Race Restriction House Rule?

[Merkuri]

Something you may want to consider is reflavoring (or having the players reflavor) those "strange" races so they are members of a "normal" race with some sort of quirk or special power. Maybe a minotaur is a type of really feral dwarf with a tough skull that likes charging with a headbutt. A deva could be a human or an elf who has had a close call with their deity and as a side effect now remembers all of their past lives. A shifter is a human who had a magical accident.

If the players are picking strange races for the mechanical benefits then this is a way to get the same benefits without being a walking crystal. And if they just like being an oddball they can still make an odd character, but one that may not look that way at first glance.

 

[Sunseeker]

The racial abilities can be pretty sweet as well (e.g. second wind as minor action etc.).

However, rather than banning races, I'd rather reflavour them into human subraces with (overall) human appearance. Most races are not too overtly magical, so it's possible to explain away the abilities in a less SFX way.

Cheers, LT.

Something you may want to consider is reflavoring (or having the players reflavor) those "strange" races so they are members of a "normal" race with some sort of quirk or special power. Maybe a minotaur is a type of really feral dwarf with a tough skull that likes charging with a headbutt. A deva could be a human or an elf who has had a close call with their deity and as a side effect now remembers all of their past lives. A shifter is a human who had a magical accident.

If the players are picking strange races for the mechanical benefits then this is a way to get the same benefits without being a walking crystal. And if they just like being an oddball they can still make an odd character, but one that may not look that way at first glance.

Pardon my newbness, but the problem that seems to present itsself here is that it takes the "role" out of the "playing". So maybe your deva is really just a pale human with a god-obsession. Or maybe your dragonborn is actually just a human with a big ego. While the character's personality may have interesting merits, at the end of the day, everyone is still just playing "weird humans". In which case they might as well just be "weird regular humans" whom act weird instead of having some weird attribute.

Nutshell: Playing "weird humans" is tantamount to playing "boring humans".

IMO, I think be best comrpomise was presented earlier. Instead of watering down everything that's interesting about a race till it's merely a complex the character has, set limits on how many of whom and what you want in a group.

The solution I see to the problem of fun vs order, is to get your group together and have them work out who should be what together. If you already do this, great. But if certain people aren't going to be as weird as they want to be and some people have to actually be, god forbid, normal, then group support is a great solution.

 

[Pierson_Lowgal]

Allowing players to reskin their minotaur (or whatever) as a human, without any necessary physical holdover, works fine. As you've suggested, most players are just looking for the mechanical edge anyway and don't care about playing a half orc or githyanki.

I hate freak characters, which I feel distract from roleplaying. Playing a human character suggests to players that they should roleplay an entire personality, rather than a pre-determined caricature. Freak characters also shine the spotlight on one character to the detriment of others. How do the people the party meets not react most strongly to the water elemental character?

 

[WhatGravitas]

Instead of watering down everything that's interesting about a race till it's merely a complex the character has, set limits on how many of whom and what you want in a group.

Nobody talked about "watering down" a race - it's just about the separation of mechanics and flavour.

E.g. I want to play a cowardly, but talkative fire sorcerer - then I could take the dragonborn, get the fitting ability boosts, change the explanation of the "Dragon Breath" to "Quickened Burning Hands"... and presto: Human fire sorcerer, without *any* of the character or personality implications of a Dragonborn.

Of course, what races are "freaky" like that are dependant on the setting and playing non-humans does not necessarily means you're playing freaks - demihumans have the full range of personalities as well - and in a world like Eberron, they won't stick out very much either (depending on the exact race).

Cheers, LT.

 

[Sunseeker]

Nobody talked about "watering down" a race - it's just about the separation of mechanics and flavour.

E.g. I want to play a cowardly, but talkative fire sorcerer - then I could take the dragonborn, get the fitting ability boosts, change the explanation of the "Dragon Breath" to "Quickened Burning Hands"... and presto: Human fire sorcerer, without *any* of the character or personality implications of a Dragonborn.

You can phrase it or call it whatever you like, but the end result is now that instead of something unique, creative, and interesting, you have something less. And less is always less than more, meaning you're working with less.

Take your same character, lets say you want to play a cowardly, but talkative fire-sorcerer, but you also want it to be dragonborn.

Trade the +str for +int, reduce the height of your character, introduce a background that your dragonborn was the runt of a family, and so they developed smarts and a quick wit, but they were weak so they were treated as less valuable. Thus your character has a complex, based on his actual physical form, his history, and his class.

Yes, there are specific limitations in the book as to what a dragonborn should be like, but as it also says, everyone is their own person, so just because a dragonborn should be good and honorable and proud and strong doesn't mean they must be.

The error in seeing humans as being able to fit into any role is a common error. They can, but so can everyone else. If you want to RP a group of "generic people" who have an adventure, great, but the most fun adventuring groups are the ones that are the most unique. Which is why IMO, instead of cutting down something interesting into something mundane, it's better to limit sheer numbers, maybe rotate out each campaign so that one guy doesn't have all the fun.

Of course, what races are "freaky" like that are dependant on the setting and playing non-humans does not necessarily means you're playing freaks - demihumans have the full range of personalities as well - and in a world like Eberron, they won't stick out very much either (depending on the exact race).

Cheers, LT.

Indeed, though I agree there are obvious places that two dragonborn, a crystal-person and a minotaur. But this can be factored into a game at the start, you're all a bunch of joes who have been talking big and someone finally told you to put up or stuff it. Maybe there's one tiefling in the group, maybe there's one drow you run into along the way.


In the end, I'd like to finish it up with saying that not everyone is good at RPing a complicated background, but still want to play an interesting race. They use that interesting race as a stepping stone to better role playing, a framework for how their character acts and sounds. So if your group is experienced, go ahead and make people play "weird people" instead of "weird races", but if not, be understanding that some people need that structure, and some people just enjoy it.

 

[Saeviomagy]

I find that the easiest way to restrict the presence of wierd races is a combination of the following
1. Simply don't present them as options. This works for players who are new to the game, and also to players who are new to your setting.

2. Present wierd races as wierd in your setting. This covers players who are experienced with your setting. Throw in roleplaying negatives and don't feel you need to balance them with anything.

That pretty much leaves people who don't care about the setting of a game when they make a character, and they can be covered easily by presenting them with the effects of the second point: your character is wierd, and will likely suffer for it.

Finally, I wouldn't restrict races by "number in the party". If anything I feel it makes MORE sense that you would find 2 of a wierd race together than to find one in a mixed adventuring party.

 

[ArcaneSpringboard]

I've found that a lot of the 'weird' races have gotten played, but in most cases, I've found it's because of trying to tie the race to the class.

I'm becoming tempted on restricting my Eberron campaign to: Humans, Elves, Halfings, Half-Elves, Half-Orcs, Warforged, Shifters, Kalashtar, Changelings and Dwarves. If you want to run one of the other races, I want some background and personality.

Similar for Dark Sun: Humans, Goliaths, Elves, Halflings, Thrikreen, Dwarves, Muls (and any of the core ones I've missed).

 

[Sunseeker]

I find that the easiest way to restrict the presence of wierd races is a combination of the following
1. Simply don't present them as options. This works for players who are new to the game, and also to players who are new to your setting.

2. Present wierd races as wierd in your setting. This covers players who are experienced with your setting. Throw in roleplaying negatives and don't feel you need to balance them with anything.

That pretty much leaves people who don't care about the setting of a game when they make a character, and they can be covered easily by presenting them with the effects of the second point: your character is wierd, and will likely suffer for it.

I had a DM who rolled like this once. "This is my story and you can't do that because I say so because I'm the DM!"

Needless to say, he didn't have a group to be DM over very long. Being strict and being mean about it(ie: do what I say 'cause I'm the DM or else!) has in my experience, been no fun and some of the most horrid RP experiences ever.

Telling people about your setting, and asking them to work with you has always triumphed as a better way to run a game than iron-fisting.

 

[Saeviomagy]

I had a DM who rolled like this once. "This is my story and you can't do that because I say so because I'm the DM!"

Needless to say, he didn't have a group to be DM over very long. Being strict and being mean about it(ie: do what I say 'cause I'm the DM or else!) has in my experience, been no fun and some of the most horrid RP experiences ever.

Telling people about your setting, and asking them to work with you has always triumphed as a better way to run a game than iron-fisting.

I really don't see how what I've said has come across as being iron fisted or mean: a DM creates a setting, and there's a limited number of stories that can be told in a world where everything is accommodating to everyone. Minotaurs aren't likely to find that most buildings in a human settlement have minotaur sized doors. Warforged are likely to face the prejudices of a population who think they were created to serve or to kill. Half elves are going to find that both humans and elves find them alien and unusual.

I'm not saying "you'll be stoned to death if you dare to play anything that isn't an elf, dwarf, halfling or human". I'm just saying that people in the world aren't all members of their local tolerance society, and the local building codes probably don't mandate universal accessibility.

 

[Merkuri]

Pardon my newbness, but the problem that seems to present itsself here is that it takes the "role" out of the "playing". So maybe your deva is really just a pale human with a god-obsession. Or maybe your dragonborn is actually just a human with a big ego. While the character's personality may have interesting merits, at the end of the day, everyone is still just playing "weird humans". In which case they might as well just be "weird regular humans" whom act weird instead of having some weird attribute.

Nutshell: Playing "weird humans" is tantamount to playing "boring humans".

Perhaps you and I have different playstyles, but I don't see why playing a human with a weird background is any less fun than playing a weird race with a "normal" (for that race) background. Each of them can have the same amount of character and RP possibilities.

When I was in high school I found that I hated playing humans, but as I got older I found that I gravitated less and less towards the real races and found myself playing almost exclusively humans. I honestly don't know what changed, but the characters I envisions suddenly all defaulted to human and I didn't make them other races unless I had a specific reason. They were all very different humans, and had background just as interesting (if not moreso) than the demihumans I played earlier in my roleplaying life.

When 4e came out and the race you played had a bigger mechanical difference I found myself wanting to play different races again, but only for the mechanical goodies - the crunch, not the flavor. I'm playing a Wilden Invoker now, but I nearly re-skinned her as an old crone witch (human) instead of a holy tree creature.

Personally, I like the challenge of taking a set of abilities and powers and trying to figure out what else this could be other than what's written in the book. I'm a firm believer that flavor and crunch should not be locked together and that one should be allowed to toss out the flavor and replace it with whatever you want as long as it makes sense with the crunch you're using.

So if my DM told me, "You can use the stats of whatever race you want, but you can only be human, dwarf, or elf," I'd be fine with that, and I'd probably even be looking forward to the challenge of coming up with a new flavor for whatever oddball race I pick.

In the end, every D&D race is really just a human in a funny hat. The difference is in how big of a hat it is. Were any D&D race to be really not human - I'm talking really and truly alien - it would probably not be a fun character to play for more than a session or two because it would be impossible to relate to.