-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Absolutely vital core races in D&D
- Thread starter Hellzon
- Start date
lutecius
Explorer
humans
gnomes, because we need a short, sneaky race and I prefer them to halflings, any incarnation, but merging them would be fine too.
half-orcs, because we need a tall, brutish race. I'm not fond of half races but they look less silly than DB.
magicky elves/eladrin, because I like them.
dwarves, for symmetry and because they are dnd even though I don't like them.
Woodsy and dark elves, fiendish and furry humans are ok for supplements.
Dragon robot people I can do without.
gnomes, because we need a short, sneaky race and I prefer them to halflings, any incarnation, but merging them would be fine too.
half-orcs, because we need a tall, brutish race. I'm not fond of half races but they look less silly than DB.
magicky elves/eladrin, because I like them.
dwarves, for symmetry and because they are dnd even though I don't like them.
Woodsy and dark elves, fiendish and furry humans are ok for supplements.
Dragon robot people I can do without.
Last edited:
Ed_Laprade
Adventurer
Human, Elf, Dwarf, Half-Elf and Gnome.
The first three are definite, for any Fantasy RPG, IMHO. As for D&D: I voted Wood Elf only because Eladrin are too magical. If the choices had just been Wood Elf and High Elf, I would have voted for High. Half-Elves get my vote because I play them more than anything else. Gnomes get my vote instead of Halflings because I've never had any use for Hobbits in my D&D.
The first three are definite, for any Fantasy RPG, IMHO. As for D&D: I voted Wood Elf only because Eladrin are too magical. If the choices had just been Wood Elf and High Elf, I would have voted for High. Half-Elves get my vote because I play them more than anything else. Gnomes get my vote instead of Halflings because I've never had any use for Hobbits in my D&D.
Mercutio01
First Post
I'm with Nifft. I could run long campaigns and be satisfied simply with humans. That would be the only "must-have" in any PHB. The others could be in supporting books, campaign settings, or other such product.
I voted with Remathillis: Dwarf, elf, halfling, human. I consider them essential because they have been in the game from first publication. The hobbits/halflings originally appeared with the note, "Should any player wish to be one ..." -- and in my experience plenty do!
A significant segment of the next generation of gamers insists that there must be fairies of the insect-winged sort. Tunnels & Trolls has had them for ages.
If there's not room for a few more, then maybe the rules are too complicated.
Take what you like, and ignore the rest.
A significant segment of the next generation of gamers insists that there must be fairies of the insect-winged sort. Tunnels & Trolls has had them for ages.
If there's not room for a few more, then maybe the rules are too complicated.
Take what you like, and ignore the rest.
Last edited:
Personally, I'd prefer that the core PHB always include Human, Dwarf (1 kind), Elf (1 kind), Gnome, Orc (of some kind) and Halfling (1 kind), with the exact nature & number of the subspecies being open.*
However, I voted "Human." Only.
I've been playing since '77 as a player and GM with enough different gamers in enough different systems and in enough different cities to find that while variety is the spice of life, if you eliminate humans, you tick off a lot of players...even players who don't normally play humans.
Even elf "fan-bois" can find fun if your campaign has something vaguely elf flavored, be it the nature lords or magical masters archetype...
But IME, nothing but humans will satisfy someone wanting to play their own RW species.
* The reason is essentially a matter of backwards compatibility: I've run a campaign dating back to 1985 or so that has been updated from 1st to 2nd and was slowly being updated to 3.X. When 4th came out, so much had been excised (races & classes) that an update was essentially impossible...and this was a factor in not embracing 4th.
However, I voted "Human." Only.
I've been playing since '77 as a player and GM with enough different gamers in enough different systems and in enough different cities to find that while variety is the spice of life, if you eliminate humans, you tick off a lot of players...even players who don't normally play humans.
Even elf "fan-bois" can find fun if your campaign has something vaguely elf flavored, be it the nature lords or magical masters archetype...
But IME, nothing but humans will satisfy someone wanting to play their own RW species.
* The reason is essentially a matter of backwards compatibility: I've run a campaign dating back to 1985 or so that has been updated from 1st to 2nd and was slowly being updated to 3.X. When 4th came out, so much had been excised (races & classes) that an update was essentially impossible...and this was a factor in not embracing 4th.
Last edited:
Scholar & Brutalman
First Post
Human, Eladrin and Dwarf. Where "Eladrin" means the "fighter/magic user" elf which we saw in BD&D. The wood elf is a later optional race.
For me, the halfling isn't needed. I don't see Hobbits as an adventurer race, and the later attempts to give halflings a different personality just don't seem to work. The most successful little people theme I've seen is the 4e gnome with its scary magical vibe.
Edit: I agree with others that Humans are the only necessary race for fantasy RPGs, however my personal idea of D&D (which was formed around 1979 when I started playing) includes Dwarves and High Elves as PC races. But not hobbits.
For me, the halfling isn't needed. I don't see Hobbits as an adventurer race, and the later attempts to give halflings a different personality just don't seem to work. The most successful little people theme I've seen is the 4e gnome with its scary magical vibe.
Edit: I agree with others that Humans are the only necessary race for fantasy RPGs, however my personal idea of D&D (which was formed around 1979 when I started playing) includes Dwarves and High Elves as PC races. But not hobbits.
Last edited:
Ahnehnois
First Post
Humans, elves, dwarves, halflings and gnomes.
Humans are self-explanatory, elves and dwarves are fantasy staples, and halflings and gnomes are D&D staples. The last of these is perhaps the least so, but gnomes seem to have a significant place in the D&D campaign settings I'm aware of and I would miss them if they were gone.
Dragonborn are a potentially nice addition but not cemented as being essential. Planetouched are part of almost any D&D campaign world, but don't need to be in the PHB as they are both uncommon and tend to be evil. I put wood elf because I see elves as being feylike woodsy people who just happen to have magical aptitude rather than magical feylike people who happen to live in the woods-also, eladrin are extraplanar celestials. The half-races (not including halfling) suck so much by 3.5 core and invite such bizarre questions about their origin that I consider them expendable, though I would notice their absence.
Humans are self-explanatory, elves and dwarves are fantasy staples, and halflings and gnomes are D&D staples. The last of these is perhaps the least so, but gnomes seem to have a significant place in the D&D campaign settings I'm aware of and I would miss them if they were gone.
Dragonborn are a potentially nice addition but not cemented as being essential. Planetouched are part of almost any D&D campaign world, but don't need to be in the PHB as they are both uncommon and tend to be evil. I put wood elf because I see elves as being feylike woodsy people who just happen to have magical aptitude rather than magical feylike people who happen to live in the woods-also, eladrin are extraplanar celestials. The half-races (not including halfling) suck so much by 3.5 core and invite such bizarre questions about their origin that I consider them expendable, though I would notice their absence.
Similar Threads
