D&D General How many Races it too much?

[cbwjm]

Kender alone just doesn't work properly. The kender are not annoyed by other kender.

You're thinking about this the wrong way. The human that gets annoyed by a party of Kender is the DM.

 

[Don Durito]

Kender alone just doesn't work properly. The kender are not annoyed by other kender.

True. But you only need one human.

And they really do need to be a Paladin.

 

[Scott Christian]

Does this include sentient monsters, like orcs, goblins, gnolls, trolls, ogres, giants, ithillids, fey, and dragons? Because I don't see many people advocating for "limited races" that are also advocating that DMs should be constrained to only the original Monster Manual or just a part of it.

That is a good question. When I wrote the question, I was only thinking of PC races.

 

[Remathilis]

That is a good question. When I wrote the question, I was only thinking of PC races.

It's one I think a lot of people take for granted.

In days of yore, you had demihumans (things players could be) and humanoids (evil monsters PCs fight). It was very easy (and relatively common) to focus on demihumans because they were the protagonists and would be ones with kingdoms, clerics and such, while the latter lived in smelly dark dungeons and guarded pies. The DM would add new monsters to keep the game fresh and the players on thier toes, and quite a collection of sentient monstrous races built up.

If we are to accept the prevailing winds of change and assume monstrous races are not uniformally evil, that becomes a whole lot of new races that become available just by virtue of having a representative in the MM. And barring obvious power concerns, the only thing that would stop most of them is fantastic racism.

It would be an interesting discussion if, for example, your eight races included all the "monstrous races" as well, giving some leeway for things like undead, beasts, planar beings, or nonsentient creatures. But even if you said "only the things in the Core Three books exist", that's still 20+ PC races* and hundreds of sentient beings with cultures, religions and governments of thier own.

I just rarely see DMs tie their OWN hands as often as they tie their PCs' hands...

* Assuming that if the monstrous version exists, the PC version does as well for things like aarakroca, orcs, or lizardfolk. There could be a separate debate about allowing PC versions of MM creatures, but for this point it doesn't matter if you are getting the stats from Volo or the MM, they exist in the world.

 

[Don Durito]

It's one I think a lot of people take for granted.

In days of yore, you had demihumans (things players could be) and humanoids (evil monsters PCs fight). It was very easy (and relatively common) to focus on demihumans because they were the protagonists and would be ones with kingdoms, clerics and such, while the latter lived in smelly dark dungeons and guarded pies. The DM would add new monsters to keep the game fresh and the players on thier toes, and quite a collection of sentient monstrous races built up.

If we are to accept the prevailing winds of change and assume monstrous races are not uniformally evil, that becomes a whole lot of new races that become available just by virtue of having a representative in the MM. And barring obvious power concerns, the only thing that would stop most of them is fantastic racism.

It would be an interesting discussion if, for example, your eight races included all the "monstrous races" as well, giving some leeway for things like undead, beasts, planar beings, or nonsentient creatures. But even if you said "only the things in the Core Three books exist", that's still 20+ PC races* and hundreds of sentient beings with cultures, religions and governments of thier own.

I just rarely see DMs tie their OWN hands as often as they tie their PCs' hands...

* Assuming that if the monstrous version exists, the PC version does as well for things like aarakroca, orcs, or lizardfolk. There could be a separate debate about allowing PC versions of MM creatures, but for this point it doesn't matter if you are getting the stats from Volo or the MM, they exist in the world.

You know I pretty much have always assumed that the monsters in the MM do not describe the game world as such but rather the potential game world.

I certainly wouldn't assume that I need to find a place for goblins in the game world just because they're in the monster book. I might just choose not to use goblins.

As in the other thread I remain perplexed at the idea that the books are the game rather than the tools for creating the game.

 

[Remathilis]

You know I pretty much have always assumed that the monsters in the MM do not describe the game world as such but rather the potential game world.

I certainly wouldn't assume that I need to find a place for goblins in the game world just because they're in the monster book. I might just choose not to use goblins.

As in the other thread I remain perplexed at the idea that the books are the game rather than the tools for creating the game.

Granted, not everything in the MM is by default but most campaigns have a large number of sentient monsters that inhabit it, and I'm pretty sure there aren't too many DMs who go though The MM and definitely say "yes" or "no" to every potential being in it before the campaign starts.

But they do with PC races...

 

[D1Tremere]

Now I just really want to know.

How many races is too many for you DM's out there? (Let's leave sub-races out of it for now.)

I know in my locked continent, there are 8 distinct cultures, 5 distinct races. I have plans for there to be other continents, so more will get added. But for the continent, 8 is as high as I can logically go. The resources for the continent are tapped (in my own head, which is only in my head).

So how many races are we looking at for everyone else and their worlds?

This is actually a really fertile question when you consider how the term race is being defined by the person answering. In basic D&D One could say there are 9 if you are just counting player character races in the PHB, but it could be more if you consider each sub-race as distinctive enough to be its own race in this context. As some have said, culture makes a better term than the word race at some point.

But wait, there is more. Just because the PCs don't often see "monsters" as distinctive races with their own culture and value doesn't mean they aren't. There are lots and lots of intelligent and sentient races that would have their own cultural values and interests. In other words, base D&D has maybe 30 distinctive races living in it's world. Ass to that all of the additional supplements and there may be hundreds.

So to address the core question, how many races is too many? Why would any amount be too many?

 

[Don Durito]

Granted, not everything in the MM is by default but most campaigns have a large number of sentient monsters that inhabit it, and I'm pretty sure there aren't too many DMs who go though The MM and definitely say "yes" or "no" to every potential being in it before the campaign starts.

But they do with PC races...

I tend to think there's an element of the two that go together. If I'm limiting the sentient races that are in the setting then that's naturally going to include the ones in the Monster Manual as well. It's just that that's more of an afterthought as they're not default player options anyway.

(I can't remember the last time I used the Orc stats in the books for actual Orcs.)

If someone is running say a humans only game then I certainly wouldn't be assuming that means only leaving out the demi-humans and not the humanoids.

 

[Jack Daniel]

Depends on the setting.

 

[Scott Christian]

I just rarely see DMs tie their OWN hands as often as they tie their PCs' hands...

I agree with this 100%.
I do think there are reasons why that are rational though. For example, most of the group doesn't want to be evil, yet someone wants to play something that is inherently evil (in that DM's world), or the limitations of a race inside civilization. But it is a great concept to think about.