Make Race Matter

[paladinm]

I was looking through my (growing) collection of OD&D/BD&D stuff, and I came across an article by Ken Marin which detailed his ideas of a RC D&D2. One of the interesting things he did was develop race/class combinations that drew upon strengths of both. BD&D used racial classes (Elf, Dwarf and Halfling); Ken expanded upon this by having elven Bards (Minstrels) be just a bit different than human bards, and halfling Thieves (Burglars) be different than "normal" ones. The old BD&D gazetteer series had a number of such classes, such as elven Clerics ("Treekeepers"), who drew upon both arcane and druidic magic, and dwarf clerics that likewise were just a little different.

I'd like to see more of this in 5e. An elven ranger doesn't have to be identical to a human one, and gnomes should have a different range of illusionist abilities than humans.

Any thoughts? How could a character's race affect his/her class abilities (besides a +1 bonus here or there)?

 

[Ramaster]

I think there are more ways of making race matter apart from marrying it to a class. Paizo did something similar to what you propose with different favored class options depending on the race/class combo. If we they to make race matter, and think they should, races should have they own mechanical identity.

As of now (thinking 3rd edition), there are kinda different race "archetypes". For example, a dwarf fighter is more suited to tanking and frontline fighting, while an elf fighter is more suited to shooting some arrows and then finessing an elven curved blade.

The awesome middle ground, IMO, is 4e races. A useful utility power, semi-variable stat bonuses (think PH 3) some "passive" stuff and a couple pluses to some skills. I that if they are going the extra mile, I suggest giving some other things as advancement options.

 

[Li Shenron]

It's an interesting take.

It's actually not too different from using 3ed race-restricted Prestige Classes, if designed well enough so that they let you progress in most of the core class features.

 

[steeldragons]

I was looking through my (growing) collection of OD&D/BD&D stuff, and I came across an article by Ken Marin which detailed his ideas of a RC D&D2. One of the interesting things he did was develop race/class combinations that drew upon strengths of both. BD&D used racial classes (Elf, Dwarf and Halfling); Ken expanded upon this by having elven Bards (Minstrels) be just a bit different than human bards, and halfling Thieves (Burglars) be different than "normal" ones. The old BD&D gazetteer series had a number of such classes, such as elven Clerics ("Treekeepers"), who drew upon both arcane and druidic magic, and dwarf clerics that likewise were just a little different.

I'd like to see more of this in 5e. An elven ranger doesn't have to be identical to a human one, and gnomes should have a different range of illusionist abilities than humans.

Any thoughts? How could a character's race affect his/her class abilities (besides a +1 bonus here or there)?

I like this/these ideas a LOT. And am all for flavor/fluff buillt-in to the races to help differentiate them as separate from just pointy-eared or bearded humans" of the same class.

I do not know, however, if it is realistic to expect from the "core"/beginning material. Perhaps coming up with one or two (as optional add-on modules to incorporate as desired) per race to begin with and then a more expansive "Speciality Racial Classes" book would probably be the way this takes form. But I don't see a great deal of page space added to the core book(s) for these sort of "off shoots."

And/or entirely possible as Dragon articles/add on stuff not found in any "published" book. But simple yet different enough to add to any campaign.

It remains to be seen just how/what Themes are going to entail...or how much (or little) they are going to put into the Race column at character creation. It might be entirely possible that this won't be necessary depending on how/what they allow a player to choose within their Race at character creation.

But still, yeah. Good thread. Good ideas. I'd be totally fine, more than fine, in fact, with it.
--SD

 

[Salamandyr]

After a few years of 4e, I'm ready for race to matter less. I'd prefer to be able to limit the species in my campaign world to those that make sense, without cutting out large swathes of the ruleset from player use.

 

[Mattachine]

I like when there are customizable choices, like feats, that have Race X and Class Y as requirements. It is an easy way to add meaningful racial features to classes that match the flavor of both.

 

[Minigiant]

I'm all for making races matter more.

Sadly I fear that in order to appease the D&D fans that who want races to be just name plates, racial features in core may be limited.

Races could affect the style of classes but I see so much negative reactions to the things that would do it.

Ability scores could be made more important. But a lot of fans hate that idea and even want to cap ability scores.

Class features could be tradeable depending on race. But many fans hate class features and want core classes to be rather vanilla.

Races could have the fluff heavily stamped into theirmechanics. But many fans hate that too.

So I fear core races will be bland slates with no meaningful adjustments and rely on modules to flesh them out. Just speed, ability adjustment, vision, height, and how long they sleep.

 

[Li Shenron]

After a few years of 4e, I'm ready for race to matter less. I'd prefer to be able to limit the species in my campaign world to those that make sense, without cutting out large swathes of the ruleset from player use.

Actually that's the direction to make race matters more Less races = more options for each race, whereas having lots of races already achieves inter-race variety and reduces space (literally, in the books) for intra-race variety. In a way it's quality vs quantity, or more precisely depth vs number. I would be very much in favour of having only the 4 classic races in the PHB with plenty of material each... but they will never do that, they'll never give up on being able to say "lots of classes! lots of races!".

 

[I'm A Banana]

Ken expanded upon this by having elven Bards (Minstrels) be just a bit different than human bards, and halfling Thieves (Burglars) be different than "normal" ones

I did a similar thing in one version of the FFZ rules, where I had each race modify the class subtly, in a different way.

It's a complex alchemy, but I think there's some points in favor of it. You'd have something about the power of a feat, like:

Dwarves

• Dwarf Soldier (Fighter): +1 to attack and damage rolls with axes and hammers.
• Stone-shaper (Wizard): You cast Transmutation spells as if you are one level higher.
• Honorer of Ancestors (Cleric): You use Divination prayers as if you are one level higher.
• Greedy Dwarf (Thief): Any monetary treasure you gain is increased by 5%, since you pick up every last thing of even middling value.

...or something. Though they could just be straight bonus feats (anyone can gain the "Axe Focus" feat that grants +1 to attacks and damage with axes, dwarf fighters just get it for free).

Entire classes might be a bit of overkill, but theme powers, feat chains, and Prestige Classes and Epic Destinies that enhance the race are all very good ideas.

 

[Gryph]

I would like to see baseline differences for race lessened from where they were in 4e. Along side of that I would like to see themes expand to fill some of the space that OP talks about. So, forex, there might be a generic "Mercenary" theme but also a "Dwarven Tunnel Fighter" theme and an "Elven Border Warden" theme. All three would have some common features and some racial flavor.

The reason I want in themes rather than classes is to limit the number of almost identical classes. So if a player wants to be Elven Border Warden and wants to be a caster the system gives an easy way to get there without creating the Elven Warder Mage class.