D&D (2024) If there are no half-elves or half-orcs will there be Tieflings (half fiends)?

[Remathilis]

What if culture was in play in 5e? Not just for the elves but for all of the other races in game. In previous editions of D&D, a lot of fluff went to describing what made High Elves different from Wood Elves and Dark Elves. But there wasn't much in the way of crunch that actually provided mechanical benefits, and what was there wasn't much.

What culture? Moon and Sun Elves? Qualinesti and Silvanesti? Tairnadal and Aereni? Silhana and Devakin? Those are all just variants of the high/wood/dark elves in the PHB and they are all very different culturally. Does each one become a race or subrace?

 

[Veltharis ap Rylix]

You seem to have very specialized preferences. Which is great, and the tradition of D&D is to just home brew what you need at your table.

The base game has to be generic enough to work on everyone's tables. For quite a long time, the game has only offered mechanics for two mixed species: human/orc, and human/elf. Let's be honest: because that's what was in Tolkien.

This new system is not perfect, but does some useful things:
1. It gets rid of a the "half-whatever" designation, which has some unfortunate IRL connotations that make WotC uneasy. You can agree with that or not, but I can see it from WotC's perspective of trying to make the game as big tent as possible.

2. It opens up mixed lineages to every species combination. If you want your character to be of mixed gnomish and elf ancestry, now that is officially part of the rules.

3. It doesn't require any special balancing. Letting players choose traits a la carte would lead to rampant min-maxing and homogenization as players settle on the "best" combinations.

I have no issue with getting rid of the "half-X" terminology. It's why I've generally shifted to referring to Half-elves as Khoravar and Half-orcs as Jhorgun'taal, though those terms are specific to Eberron.

I have no problem with opening up the species combinations either. I have no desire to lock that down again.

But I do think there needs to be a mechanical aspect to mixed ancestry characters for people to play with, even if it's only optional - it's an important aspect to my character creation process and how I relate to the characters I create. Without it, they don't actually feel mixed ancestry to me, and that means that the goal of mixed ancestry representation is only being met at the cosmetic level.

More to the point, in the name of "balance" and sticking it to hypothetical min-maxers (for surely the concerns of mechanically minded players can be for no other reason), the ability to actually play a mixed ancestry character has not only not really been increased, it has actually been diminished, because functionally there are no mixed ancestry characters anymore, just characters that look the part. And that, I feel, is not sufficient.

I'm sorry my go-to example isn't interesting enough to be worth considering.

 

[Hussar]

I believe that it’s the phb’s job to give the baseline.

It’s the settings job to make things unique.

 

[Clint_L]

I have no issue with getting rid of the "half-X" terminology. It's why I've generally shifted to referring to Half-elves as Khoravar and Half-orcs as Jhorgun'taal, though those terms are specific to Eberron.

I have no problem with opening up the species combinations either. I have no desire to lock that down again.

But I do think there needs to be a mechanical aspect to mixed ancestry characters for people to play with, even if it's only optional - it's an important aspect to my character creation process and how I relate to the characters I create. Without it, they don't actually feel mixed ancestry to me, and that means that the goal of mixed ancestry representation is only being met at the cosmetic level.

More to the point, in the name of "balance" and sticking it to hypothetical min-maxers (for surely the concerns of mechanically minded players can be for no other reason), the ability to actually play a mixed ancestry character has not only not really been increased, it has actually been diminished, because functionally there are no mixed ancestry characters anymore, just characters that look the part. And that, I feel, is not sufficient.

I'm sorry my go-to example isn't interesting enough to be worth considering.

I considered it, and it is interesting. I think it would add a ton of complexity to the base game and would be very hard to balance, because it seems like it would allow players to pick species traits in order to optimize. It seems very specialized to your table and setting, and I think that is fantastic, but I don't think it would work for the base game.

And there's no way WotC can offer specific builds for every possible species combination, so that's not even on the table.

 

[Veltharis ap Rylix]

So species traits are so superfluous and unimpactful that they're not worth being concerned over, but heavens forbid we allow a power-gamer to mix-and-match them because they cannot be allowed to eke out even a fraction of a percentage point of an advantage? In a game system they already tune to the max anyway?

I couldn't care less about "but the power-gamers!" I don't make this argument for power-gamey reasons - they are always narrative in nature, and my go-to example is wanting Khoravar that can continue to have both Fey Ancestry and Skill Versatility (or something approximating them), which I've been repeatedly told is not impactful enough to be worth the effort of preserving.

 

[bedir than]

What culture? Moon and Sun Elves? Qualinesti and Silvanesti? Tairnadal and Aereni? Silhana and Devakin? Those are all just variants of the high/wood/dark elves in the PHB and they are all very different culturally. Does each one become a race or subrace?

They become different cultures, a new element

 

[Corinnguard]

What culture? Moon and Sun Elves? Qualinesti and Silvanesti? Tairnadal and Aereni? Silhana and Devakin? Those are all just variants of the high/wood/dark elves in the PHB and they are all very different culturally. Does each one become a race or subrace?

If someone decided to make an A5e version of Dragonlance, Eberron or the Forgotten Realms setting, all of these elves would have had a list of commonly held traits, and maybe a list of setting-specific elven gifts. Then under the culture section of each setting, there would have been Moon Elf Culture, Sun Elf Culture, etc., each of which would have provided some usable cultural benefits.

So you really don't need to make each one a race or subrace, just an actual culture.

 

[CreamCloud0]

If we want the game to make species mechanically important, at bare minimum we would start with the following:

Drop Class down to 10 levels of mechanics and give Species 10 levels of mechanics.

Right now in the game, your JOB is a hundred times more important than who you are as a living, breathing entity mechanically. Which quite frankly is stupid. So to my mind your choices are either make your Species and your job mechanically equal AT A MINIMUM... or we just stop trying to make Species mechanics a thing to care about. If you can't give Species the kind of mechanics it deserves, then just stop caring about it.

Because you will never convince me that having 7 or 8 distinct mechanics for Species makes them good, while only 3 or 4 is a crime. It's all a crime. So I just choose to ignore the crimes altogether.

honestly i would love a dual-progression system between species and class, like, they're touted as the two fundamental building blocks of your character but they're in no way equal to each other, one is the core pillar of your character the other is essentially a footnote of abilities.

 

[DEFCON 1]

So species traits are so superfluous and unimpactful that they're not worth being concerned over, but heavens forbid we allow a power-gamer to mix-and-match them because they cannot be allowed to eke out even a fraction of a percentage point of an advantage? In a game system they already tune to the max anyway?

I happen to agree with you on this. Because I happen to believe species mechanics on the whole are essentially merely window dressing... I think the game should give a 'Mixed Ancestry' species write-up and select one or two features from each species in the new PHB that are the exchangeable since no combination of them could hope to overpower anything.

So you select a foundational species to start with and then swap out one or two features taken from the other parent. They pretty much already do the same thing for Multiclassing, so why they wouldn't do it for Mixed Ancestry is beyond me. It removes the issue of the word "Half-" from any species write-up, it allows for more parental pairings than just human/elf and human/orc, and it gives a lot of people what they want. And those of us who don't particular care for it can just ignore one species write-up rather than two.

 

[Clint_L]

I happen to agree with you on this. Because I happen to believe species mechanics on the whole are essentially merely window dressing... I think the game should give a 'Mixed Ancestry' species write-up and select one or two features from each species in the new PHB that are the exchangeable since no combination of them could hope to overpower anything.

So you select a foundational species to start with and then swap out one or two features taken from the other parent. They pretty much already do the same thing for Multiclassing, so why they wouldn't do it for Mixed Ancestry is beyond me. It removes the issue of the word "Half-" from any species write-up, it allows for more parental pairings than just human/elf and human/orc, and it gives a lot of people what they want. And those of us who don't particular care for it can just ignore one species write-up rather than two.

No offence, but you are a serious min-maxer, are you not? Judging by many of your threads?

So species traits are so superfluous and unimpactful that they're not worth being concerned over, but heavens forbid we allow a power-gamer to mix-and-match them because they cannot be allowed to eke out even a fraction of a percentage point of an advantage? In a game system they already tune to the max anyway?

I couldn't care less about "but the power-gamers!" I don't make this argument for power-gamey reasons - they are always narrative in nature, and my go-to example is wanting Khoravar that can continue to have both Fey Ancestry and Skill Versatility (or something approximating them), which I've been repeatedly told is not impactful enough to be worth the effort of preserving.

I know that's not your rationale, your rationale appears to be your particular setting preferences. I don't see why home brewing to your particular taste is not a good option - don't we all do that, all the time? Or just stick with the 2014 version. I think your suggestion will actually lead to more homogeneity, not less, while also creating a lot of complexity that is difficult to balance. That balance may not be important to you, but it is to those designing a game for millions, not just your table.

You have not made an argument about why your ideas are better for the game in general, rather than just for your own campaign.