D&D (2024) No Dwarf, Halfling, and Orc suborgins, lineages, and legacies

[Mind of tempest]

Dragonborn, Tiefling.

dragonborn lack a setting presence they feel empty, this angers me they are popular on look and mechanic alone without the final part.

To respond to the OP. I'll be disappointed if the Dwarves, and Halflings don't get suborigins.

Not because I think they particularly need them (in the same way that other species don't really need them), but because it represents a choice to dodge the creative effort they should have taken when the PHB (and later MToF) came out.

It's not like High vs Wood is a superior conceptual delineation compared to Mountain vs. Hill or Lightfoot vs. Stout. It's just a place where more than zero effort was spent.

but what would they even be, high and wood as at least some more presence, what is the difference between hill and mountain or lightfoot and stout something that feels more important?

 

[Gammadoodler]

dragonborn lack a setting presence they feel empty, this angers me they are popular on look and mechanic alone without the final part.

but what would they even be, high and wood as at least some more presence, what is the difference between hill and mountain or lightfoot and stout something that feels more important?

Off the top of my head, Mountain vs Hill would be underground vs surface dwarves. Lightfoot vs. Stout would be nomadic vs settled Halflings.

 

[Mind of tempest]

Off the top of my head, Mountain vs Hill would be underground vs surface dwarves. Lightfoot vs. Stout would be nomadic vs settled Halflings.

okay now what?
high elves tend to go all in on magic while wood elves are all in on druids and being one with nature.
what do they types go for in dwarves and halflings?

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Tolkien is a continuation of the British tropes. It remembers earlier references to elves are humansize, retains the fertile land of Celtic Sidhe, but explores modern euhemeristic speculations about various traditions originally referring to other ethnicities.

Thank you for adding the word "euhemeristic" to my vocabulary but I am afraid that I don't think that really supports your claim. Elves are popular because they're skinny, hot, and better than other people - that's why they have enduring cross-cultural popularity, not for folkloric or Tolkein-related reasons.

 

[Yaarel]

Thank you for adding the word "euhemeristic" to my vocabulary but I am afraid that I don't think that really supports your claim. Elves are popular because they're skinny, hot, and better than other people - that's why they have enduring cross-cultural popularity, not for folkloric or Tolkein-related reasons.

I agree the "supermodel" trope helps popularize the Elf, with notions of "glamour".

But even that isnt wrong, and extraordinary beauty is part of the British elf tropes, such as the concept of "elf shine". Tolkien leaned into this. The Tolkien movies do too.

 

[Gammadoodler]

okay now what?
high elves tend to go all in on magic while wood elves are all in on druids and being one with nature.
what do they types go for in dwarves and halflings?

Mountain Dwarves go all in on crafting items and self defense. Hill Dwarves go all in on agriculture and trade.

Lightfoots are all about the new..new places..new experiences, new friends..new treasure.. whole troupes of bards and rogues traveling together, maybe crews of missionaries, seeking to convert folks to their way of life.

Stouts are all about strengthening bonds and the value of home.. they're constantly looking to preserve and improve the their communities.. could be druids, could be clerics, maybe an order of paladins focused on hospitality.

Edit: note..this is all off the top of my head. Like, this isn't high effort design work.. and it gets us to divisions that are about equally distinct as "magicky" vs. "woodsy"

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Mountain Dwarves go all in on crafting items and self defense. Hill Dwarves go all in on agriculture and trade.

Lightfoots are all about the new..new places..new experiences, new friends..new treasure.. whole troupes of bards and rogues traveling together, maybe crews of missionaries, seeking to convert folks to their way of life.

Stouts are all about strengthening bonds and the value of home.. they're constantly looking to preserve and improve the their communities.. could be druids, could be clerics, maybe an order of paladins focused on hospitality.

These all sound like cultural things and would be unlikely to apply to every individual.

 

[Scribe]

Elves are popular because they're skinny, hot, and better than other people - that's why they have enduring cross-cultural popularity, not for folkloric or Tolkein-related reasons.

 

[Gammadoodler]

These all sound like cultural things and would be unlikely to apply to every individual.

The same way with magic elves and wood elves.

Edit: and TBH, in all these examples, it's about 80% geography.
The deal with wood elves is that they live in the woods.
The deal with Drow is that they live in the underdark. The deal with Sea Elves is that they live in or around the Sea.

And this is ok. I think if you the subgroups you create live in different environments and have ways of life that are distinct from one another, you've mostly justified their existence as a subgroup.

 

[Scribe]

dragonborn lack a setting presence they feel empty, this angers me they are popular on look and mechanic alone without the final part.

That is only an issue of setting design however, not the species itself. Therefore 'new things' can be made, and be accepted or gain in popularity.

EDIT: Maybe I just need to put my time where my keystrokes are, and finish writing up my SRD based setting with the associated species/cosmology. Probably a while before any DLC comes out I need to play for any of my games anyway.