D&D (2024) The 10 Species in "Your Ideal 2024 PHB"

Remathilis

Legend
I mean, you can make pretty much the same argument for almost every class, as well.

There's certainly a strong argument that greater mechanical specificity, and more heterogenous design, strengthens the narrative presentation of the concept. (Not an overwhelming argument, but strong.) But greater specificity is also going to have a trade-off with less versatility.

Having a race with 3 choice points, each of which has 3 options, is simply easier to fit into a book than 27 different races.

I can and I did!

Though the thing is homogeneous design ends up reducing their impact on the world as well. For example, the aarakorca, harengon, tabaxi and tortle are all unique separate species with distinct designs (both mechanical and aesthetic) and lore. Combining them removes those unique elements, makes them all one people, and forces them all into one style and story. Remember the ardling? How the second attempt tried to make a generic animal-headed species and it failed to capture the essence of any of the animals it was trying to emulate? That's what I dislike. And I would gladly take 27 dedicated options over a dozen sourcebooks to one mediocre option in the PHB.
 

log in or register to remove this ad





CreamCloud0

One day, I hope to actually play DnD.
Core 4:

Human
Elf
Dwarf
Orc

X-Touched 6, that can just be 1st level feat as a template added to core 4:

Aasimar
Tiefling
Warforged
Shifter
Dhampir
Dragonborn
ah i see, so you chose not to follow the rules presented in the OP, in the way almost exactly called out by the OP... ;)
Basic Ground Rules
  • Number: There must be ten. No more. No less. So no "just the four Tolkien races" answers or cheats around that.
you actually have 28 species options here: 4 species x 7 templates(6+1 untemplated) = 28.
 

Aldarc

Legend
Though the thing is homogeneous design ends up reducing their impact on the world as well. For example, the aarakorca, harengon, tabaxi and tortle are all unique separate species with distinct designs (both mechanical and aesthetic) and lore. Combining them removes those unique elements, makes them all one people, and forces them all into one style and story.
Based on some past discussions, some would consider this a feature and not a flaw. FWIW, I do think it is worth asking whether the lore, story, and style for these species is strong enough on their own. For some people, just like other people with the half-elf and half-orc, these species options aren't strong enough on their own so they deem that little is lost by combining them.

Remember the ardling? How the second attempt tried to make a generic animal-headed species and it failed to capture the essence of any of the animals it was trying to emulate? That's what I dislike. And I would gladly take 27 dedicated options over a dozen sourcebooks to one mediocre option in the PHB.
WotC has a terrible track record of failing horribly with their initial attempts to do things like Ardlings, Psions, or Druid Wildshape Templates, missing some obvious solutions, and then deciding to scrap their ideas entirely. Their motto seems to be, "If at first you don't succeed, never try again." That said, I think that they were trying to do too much with the Ardling. It was not just trying to be Beastfolk but also Angelic Outsider Beastfolk.

I'm not sure where the allergy to supplements came from in the hobby...
Regardless, there are plenty enough "PHB-only GMs" to make that allergy an inconvenience that the whole table has to deal with.
 




Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top