D&D (2024) Races as classes

[DnD Warlord]

I have been thinking more and more about basic d&d and the dwarf and elf classes.

With everything going on with race changes I wonder about going back to racial classes. Not as mandatory. Like as a multi class.

So at 1st level if you take wizard fighter ect...you basically would be a human variant with some fluff and maybe a single ribbon making you an elf, teifling ect.... then as you level you can take levels in your race making you more of that race.

So an elf might get some spells and some Fey traits if they take levels in elf...a dragonborn would get more and more draconian traits.

I remember 3.5 had mini prestige classes like this in a book...like 5 levels. I was thinking if we take almost everything from races would could make at least 10 level classes.

 

[DnD Warlord]

I don't know why I hut 6e, I meant to hit 5e...so I hope people see this

 

[jmartkdr2]

If I wanted to put that idea back into 5e, I'd be more inclined towards racial subclasses - so a special dwarf fighter who's good with axes and really hard to move or move past, as opposed to an elf fighter who's great at switching between ranged and melee fighting and can add a splash of magic, and a dragonborn fighter who learns to blend their breath weapon into their weapon attack routine, and so on.

I'd want these for most races for at least fighter, cleric, rogue, and wizard, but wouldn't be opposed to them for other classes depending on how good the individual subclasses are.

In other words, battlerager and bladesinger being one-race only wasn't a bad idea, regardless of one's opinion on the execution of the idea.

 

[Orcslayer78]

You could try Master of None on the DMGuild, it explains how to dual multiclass at the same time for characters, the only problem is the book says that those characters would be overpowered compared to a single class character but for me there are two easy ways to fix this problem: you bring back XP and make them level up requiring double the amount of XP compared to a single class character or you simply make them level up every two milestones instead than one.

 

[Li Shenron]

Never liked races as classes in old editions. I was kinda interested in UA's Paragon Classes in 3e, which were 3-levels racial classes but not standalone classes, you could only multiclassed into. The idea of those was to emphasize being an elf or an orc. Doesn't seem a good idea anymore nowadays.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

In Arcana Unearthed, every race was a prestige class as well.

 

[Orcslayer78]

The idea of those was to emphasize being an elf or an orc. Doesn't seem a good idea anymore nowadays.

So basically roleplaying and differentiate characters is no more a good idea anymore? Everyone should just play humans in different shapes? Pointy eared humans? short an bearded humans? scaly humans? demonic horned humans? gray skin humans? pointy eared coal skin humans?

 

[Marandahir]

If I wanted to put that idea back into 5e, I'd be more inclined towards racial subclasses - so a special dwarf fighter who's good with axes and really hard to move or move past, as opposed to an elf fighter who's great at switching between ranged and melee fighting and can add a splash of magic, and a dragonborn fighter who learns to blend their breath weapon into their weapon attack routine, and so on.

I'd want these for most races for at least fighter, cleric, rogue, and wizard, but wouldn't be opposed to them for other classes depending on how good the individual subclasses are.

In other words, battlerager and bladesinger being one-race only wasn't a bad idea, regardless of one's opinion on the execution of the idea.

Eek, I disagree. No reason why the Swordmage Wizard should be only for Elves or the Spiked Armor Barbarian should be only for Dwarves.

Always disliked ancestry-restricted classes/paragon paths/prestige classes/epic destinies. It's like saying, 'nope you can't do the thing because you weren't born a special way. Too bad!'

Ancestry is about where you came from. There is no choice involved here (usually) - for the character in world. They can't help but be a dwarf, for example. But class is about who you are, what you choose to be. They CAN choose to be a Bladesinger, despite the world culturally accepting only Elves as guild-sanctioned Bladesingers. They're fighting an uphill battle, but D&D is just as much about defying the odds as it is about conforming to them.

This is why race-classes were so bad to begin with. It meant that only humans (and a rare few others) could choose to make their own destinies, if you played an Elf or a Dwarf you were stuck being like every other elf or dwarf. Defy the odds. Be your own person. That's what it means to walk the road of a class.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

Racial Paragon Classes, but today it needs a change to allow more flexibility.

Racial Paragon Classes :: d20srd.org

 

[Orcslayer78]

Eek, I disagree. No reason why the Swordmage Wizard should be only for Elves or the Spiked Armor Barbarian should be only for Dwarves.

Always disliked ancestry-restricted classes/paragon paths/prestige classes/epic destinies. It's like saying, 'nope you can't do the thing because you weren't born a special way. Too bad!'

Ancestry is about where you came from. There is no choice involved here (usually) - for the character in world. They can't help but be a dwarf, for example. But class is about who you are, what you choose to be. They CAN choose to be a Bladesinger, despite the world culturally accepting only Elves as guild-sanctioned Bladesingers. They're fighting an uphill battle, but D&D is just as much about defying the odds as it is about conforming to them.

This is why race-classes were so bad to begin with. It meant that only humans (and a rare few others) could choose to make their own destinies, if you played an Elf or a Dwarf you were stuck being like every other elf or dwarf. Defy the odds. Be your own person. That's what it means to walk the road of a class.

Aaaand....who cares?

The OP asked for help to put racial classes back in the game, not if he should do it or if it's acceptable for the commenters or if they agree with it, if you don't like this idea why are you even commenting to this thread?