criteria for new races to be added to the PHB

gyor

Hero
Okay so playable Goblins stats have appeared in 3 different books, 3 or more settings, possible with more to come. Bugbears, Hobgoblins, Goliaths, have appeared twice. Deep Gnomes stats have appeared 3 times. Playable Aasimar have published twice (although with different stats), they have gotten mentions in Wayfarer's Guide, Volo's Guide, the DMG, the SCAG.

If you keep reprinting a playing race or subrace or they keep popping up in multiple settings in a playable context, it's a sign that they should have been put into the PHB in the first place. I mean why are their races like humans, Dwarves, ect..., in the PHB? because its more effient to put them in the core player book instead of reprinting the core races and core subraces endlessly.

Imagine having reprint playable human, Dwarf, Elf, Halfling,,ect..., rules in every setting book or other book where they meant to be playable. That would be terrible.its so much more effient to put them in the PHB, a central book. And remember each race actually take up a small amount of page space compared to class or alot of other stuff.

So Goblins, Deep Gnomes, and Aasimar should be in the PHB, possible other races as well.
 
Last edited:

delphonso

Explorer
I'd say goblins are pretty exemplary of generic fantasy, though. I believe they should be added, honestly - especially if as OP says, they're commonly included in setting books and have been printed so many times.
 

Doc_Klueless

Doors and Corners
I see where you're coming from but... I prefer keeping the PHB list of races fairly trim and close to the "Classic D&D Mix." For me, the fact that not all settings contain the same races is something that makes those particular settings that do special.

However, I'm also not particularly opposed to it either... As long as it doesn't increase the page count and therefore cost of the PHB. It's a big enough $$$ leap for beginners already.
 

Doc_Klueless

Doors and Corners
I'd say goblins are pretty exemplary of generic fantasy, though. I believe they should be added, honestly - especially if as OP says, they're commonly included in setting books and have been printed so many times.
I love playing goblin PCs. Love it. But I wouldn't want them available as a baseline PC race. However, that opinion should be taken with a grain of salt as I don't much like having half-orcs in the PHB as well.

But it's something I could live with so... heh.
 

gyor

Hero
I see where you're coming from but... I prefer keeping the PHB list of races fairly trim and close to the "Classic D&D Mix." For me, the fact that not all settings contain the same races is something that makes those particular settings that do special.

However, I'm also not particularly opposed to it either... As long as it doesn't increase the page count and therefore cost of the PHB. It's a big enough $$$ leap for beginners already.
I point out that not all settings include PHB races and given D&D is expanding to include MtG settings, even humans aren't in very Setting! (Humans are not present in the Shadowmoor Setting). Gnomes and Half Orcs are not present in Darksun, and Dragonborn got repurposed to represent the Dray in 4e so I don't know if that counts. Demihumans aren't present usually in many Domains of Ravenloft.
 

delphonso

Explorer
Uncommon races, as per RAW, aren't necessary to include at all. So really the only 'guarantees' are dwarf, human, elf, and halfling.

Anyway, to return to point;

I think the criteria could be pretty simple:
1. Races should be reasonably playable by a new player (heavy RP races like Drow, or weird ones like Lizardfolk shouldn't be there.)
2. Races should be appropriate for most settings and adventures (Warforged not being included is a good thing. Maybe goblins fall here.)
3. Races should bring something to the table. (Half-orc and Goliath are basically the same.)
 
Last edited:

Parmandur

Legend
In the event of 6E introducing a revised PHB, I'd lay decent odds that Goblins might end up included. Not sufficient reason for an alteration to the PHB, though. It didn't take up much space in either Ravnica or Eberron, since the setting fluff for Goblinoids needed to be provided anyway.
 

gyor

Hero
If you include Devas as a weird type of Aasimar as FR does, Aasimar appear in a player context in Planescape, Nentir Vale, Eberron, Urban Arcana and Faerun, possibly others, plus multisetting generic products like Races of Destiny.

Goblins have been published in 5e alone 3 times, they have a history of being published as playable race in previous editions as well, for multiple settings. And for MtG settings Goblins often are a core race.

Genasi are a race in Forgotten Realms, Planescape, Eberron in the past, Nentir Vale, and possibly others, and in generic setting neutral products.

Gith appear in Planescape, Forgotten Realms, Darksun, Spelljammer.

Shifters appear in Eberron, Nentir Vale, and the Forgotten Realms promiently.

And most of these races make sense for Greyhawk.
 

dave2008

Legend
I am actually the opposite. I would prefer the PHB be to have only a few races (4-5 max) and then it should soon be followed by (or published at the same time) a "Complete Races" splat book that has all the races. So in the neighborhood of 50-60 races. The PHB is for those you just want to get started, then every option under the sun is in the supplement.
 

gyor

Hero
I am actually the opposite. I would prefer the PHB be to have only a few races (4-5 max) and then it should soon be followed by (or published at the same time) a "Complete Races" splat book that has all the races. The PHB is for those you just want to get started, then every option under the sun is in the supplement.
Your confusing the purpose of a Beginner Box with the PHB, a core book whose function at least in part is containing elements that are common to many settings, to reduce the need for duplication, as well as acting as a starting point.

So far it's only Aasimar, Shifters, Genasai, Goblins, and Gith, and isn't a huge increase, it's what 10 pages maybe, 12 at most. Peanuts.
 

gyor

Hero
In the event of 6E introducing a revised PHB, I'd lay decent odds that Goblins might end up included. Not sufficient reason for an alteration to the PHB, though. It didn't take up much space in either Ravnica or Eberron, since the setting fluff for Goblinoids needed to be provided anyway.
I don't expect a retroactive change, I'm thinking more for 5.5e or 6e, just a lesson for the future, to improve effiency and logic.
 

aco175

Adventurer
I love playing goblin PCs. Love it. But I wouldn't want them available as a baseline PC race. However, that opinion should be taken with a grain of salt as I don't much like having half-orcs in the PHB as well.
I'm actually in the opposite camp where I do not like to see 'monster' races as PCs. They have always been monsters that are meant to be killed and should be beaten out of most towns not listed as Mos Eisley. I find that the game looses something if the DM needs to shoehorn the plausibility of the game to fit someone wanting to play a monster.

I know some like this and there should be a book allowing it, but not in the PHB where the more traditional races that are looked at as hero races should be. I have played in more one-shots where we all played monsters and the tables were turned, but they were never full campaigns.
 

dave2008

Legend
Your confusing the purpose of a Beginner Box with the PHB, a core book whose function at least in part is containing elements that are common to many settings, to reduce the need for duplication, as well as acting as a starting point.

So far it's only Aasimar, Shifters, Genasai, Goblins, and Gith, and isn't a huge increase, it's what 10 pages maybe, 12 at most. Peanuts.
No I am not and I don't care about the number of pages. However, I am biased as a DM. I almost never play characters so I generally care less about player content. For me as a DM I would rather the core book had less options and splat books had a lot more.

EDIT: In addition, your complaint is based on the idea of things being printed in multiple locations / multiple times. My argument: Core + 1 for races. It is either printed in core or in 1 splat book, end of story. Simple and clean.

EDIT 2: 2nd option, no races in the PHB. All races in a splat book (I guess it would become a 4th core book). That way all races are in one book.
 

dave2008

Legend
I don't expect a retroactive change, I'm thinking more for 5.5e or 6e, just a lesson for the future, to improve effiency and logic.
The logical thing from that standpoint is to put all races in a 4th core book. PHB, MM, DMG, & PRG (Player Race Guide). Otherwise someone is always being left out or a 2nd class citizen.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
I’d strongly add Goliaths to that list.

Also the idea they’re the same as half-orcs is laughable, to me.
 

PsyzhranV2

Adventurer
I'm actually in the opposite camp where I do not like to see 'monster' races as PCs. They have always been monsters that are meant to be killed and should be beaten out of most towns not listed as Mos Eisley. I find that the game looses something if the DM needs to shoehorn the plausibility of the game to fit someone wanting to play a monster.

I know some like this and there should be a book allowing it, but not in the PHB where the more traditional races that are looked at as hero races should be. I have played in more one-shots where we all played monsters and the tables were turned, but they were never full campaigns.
Angry Ghaal'dar noises
 

gyor

Hero
The logical thing from that standpoint is to put all races in a 4th core book. PHB, MM, DMG, & PRG (Player Race Guide). Otherwise someone is always being left out or a 2nd class citizen.
It's not about 1st and 2nd class, it's about reducing duplication.
 

Advertisement

Top