Eladrins, Tieflings, Dragonborn Too Far Outside Standard Fantasy?

[That One Guy]

I agree with the OP, to a certain extent. I fear that, should I ever start a 4E game of my own, I will be spending too much time trying to explain why tieflings and dragonborn "aren't allowed" in my game because they are in the PHB. And houserule or no, the implication among most players is "if it is in the PHB, it is allowed." Putting them in the PHB makes them "cannon" to some people...especially the people who are fond of saying things like "if you don't allow the PHB as-written, then you aren't playing D&D."

I don't know if the OP intended to open up that old "what is/is not real fantasy" can of worms, though. That is an argument that will go nowhere in a hurry. I'm not saying that there is no place for eladrin, tieflings, dragonborn, gelatinous cubes, or any other thing in D&D...and I don't think the OP was saying that, either. If the choice were mine, I would have put them in separate books. That's all.

I respect how you put that and your point of view. Well said. I do not agree, but I think your reasoning is sound.

I too dislike the notion of, "if you don't allow the PHB as-written, then you aren't playing D&D."

 

[med stud]

I haven't seen halflings, except in a very general sense (like pygmees) anywhere outside Tolkien. Tolkien's elves are a bit like those in D&D but the likeness is superficial IMO. The freedom-loving, nice minded elves of D&D seem to be unique for D&D. Dwarves as presented in D&D exists in Norse mythology and Tolkien (who took them from Norse mythology). Except that Norse dwarves often were portraited as pretty evil. Gnomes are pure D&D. Gnomes of the folk lore doesn't resemble D&D gnomes except for the fact that both kind of gnomes are small.

I haven't read Vance but I have read Howard and Leiber. I think you really have to stretch it to say that D&D races figure in those books. IMO, dragonborn and tieflings are more "Howard" in feel than dwarves and halflings.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I agree that the races the OP identified are rather naff. They will not be making an appearance in my campaign unless heavily modified. Still one man's meat is another man's poison and all that.

I think that the problem for me and perhaps the original poster was that the strength of D&D was it was a kind of linqua franca of fantasy RPG and it gave stock archetypes that could be then modified for your own game world. However by moving away from the stock (or cliched if you will) you have a style that is less easily modifiable. D&D 4th edition feels in flavour much like Earthdawn which was great in terms of colour. But Earthdawn did not get as much play (at least in our group) because it was less easy to make the setting your own.

I do not like the higher fantasy of feel of the new D&D myself, though I do like the mechanical changes for a more balanced and playable game. For me when everything is magical it cheapens the feel and sense of wonder. Magical is simply the new mundane. When my Paladin draws back the cowl of the hooded stranger to see the slitted eyes and forked tongue of someone who has been touched by diabolical forces, I want to be able to cry aloud in shock and disgust and reach for my sword without another PC going "Relax it's just Dave who works in the bar. Racist!"

As this is an enclave of people who are largely excited about the new edition any concerns and criticisms tend to be attacked. After reading through a few such posts, I want to say "Yes, I like 4th edition but that does not mean I have no sense of critical discernment" .

I think Earthdawns rule affected the flavour a lot stronger then just the selection of races, though. The way magic worked, the fact that people used magic instead of normal skills affected the fantasy a lot.

4E lacks the Half-Orc or Gnome as PHB races, but it still features the iconic "baseline fantasy" races Dwarves, Elves, Halflings and Humans.
Adjusting the selection of races, or changing the cosmology, never seemed to me a sa big deal. Removing alignment with the 3E core rules was a lot harder, since it was "fluff" infringing the rules.

But maybe I just feel that way because I like the new cosmology more then the old one. (Even though I can't say I felt a special need for Tiefling or Dragonborn...)

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Eladrin I'll tolerate as they're just grey elves by another name.

Tiefling and dragonborn are right out, though. I've never approved of planetouched PCs or half-dragon PCs or lizardfolk PCs in previous editions; why would I start now?

But like others, I'll fell a very strong pressure to include them as they are now "standard" because they are in the PHB. Blech.

I wished 4E could have monkeyed with the rules and some of the edge-fluff of D&D without having significantly re-written the core fluff.

 

[hong]

I swear, I bet you guys have never even banned wizards in your life.

 

[Shadeydm]

How many of you feel that races such as Eladrins, Tieflings, and Dragonborn are too far beyond the scope of standard fantasy fare to be included as base races? Personally, I can't think of a single classic fantasy story that involved eladrins, tieflings, or dragonborn and I resent them being included in the core races.

As a GM, now I have to explain which parts of the PHB I am excluding wholesale and I really shouldn't have to do that. The PHB should include the core elements that most if not all standard fantasy stories would include. I think races such as those belong in splatbooks where they are not automatically assumed to be already a part of the game.

And I understand that there's not much we can do about it now, but I'm just wondering how many others feel the same way.

I think the question really should be are races such as Eladrins, Tieflings, and Dragonboobs too far beyond the scope of core DnD. I think they are, however, I'm sure there are plenty who think otherwise. I can hardly wait to see the write up for Gibbering Mouther PCs in the PHB3 I wonder how many boobs they will have...

 

[hong]

Male dragonborn demand equal representation!

 

[Wormwood]

As a GM, now I have to explain which parts of the PHB I am excluding wholesale and I really shouldn't have to do that.

I agree with your last point.

But then again, it would never occur to me to unilaterally exclude anything in our games. The group make these kinds of decisions.

 

[Tuft]

I've always wondered why "classical" mythological creatures like Centaurs, Satyrs, Harpies, Merfolk, Pixies etc are so far from mainstream in D&D...

 

[AllisterH]

Demon-cursed/derived races are races I've read about in fantasy so the tiefling is not a big deal. Eladrin as other people have mentioned is Galadriel and Elrond (with Legolas being Elf) so again, not a problem.

The only one I've never read (outside of D&D fiction) about is Dragonborn