D&D 5E So How Many Different Kinds of Elves Can There Be? A Thread on Subraces

[Morrus]

One. With infinitely flexible cultural variation according to campaign. That's my preference. I literally don't even know what 70% I'd D&D elf varieties are.

Plus drow. So, two.

I could be persuaded that woodland and magic-city elves are different. High/Wild and Grey. But beyond that - meh.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

What about aquaelves?

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Put me in the "sub-cultures, not subraces" column. I like some cultural variations, but don't need them mechanically distinct in significant ways (ability scores, etc). I'm OK with minor mechanical differences that reflect culture, though -- like different favored weapons, or preferred classes, or the like.

The only ones I'm not certain on are aquatic elves (obviously, they need to be mechanically different to breathe water) and drow (which feel better with some magical differences at least). But I'm almost ready to treat those two variations as completely separate races.

As to number ... I'm fine with an upper limit of Greyhawk varieties: Grey, High, Wood, Wild, Aquatic, Drow (and consider Valley to be a High or Wild Elf culture, not a distinct variety), and probably at least one of those is redundant, possibly two. More than that ... no. Avariel, for example, have always seemed downright silly to me.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I don't see much point to a large number of subraces too.

In 4e, there was a bit of proliferation near the beginning. Eladrin, elf, half-elf, drow. Maybe fey'ri. Most different previously-existing subraces (grey elves, high elves, grugrach, star elves, etc) fit into one of these categories and so are cultural groups. Lythari and avariels are basically templates and aren't suitable as PCs anyway.

Another bad example are "arctic dwarves", which I think were from Forgotten Realms and were ordinary dwarves with cold resistance. Why isn't that a feat? (Because no player wants to spend a feat on resistance to cold 5.) Inuit don't resist cold damage, why do arctic dwarves need such an ability? Like Inuit, arctic dwarves are a cultural group and don't need to be treated as a "subrace".

 

[Morrus]

Inuit don't resist cold damage, why do arctic dwarves need such an ability? Like Inuit, arctic dwarves are a cultural group and don't need to be treated as a "subrace".

That's a good analogy. Humans don't have subraces in real life or in-game.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I think this is one of those subtle things that PF made a great move on. Alternate racial traits. An elf is not one set of traits, but is effectively built using a selection from a list of elven traits. If you want to associate or ban particular traits from a particular subrace you define, okay.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

That's a good analogy. Humans don't have subraces in real life or in-game.

Oh, I don't know. They're probably a human sub-race in Lake Wobegon, "where all the women are strong, all the men are good-looking, and all the children are above average."

 

[Morrus]

Oh, I don't know. They're probably a human sub-race in Lake Wobegon, "where all the women are strong, all the men are good-looking, and all the children are above average."

That's gone completely over my head'

 

[Ratskinner]

Reminds me of the end of the 2e era... there seemed to be a new tribe/species/race of elf in every town and county you visited.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

That's gone completely over my head'

From Garrison Keillor's Prairie Home Companion radio show. Lake Wobegon is a fictional place in the Minnesota, home of exceptional Norwegian-Americans (see also: Lake Wobegon effect). It's probably too much of a US-centric reference. While Garrison Keillor is known in the UK -- he's narrated a whole series of UK Honda commercials -- I don't know how well know the show is, though I understand it did air on BBC 4. Most of the humor is not only very US-centric, it's very Midwest-centric.