D&D 5E (2014) Race-Class Combinations

I would also note, as in the OP dwarf example, that classes that may be "common" or "preferred" in certain race cultures, but are still themselves "rare" classes, would still to my mind/games be "rare."

So, for example and the sake of comparing to the OP, for a Dwarf in my setting, in a 5e game:
Dwarf
Preferred: Fighter (Champion), Fighter (Battlemaster), Cleric
Common, as "Acceptable within the Culture": Ranger, Bard, Paladin (though the last two are both "rare classes" overall.)
[Un?]Common, as "Easily Found/Doable but not Accepted, if not actively discouraged, within the Culture": Rogue (Thief) while stealing is still unlawful and viewed as dishonorable, it is something that dwarves can "commonly"/easily be, Rogue (Assassin)
Rare, as "May or May Not be Accepted within the Culture, but low numerically/by population and/or Very Unusual/Outside the norm": Anything using Arcane Magic, Druids, Monks.

Barbarian is a Human-only culture [or Half-Elves or Half-Orcs from that culture, the latter far more common than the former] in my setting.

Elf, for further comparison/example:
Preferred: Fighter (Battlemaster), Fighter (Eldritch Knight), Wizard (Enchanter, Abjurist, Illusionist, Diviner), Ranger
Common, as "Acceptable within the Culture": Druid, Rogue (Arcane Trickster), Fighter (Champion), Wizard (Transmuter, Evoker), and Bard (rare overall.),
[Un?]Common, as "Easily Found/Doable but not Accepted, if not actively discouraged, within the Culture": Rogue (Thief), Rogue (Assassin), Warlocks, Wizards (Conjurer)
Rare, as "May or May Not be Accepted within the Culture, but low numerically/by population, Very Unusual/Outside the norm": Monks, Wizard (Necromancer).
Barbarians, see above.

So really, it's not necessarily that you need to separate things out by race, with any mechanical consequences, but by culture within a setting for flavor.

Of course, that is all dependent on where on the [very wide] spectrum one falls on "Importance of Flavor <> Importance of Mechanics."
 

log in or register to remove this ad


From what I've seen, Dwarven wizards are relatively common in 5E! ;)

I know you're partially being tongue-in-cheek, but I'm talking about my own personal campaign setting - which, of course, diverges from 5E in a few ways. In my world dwarves aren't wizards, sorcerers or warlocks - it is not part of their culture, not "in their blood," so to speak. It doesn't mean that an exception isn't possible (and I still dabble with the idea of a dwarvish runecaster, aka wizard re-skinning).

Similarly there are no elven clerics because they don't worship or believe in otherworldly gods in the same way that humans do. Elven "religion" is a hybrid of animism and Taoism, with a touch of ancestor worship/honoring. The Moon Kindred, aka wool elves, rever their "living goddess" the Emerald Queen - who simply happens to be a very, very ancient elf who has attained a kind of pseudo-immortality.
 


I personally would not use experience rewards or penalties to enforce favored classes; it sends entirely the wrong message and opens things up for players to exploit.

Instead, use RP mechanisms. Maybe a dwarven wizard is teased a lot and not given respect by fellow dwarves. Maybe an elven barbarian is treated like the village idiot for their violent ways.

It sends the message that certain classes are preferred, but does not create future issues that modifying XP can.
 

I'm curious how other DMs handle race-class combos. I generally have an "anything goes" approach in that while certainly dwarf monks don't really exist in my world, certainly one could. There are always exceptions. But I also like the idea of differentiating what could be called preferred, common, and rare combinations. For example:

Dwarf
Preferred: Fighter
Common: Cleric, Paladin
Rare: Barbarian, Bard, Druid, Monk, Ranger, Rogue, Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard

I'm tempted to say that preferred combos give a +10% XP bonus, common none, and rare -10%, but that seems an unnecessary penalty and bonus that would be rather prohibitive. But any thoughts on how to differentiate beyond just descriptive? Or is it more problematic than it is worth?

IME, it boils down to the DM's philosophy. Is the world's history static and unchallengeable? Does the DM have a vision that can't be changed? or Is it a fluid world where the players can create a character without restrictions?

If in your world, let's call it Oreo, no dwarves practice magic because it is against the culture and tradition of 38 millenium (and 4 pages of DM notes) than I guess Dwarves can't be wizards.

If you allow a rogue dwarf to be a wizard and go against the grain, you could impose whatever penalty you see fit. The 10% exp. point penalty could represent the dificulty for this outcast to learn magic, or you could charge extra for the base price of scribing spells in her spell book.

Personally, I think the xp penalty is to much but I do see how it gives the character a little more "connection" to the setting.

When I DM, I am always a "play whatever and we'll fit it in somehow" type of guy. I use mechanics to create flavor as oppose to have the mechanics represent the flavor.

As long as you don't alienate players in imposing your style on the game, I think either style works well. My rule #1 in DMing is: Check with your players before instituting any great idea you have.
 

I'm more in favour of playing against type and hate race-class restrictions.

I was considering a 13th Age style house rule, where you get a +1 to one of your class' saving throw stats, as long as you don't have a racial bonus to the stat.

So, an Elf Fighter could get a +1 to Strength or Constitution, but not a Half-Orc. But A Half-Orc Wizard could get +1 Intelligence.
 

This also allows some fun on the players part to create the background for their PC. It could mean that there is an circle of Dwarven druids guarding their mountain domains


That's the stuff love in character creation.

Some guys in my group made a "Fencing School" that produced blousing wearing, rich kid barbarians. They didn't "rage" they "focused".

Some Dryad obsessed, elf barbarians is now on my list of groups to create.

or Halfling Urban Rangers

or the 1/2 Orc Dieing Poet Society
 

My view is to ask how a society would work based upon the Classes that are common. For example, in the case of Dwarves, most fantasy worlds suggest a high degree of history in their culture and the engineering skills to build civilisations under mountains and rocks. if all Dwarves were just Fighters and Clerics (with some NPC workers, I guess). Who would recall the great tales of History? (Bards?) Who would design the great structures? (Wizards, perhaps?)

I think that certain Racial traits and abilities certainly make better combos with some Classes than others, but if we are to include non-human races I’d prefer their cultures to be rich rather than stereotyped. The only Class that seems a little hard to imagine for Dwarves, from my perspective, is the Sorcerer due to the innateness of their magic. But learned Wizards or corrupt Warlocks, certainly.

So if I was going to list out Dwarves in my created world, I’d probably add another tier:

Preferred: Fighter
Common: Cleric, Paladin,
Uncommon: Barbarian, Bard, Ranger, Rogue, Warlock, Wizard
Rare: Monk, Druid, Sorcerer.

…And, I would still acknowledge it as arbitrary.
 
Last edited:

Dwarven Rock Sorcerers!

Spells:

Cantrips:
Mending
Message
Acid Splash
MAge Hand

1st Level:
Detect Magic
Thunder Wave
Comprehend Language

2nd Level:
Alter Self
Reduce
Shatter
Spider Climb

3rd Level
Dispel Magic
Counterspell


4th level
Stone Skin

5th level
Wall of Stone

6th level
Move Earth

Feats: Elemental Adapt (Thunder), Dungeon Delver, Ritual Caster


Don't leave home without one! Natural Dwarven explorer/ ore finder
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top