D&D General Species need more than spells (and why Tieflings have been shafted since 5e released)

[diabolistDestroyer]

Something I've noticed from Wizards of the Coast is that, for a decent number of species, instead of providing them with original features, ones that paint a picture of how the species fights, or handles social scenarios, or traits that hark back to their backstory and lore-

-They just give them spells.

Examples include one certain species from the Player Handbook, in both 2014 and 2024, as well as 2014's Fairy, all 4 Genasi (but especially Fire), Yuan-Ti (They have Magic Resistance, which is good, but other than Poison Resilience, they don't have any other notable traits besides said spells, which hurts considering they're supposed to be snakelike), Triton (similar to Yuan-Ti, but they at least get some aquatic features for flavor, situational or not), Aarakocra [MotM] (They nerfed its fly speed and then realized it only had flight and talons so they slapped some spells on it and called it a day, PEAK laziness imo), 2014's High Elf and Dark Elf from the Player's Handbook (High Elves got done especially dirty because they only got a cantrip and nothing else), and 2024's Elves, their lineages specifically (the ONLY difference between them beside their one trait is their spells).

Now, there's nothing wrong with giving species spells, but that should come with some originality in how it plays and feels, not without.

This represents a real lack of effort from, let me remind you, a billion-dollar company. And no other species has suffered from this issue more than Tieflings.

The Tiefling in the 2014 Player Handbook got resistance to fire damage (which is good, don't get me wrong), a cantrip and two spells. And that's it. (There's also Darkvision, but everybody had Darkvision.) And this was before spells granted to a species could be cast using spell slots, and until 2024, aka, for ten years, Tieflings could only use their leveled spells once, even if they were a spellcaster. And these spells were Charisma locked, meaning any Tiefling that didn't play a Charisma caster or a subclass that relied on Charisma (like Swashbuckler Rogue) couldn't use these spells effectively.

The variant Tiefling released in the [SCAG] didn't help this issue at all. Two of the options just substituted either one or all of the spells they already got with nothing else. (Winged did make them good tho, but imo it's a little boring because they were bare bones to begin with, kind of like Aarakocra, but again, it was good)

Tieflings, lorewise, are either the children of those from the Lower Planes, or those who receive a curse placed upon them because of their family dealing with fiends. And that's awesome. There's so much potential for flavor given the large variety of fiends there are. And yet, when [MotM] came out, Tiefling wasn't revised or given polish like other options, and all it got were several lineages that, say it with me everyone, just gave them spells! And all of these spells were Charisma locked, too! (To say something positive, this did give the species a large variety of options that could provide some useful utility, but given the Charisma lock, this is dependent on if the spell doesn't rely on your spellcasting DC which only about half or a third of them did.)

Tieflings got the bare minimum in the 2024 Player Handbook. Their spells are no longer Charisma locked (which other species have had since before 2024), they can be Small (good for Imp flavor at the least), they can cast their spells using any spell slots they have (which, again, has been given to species before 2024), and Thaumaturgy (which, fun fact, 4 out of 9 Bloodlines got back in 2014). Other than that, again, all they get are a damage resistance, a cantrip, and two leveled spells. Nothing interesting flavor-wise or feature-wise other than the damage resistance changing depending on what Legacy you chose (and even then, that's the bare minimum.)

In the interest of creating a better Tiefling (or at least running some ideas against people with more experience than me), I've brought this topic up to the community. But I'm also curious about opinions on some of the other species I mentioned at the start, so don't be afraid to mention those either.

I've got two features for Tieflings as examples:

Devil's Eyes. You have 60 feet of Darkvision, can see color in darkness, and you can see through magical darkness. (60 feet is meant to not invalidate the Devil's Sight invocation but also giving Tieflings a unique version tying back to the Devil part of the invocation.)

Flames of Avernus (Infernal Tiefling only). When you deal fire damage to a creature, you can cause the flames to linger to that creature, continuously burning them. For 1 minute, at the start of each of its turns, the creature takes 1d6 fire damage, and whenever that creature makes an attack roll or a saving throw, the target must subtract 1d4 from the attack roll or save. The flames can be snuffed out by the creature using its Action to do so.

You can cause fire to linger this way a number of times equal to your Proficiency Bonus, and you regain all expended uses when you finish a Long Rest.

Some Legacy ideas I've had are a Celestial Tiefling (Arisen Demon type beat), a sort of Fey/Twisted Nature Tiefling (being descended from Hags and the like), and a Stygian Tiefling (imagine a full take on the Levistus Tiefling from [MotM]). There are far too many potential ideas to not expand upon them.

 

[aco175]

Is this because spells can do anything? There are so many spells that do stuff and picking something that fells appropriate to a race is easy or you come up with something and the players just say that it is just like X spell.

These spells went further than before and part of the time if I had a PC with fire resistance and can cast fire bolt I would be happy. I would not need to use my feat for spells and I had a free ranged attack for 1d10 so I do not need a bow. Is this comparable to a human feat?

 

[sevenbastard]

As some one who thinks that D&D should be less magical and that only wizards should have spells i agree.

 

[diabolistDestroyer]

Is this because spells can do anything? There are so many spells that do stuff and picking something that fells appropriate to a race is easy or you come up with something and the players just say that it is just like X spell.

View attachment 435621

These spells went further than before and part of the time if I had a PC with fire resistance and can cast fire bolt I would be happy. I would not need to use my feat for spells and I had a free ranged attack for 1d10 so I do not need a bow. Is this comparable to a human feat?

It's less that spells can do a lot (again, not against giving spells to species), my problem is when spells are just slapped onto a species in place of originality, especially considering how barebones Tieflings have felt mechanically. Perhaps if they added, like, one more base Species feature and an additional feature per Legacy, then they'd feel better designed compared to everything else.

That said, I am glad you like the 2024 Tiefling and that you decided to give your opinion! It really helps to have even just one other viewpoint.

 

[Deset Gled]

-They just give them spells.

True of species? Sure. But also true of pretty much everything else across 5e. Classes abilities are just spells. Magic items do spells. Even some feats are just spells.

This the both a huge benefit and major downside of 5e. It makes things simple, more modular, easier to access. It also makes things samey, even bland. You want a detailed magic system that separates Extraordinary from Supernatural from Spell-Like abilities, with Arcane and Divine magic being tangibly different? Go to 3.X with all its crunchy (to the point of painful) goodness. You want dozens of settings, each with their own set of special worlds and subsets of rules? Go 2e and it's countless splatbooks. You want "good enough"? Stay right where you are with 5e.

 

[Minigiant]

If Maneuvers, Invocations, and Infusions were universal, species could have them.

Orc Adrenaline Rush could be a Manever.

​

 

[diabolistDestroyer]

If Maneuvers, Invocations, and Infusions were universal, species could have them.

Orc Adrenaline Rush could be a Maneuver.

​

Having a system for species where you can pick and choose different types of abilities would be really cool. Maybe you could get more later by either incorporating it into the ASI/Feat system, or by making a similar but separate system that kind of co-mingles with it?

There could even different options for existing features depending on what lineage you chose, like what condition you resist with Fey Ancestry changing based on what type of Elf you are (ie, Drow resisting the Blinded condition, Wood Elves resisting being Grappled). Just spitballing.

 

[Chaltab]

As some one who thinks that D&D should be less magical and that only wizards should have spells i agree.

...what about sorcerers?

 

[Scribe]

Maybe for 6th edition if it's a total reboot. How 5e and 5.5 have done species is horribly dull.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I am one who has no concern or problem whatsoever in reflavoring stuff. I find it completely unnecessary to have one ability that is a "species feature" do one thing, and a spell that is the exact same mechanic that does the exact same thing be called something different just so that it's "not a spell". To me that is pointless. If I don't want the feature to be a spell, I'll just reflavor it.

Can't speak for anyone else... but when I'm playing my character and I say I do 'X' thing... I am never specifically saying "I cast a spell that does X". As far as the game is concerned... I am just doing the action that gives me the effect that the X spell gives me. If I use a Bonus action to move... I just say I'm using my Bonus action to move, not saying "I'm going to cast a spell called Expeditious Retreat that allows me to use my Bonus action to move."... even if the feature that gives me the ability to use a Bonus action to move is a "spell" that I've been given. To me... there's nothing gained by calling them two separate things if they are the exact same mechanic.

It's the same way I have all the "non-magical" Rangers that I could possibly want in my game already. Because I can just reflavor the spell slots to be a set of Ranger "features" that can be used a certain number of times per day. Likewise, the Warlord has been in available to my players for the last 12 years by just reflavoring the Bard.