D&D General How many mechanical features does a race need to feel "right"?

[steeldragons]

hmmmm...42?

Nah. I'm going to say...a species needs... what did I do in my own system/setting?... I think I do a solid 4...but then a couple of those have multiple "sub-elements"...and the Ability adjustments...so, let's say, 6.

I think that's enough/solid to make non-human species FEEL (and hopefully, play) "non-human." No "just humans with pointed ears" here!

Breaking it down in general categories, off the top of my head, I go with something like this...

• Trait 1: Ability Adjustment: +1 to two abilities, -2 to one ability. Every non-human species operate and have aspects of their physiology and/or psychology/mentality that are not the same as the "baseline" human (who are granted +1 to their class' Primary ability and +1 to another ability of their choice).
• Trait 2: Size...but this is really only applicable to/for the Small species. Or very rare "Large" ones which in my game only really applies to/for PC Centaurs.
• Trait 3: Senses: for most this involves a
  • 3a) Vision (lowlight, superior lowlight, dark, superior dark); and
  • 3b) one other situational Perception roll bonus: a dwarf's "Stonecunning," an elf's "Keen Senses," etc... Something that relates to/is not necessarily dependent on sight, but some other sensitivity of the species.
• Trait 4: Save Bonus: there is some element of the innate species physiology, mentality, or [predominant] society that affords the species a situational bonus to certain saves or ability checks. Elves are "Sure-Footed" granting a bonus to Dex-based ability/save rolls for maintaining balance (as on ice or traversing a tree bough), saves involving difficult terrain (e.g. as made by the Entanglement or Soften Earth spells), or (I think) climbing. Halflings (and dwarves and gnomes) have "Stoutfolk Resistance" granting them a bonus to Con-based save rolls and against Arcane magic attacks (Divine and Nature magic effect them normally)... and so on.
• Trait 5: Let's call this one, as a category, "Culture"...for lack of something better. This can, but doesn't always, involve more than one element. A Dwarf's are "Ancestral Warriors" attack or weapon bonus would go here. Halflings in my setting have something called "Affable Charm" giving them a bonus to interactions using Persuasion (and Deception, if using that as a separate skill. But not "Intimidate.") for creatures with whom the halfling can communicate (generally a shared language... but, ya know, magic happens, so not necessarily.).
• Trait 6: I guess we'll just call "Miscellany." There's something else specific to the species that other species do not have/get/can do. Or, at least, can not do innately. This would be where -using 5e as an example now, not my own game- something like a Dark Elf or Tiefling's innate magic would go. Dragonborn breath weapon. That sort of thing. My Elves are "Star-Blooded" which gives them ye olde immunity to ghoul paralysis and Enchantment/Charm effects (compulsions work normally). Satyrs have, obviously, "Caprine Form" giving them a Headbutt attack (with their horns), Jumping/Kicking with their haunches, and Dex bonuses for balance.

They all feel different. They have, as far as I've seen, play differently.

 

[TwoSix]

Like a few others have said, it's not quantity, but quality that matters. The Fizban's Treasury of Dragons' Dragonborn have just 3 racial traits: Elemental Resistance, Breath Weapon, and a unique feature based on their "Family" of dragons (flight for Gem Dragonborn, a special Breath Weapon for Metallic Dragonborn, limited damage Immunity for Chromatic Dragonborn).

Just 3 mechanics. That's really all that sets them apart from a "normal" D&D person. And, at least in my opinion, that's easily enough to make Dragonborn feel like their own thing. They breath like dragons, resist certain damage types like dragons, and have a special ability based on the dragons they are related to.

The same is true for Changelings. Changelings basically only have 1 mechanical feature that sets them apart from other races (Shapechanger), and it's easily enough to make them feel "right" as a race.

The same general pattern also applies to Kalashtar (Mind Link, Mental Discipline, Dual Mind, Severed from Dreams), Shifters (Darkvision and Shifting), Aarakocra (Flight and Talons), Fairies (Fey creature type, Fairy Magic, Flight), Goblins (Fury of the Small, Darkvision, Nimble Escape), and a few other races.

However, there are also quite a few races that do need more mechanics to set them apart from the "assumed racial mechanics" of D&D 5e. Warforged have a lot going on (Poison Resistance, not needing to eat, drink, sleep, or breathe, immunity to disease, shorter long rests, +1 to AC, taking an hour to put on/take off any armor, armor can't be removed against your will while alive), as do Elves (Darkvision, Trance, Fey Ancestry, Keen Senses and a subrace), Grung (Climbing Speed, Amphibious, Poison Immunity, Poisonous Skin, Standing Leap, and Water Dependency), and a few other examples.

The amount of mechanics depends on the race and what sets it apart from the base D&D race. Some races need more mechanics than others (Warforged and Grung), and some really don't need all that many to explain their concept and make it playable (Changelings and Dragonborn).

Quality versus Quantity and context is everything.

Strong agreement with your list.

I'll go a step further and say that the only racial mechanics that really matter in terms of making a race feel present and different are ones that require active insertion in the fiction.

+2 to a stat, free skills, darkvision are all terrible racial features because they have no presence during play. No one ever says "I'm making my Perception skill, which I'm proficient in because I'm an elf!" or "I just make my Concentration check because I'm a dwarf with +2 Con!". Every character has ability scores which are modified by multiple sources; nothing about using that slightly higher ability score makes the other players feel like you're an elf or a dwarf.

Good racial skills are those that trump normal expectations of play, not just adjust numbers. Turning a 20 damage hit into a 5 point hit because of Stone's Endurance is a good racial. Flight is a good racial. Changeling shapechange is a fantastic racial. Resistances are a blah racial, but immunities are fantastic ones.

Darkvision would be a good racial if it wasn't so widespread; its ubiquity makes it flavorless, such that races that don't have it are actually the noteworthy ones. Natural weapons are good for verisimilitude but ultimately flavorless, since 5e play really doesn't allow for their use except in the most contrived situations. Make claws a bonus action attack, though, and then they'd actually be an interesting racial feature.

 

[d24454_modern]

It needs to accurately reflect the myth that it's based off of. That's the most important part.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Zero. Race is fluff, not crunch.

Winner winner chicken dinner.

 

[Stormonu]

I'd like race to be more than mere handful of mechanical traits, but mechanics are sometimes needed.

On the note of ASI's, I wish there were three levels: one +1 ASI from race, one +1 ASI from background, one +1 ASI for class. Let the ASI's at level up be directed more towards unique talents such as feats and less likely to be spent on ASI's.

As for racial ASI's, I'd like to see two options:

+1 to one ability score defined by the race (example, +1 Dex for elves, +1 Con for dwarves, +1 Cha for dragonborn, etc.)
OR
+2 to one ability or two +1 to ability scores and a -1 penalty to another score, defined by race (ex., +1 Dex, +1 Int and -1 Str for elves; +2 Dex and -1 Str for halflings; +2 Con and -1 Chr for dwarves, etc.)

With the three ASI sources, you might build something like:

Elvin (+1 Dex) wizard (+1 Int) with Soldier background (+1 Str).
Elvin (+1 Dex) wizard (+1 Int) with Scribe background (+1 Int).
Elvin (+1 Dex) rogue (+1 Dex) with Street Urchin background (+1 Dex).
Elvin (+1 Dex) rogue (+1 Dex) with Charlatan background (+1 Cha).

 

[Malmuria]

Just one special trait/ability is fine. I'm currently starting a Whitehack campaign. In Whitehack, you get "groups" that you can write next to a chosen ability score, and one of these groups is your species. So you might have "lizard person" written next to your dexterity score, and when applicable to you get advantage on dexterity checks. It's a very flexible rules lite system that relies on conversation between player and dm.

There are other games where inventory is where a character gains expression (e.g. Knave, Into the Odd). For these games, race/culture could be expressed through an item or trinket that grants a particular effect.

Otherwise I prefer to just stay within the fiction and let race/culture/background affect things naturally. It requires a dm who is looking out for ways that PC traits can express themselves in a game, however.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I'd say around six to nine? I think a character's race ought to have some influence across many areas of their abilites, not that race exclusively lies in the mechanical aspects but if everything is centred in or around only one or two key features then outside of those specific areas you might as well of been playing a human for all the influence it had. (A player's capacity to RP the feel of the impact of their character's race into the gameplay is an entirely different topic, i'm viewing this exclusively from the mechanical side of things here)

Not that all of the features need to be things that dramatically shift how you play them but a knowledge proficiency here, a resist advantage there, maybe a pinch of weapon proficiencies and a sprinkling of unique abilities on top that all add up to be more than the sum of their parts, Basically 'A little, Alot' reminders that let you appreciate the race you chose is actually doing something for your character beyond whether they have a tail or not and what colour their eyes are.

 

[Lanefan]

Prompted by the discussion/debate over in the List of All 33 Races in MMotM thread, I'm curious:

For your tastes, how many mechanical features does a race in D&D need to feel "right", worthwhile, not-oversimplified, or whatever? One? Three? Five? More? None?

Does it matter what the features are? Do they need to include ASIs? Do they need to include movement? Save modifiers? AC modifiers? Proficiencies? Advantage or Disadvantage? Languages? Feat-like abilities? Innate spellcasting?

Whatever it takes to suit what the species - partcularly the physical aspect - is all about, and to make sense. For some species this might be only one or two mechanics, for others it might be a bunch.

Human is always the baseline default.

--- Shorter species: lower move rate. Taller species: higher move rate.
--- All species: baked-in ability bonuses and penalties to reflect that species' physicality and-or mental ability relative to a Human, covering however many of the six abilities as are needed. This is one area where a bonus somewhere must be cancelled out by a penalty somewhere else. And yes this specifically means some species will end up being inherently less intelligent than Humans.
--- All species: language knowledge suitable to the species; e.g all Dwarves speak Dwarvish but not all Dwarves necessarily speak Common.
--- Some species: different sense abilities e.g. night vision (and a return to splitting out infravision and ultravision for different species is long overdue!), enhanced (or poorer) hearing or sense of smell, etc.
--- Some species: species-based save modifiers e.g. Dwarves have higher resistance to magic while Elves are vulnerable to it.

And so on.

Then, if after all this a species turns out not to be vaguely in overall balance with a Human - be it too powerful or not powerful enough - it can't be a PC. Pleasant side effect: this ought to chop down the list of playable species to a more manageable number.

Do the races need to be balanced with each other, insofar as the rule system allows?

Vaguely, yes.

Do the races need to be balanced with themselves, i.e. do drawbacks like "this race has a slower-than-average movement speed" need to be balanced by an extra bonus or feature?

This would be necessary in order to preserve the vague balance between species while avoiding rampant power creep, so yes.

 

[Lanefan]

What penalties would make a centaur feel more horsey? What does fire magic make you bad at?

The quickest way to make a Centaur feel its horsey-ness is to run a dungeon adventure where all the corridors are only 5' high, that has lots of steep stairs (or ladders!), and that has a few tight-squeeze-for-a-Human openings that must be got through.

In an older campaign I ran one of the long-running PCs was a Centaur (courtesy of someone casting Reincarnation instead of Raise Dead), and I had to give a fair bit of thought at the time to just what a Centaur could and couldn't do.

 

[jmartkdr2]

The quickest way to make a Centaur feel its horsey-ness is to run a dungeon adventure where all the corridors are only 5' high, that has lots of steep stairs (or ladders!), and that has a few tight-squeeze-for-a-Human openings that must be got through.

That works. The original comment implied that ability score penalties could handle all balance issues.

(I don't think you can really balance races at all, unless you stick to a narrow range or have race choice affect class features/options.)

In an older campaign I ran one of the long-running PCs was a Centaur (courtesy of someone casting Reincarnation instead of Raise Dead), and I had to give a fair bit of thought at the time to just what a Centaur could and couldn't do.

"Sucks at climbing" is a good one - so long as it isn't "can't climb at all" because at that point just don't allow centaurs.