D&D General Race Has No Mechanics. What do you play?

[FrogReaver]

my wife would go for the ‘prettiest’ or most ‘badass’ looking race, probably based on the art.

I don’t tend to play characters where race is a major influence on their personality and so it probably would be something traditionally quirky, like a really strong goblin or a really charismatic dwarf, etc. Nothing wrong with any other way, but I find interesting quirks really aid the roleplay in bringing the character to life.

 

[cranberry]

Might as well just play a human.

 

[Aldarc]

Changeling. Then if you get bored, you change your own appearance.

 

[Laurefindel]

Would race being cosmetic only be a turn off for you?

I would still play in such a campaign, but I'd find that something is missing.

While this is not mentioned in the OP, I assume we're talking about D&D here (this thread being in the D&D sub-forum) and in D&D, I expect some mechanical support to race/species. Not so much because I want moar powah, but because race/species is one of the main parts in the D&D mini-game of PC-building (which is a mini-game I enjoy a lot).

Otherwise, I'm all in favour of a campaigns where people play the race they want because that's what they want to play, not because they want the mechanical goodies that come with it. If people stop making non-human characters because "what's the point if there is no mechanical difference", then I question the relevance of having different races/species instead of just different packages of abilities.

 

[John R Davis]

1st ed gnome cos awesome ( and worship the evil mole deity)

 

[DragonLancer]

Would race being cosmetic only be a turn off for you?

Yes. As others have said, you just say human. You have to have something to help with the immersion in both game and setting.

 

[Lanefan]

This is not a thing in any edition of D&D I have read and sounds very much like a house rule.

It's not even a house rule, just common sense.

 

[O-Castitatis-Lilium]

I wouldn't play. Race being purely cosmetic just really puts me off. Everyone is good as something on an individual level. Some are better naturally at art than others, some are better naturally at sports than others, some are better at dance naturally than others, some are even better at mathematics naturally than others, and the list goes on. You can't really do that on an individual level in games, because stats are very limiting in that aspect in showing that off, so the next best thing you could use are both race and background. With those combined with the stats, you can get as close to individual natural talents as you possibly can. Your character would feel just a little more individualistic rather than feeling the same as everyone else in the group. Any bit of individuality that you can give a character within the rules and mechanics should be priority for the player; this is excluding DM choice to limit certain races and classes to suit the homebrew world and lore. I play and make my characters to be as unique and different as possible without becoming the center of attention or looking like I'm looking for attention...if that makes any sense.

 

[Lanefan]

Changeling. Then if you get bored, you change your own appearance.

How can that be possible without also packing huge mechanical advantages in a lot of non-combat situations?

 

[Reynard]

It's not even a house rule, just common sense.

So something you made up for your campaign(s) that you somehow believe should apply universally, despite it having no basis in the actual game.

Gotcha.