Mixing Races....and why DM's shouldn't allow it

I think that people read too much into the "half" part of "half-illithid" or "half-fiend", and assume that it has to mean literal, biological parentage.

Honestly, I have always interpreted it as a shorthand convenience. "Half-illithid" is simply a better name for a template than "illithid-like magical hybrid creature" - besides which, the actual description for the half-illithid template has, in some versions, included the explanation that half-illithids are the result of implanting an illithid tadpole into the brain of a creature that cannot transform into a true illithid, such as a bugbear.

In a recent thread, I posited that aasimar and tieflings need not literally be descended from celestials or fiends, but that they could be the result of the infusion of holy or unholy energies into the human inhabitants of an area where vast celestial and fiendish armies were destroyed in a cataclysm.

This idea probably came to me because the daelkyr halfblood race in Magic of Eberron comes with a similar explanation: the daelkyr don't impregnate mortal women, but those who conceive in an area tainted with the energies of Xoriat might bear a child infused with their essence.

I note, too, that the lemorian half-fiend template which appears in Dungeon's Savage Tide adventure path is explicitly applied during a ritual of transformation.

Really, I think the distinction between "inherited" and "acquired" templates isn't all that useful.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


William drake said:
I just read somewhere that a player was a Kobal (ya know, the little lizard guys) and a Halfling....

...
I'm just saying this because I also see Halfdragons, half weretigers on here and I laugh, not becaue its funny, but because one day those players are going to come to me and say "well my old DM allowed me" and I'm just going to continue to laugh.

I don't know, your thoughts.

....

I think I'm with you on this one, but the 1/2 kobold, 1/2 hobbit seems to make some weird sort of sense, maybe one is a sub-species of the other.

Personally, we allow human-elf and human-orc, that's it on the half breeds. Explained by normal genetics, so such half breeds are sterile.

Ohh...on centaurs and all that, explained by some major mojo magic mutagenic material in the myst of the past, not replicated since on any large scale.

Not allowing in dragon blood, demon blood, etc. has never really been a problem in our campaigns, however, as we are shooting for more of a high adventure, "high" magic swords and sorcery feel with a mythic backdrop, something like Conan meets JRRT, add in Egyptian and Nordic mythology, mix in a bit more magic and stir 25 years. :)
 

I never say "you can't be this race." I just inform them that since this is a 1st level game (at least currently) their options are pretty limited. ;)
 

Rothe said:
I think I'm with you on this one, but the 1/2 kobold, 1/2 hobbit seems to make some weird sort of sense, maybe one is a sub-species of the other.

<snip>

They are both vermin so it does make sense.
 


Nightfall said:
halflings aren't vermin. Gnomes on the other hand... ;)

Them too.

Funniest profile pic here is the one of the Travelocity gnome asking if he looks like a bard.

I love that one.

Thanks,
Rich
 

Yeah the Travel gnome is probably the only true gnome I'll ever like.

D&D gnomes just annoy me.

Well not the jungle gnomes of Termana, but most of the other ones sure.
 

IF the DM takes into consideration and actually balances the class himself, there probably won't be a problem, that kid would have some serious social issues though. There's a book floating around on RPGNow that combines the base classes with each other to produce 20 new classes. It's a pretty well written book and balanced. They just take out a racial ability here and add one here and voila.

Any player that wants to argue that he should get full from both parents has just identified himself as a power gamer and would not be accepted in my campaign anyway.

Its moot to argue genetics in a fantasy game that already has half-dragons, half orcs, half elves and natural lycanthropes. That solely depends on what ever science you want to put in your world. The DM's main concern is to insure the balance.

I rarely ever get requests like this from players because I have set classes and races depending on where the player is.
 

Banshee16 said:
Originally, only a few species (gold, silver, bronze) bred with humanoids....then 3E came along, the designers realized the race was popular, and opened it up to everything

I don't think that this was the reason. The reason was that in 3e, they wanted to get rid of all those limitations that seemed arbitrary: only human paladins, only fighters with Str X, and only half-dragons from this and that dragon race.

That's part of the 3E philosophy of taking away limits though. I *do* think settings should have some limits....then they have more internal consistency.

Settings, maybe. But not the rules. If the creators of Campaign Setting X think that Y should not be allowed in their setting, then this should be put into the Campaign Setting, not into the core rules.

Rothe said:
I think I'm with you on this one, but the 1/2 kobold, 1/2 hobbit seems to make some weird sort of sense, maybe one is a sub-species of the other.

Huh? Beyond the fact that both are small, I see no big similarities. One race is practically small humans with hairy feet, and the other looks like scaled rats.

Not allowing in dragon blood, demon blood, etc. has never really been a problem in our campaigns, however, as we are shooting for more of a high adventure, "high" magic swords and sorcery feel with a mythic backdrop, something like Conan meets JRRT, add in Egyptian and Nordic mythology, mix in a bit more magic and stir 25 years. :)

Egyptian mythology. Isn't that where the gods look like humans with animal faces? :p

I'm quite sure of it. If it comes to animal-men deities, the Eyptians have the whole Set.
 

Remove ads

Top