are proficient, using spellcasting ability for it.
• Elfshot Cantrip. Bow shoots psychic damage, paralyzed instead of dead.