D&D 5E The Race Docket: What Races do you want to see first for 5e?

[howandwhy99]

If they want to stick to traditional races non-hobbyists can appeal to, I'd publish more mythological creatures.

I have a yearly Al'Qadim game and in prepping for it I realized the 2e designers had ported D&D demi-humans from european medieval myths as the only options other than human. It wasn't hard to remove them and add near-human races from Persian, Arabian, ancient Middle Eastern, and even Indian subcontinent mythologies.

The risk is these races are then turned banal from over use and indistinction so they might be more universally appealing. Which in turn removes a lot of really great monsters too. But I think Elves, Dwarves, Gnomes, and Hobbits should be seen as unique monsters too with cultures and histories to learn through play.

And then maybe dragon-people, griffon-people, or beholder-people can be added as unique, really strange and bizarre alternatives too.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

I wouldn't be surprised if the race list is identical to the 3.X players handbook.

That said, I suspect that the common and uncommon races we saw in the playtest packet will be in the PHB, and the optional races will be in the DMG.

 

[Kobold Stew]

In the PhB, I'd like the big 4, plus half orc, half elf, and gnome.

They've had really interesting presentations of dwarf, elf, halfling, and gnome so far. I'd be really pleased if the half-races were there with the same care and detail.

Really, that would be enough for me.

I expect all the other playable races we've seen in the DMG or the back of the MM; playing monstrous humanoids is really fun, for me at least. But for the PHB, I really just want a half-elf or a half-orc that isn't hobbled out of the gate.

 

[the Jester]

First, I want everything that has been in a previous PH (or rather, a PH1, since a couple of editions have more than one PH).

Then, I want campaign-specific races in setting books- FR can have Drow and genasi, DS gets muls and half-giants, Eberron gets warforged, etc.

Then maybe eventually a book of optional material for players could include a few other options: goblins, kobolds and orcs; aasimar/devas; goliaths; pixies; etc. Maybe including a reprint on some of the campaign-specific stuff, maybe not.

I am not interested in the unending stream of new races that 3e and 4e threw at us. Most of the new pc races didn't do it for me.

 

[Blackwarder]

Leprechauns!

Warder

 

[pickin_grinnin]

I want to see all playable races in the Players Handbook, not spread out over multiple books.

 

[Raith5]

Then, I want campaign-specific races in setting books- FR can have Drow and genasi, DS gets muls and half-giants, Eberron gets warforged, etc. .

I would think Drow are not world specific - they were in Greyhawk long before FR. But I agree with the rest.

 

[Li Shenron]

So, the PHB will most likely have dwarves, elves, gnomes, halflings, half-elves and half-orcs along with humans. Additionally, I suspect dragonborn, tieflings, warforged, and kender will all appear in in either the PHB or DMG.

What other races do you want to see converted first post-core rules?

Muls? Shifters and Changlings? Goliaths? Half-vistani? Aasimar and Genasi? Rakasta? Drow and Shadar-kai? What races do you hope get converted first?

Honestly, at this stage I hope the PHB has only the core 4. Just because of a matter of page count, and IMHO the core books really need a good amount of subclasses and feats, otherwise their subsystem is going to be crippled and require people to buy splatbooks (I am not against splatbooks, I am only against some splatbooks being virtually required).

I am going to buy all the 3 core books anyway, so moving optional races to the DMG (which is the only book that probably has plenty of space available) is IMO a good move: it allows to have weird and unusual races in core, but without putting too much "player's entitlement" on them.

That said, to answer your question (and assuming all the playtest races are already in core), I'd like Aasimar , Hobgoblins, Orcs and Genasi, possibly even in the DMG at this point*. Then I'd like too see some suggestions for human subraces (but with cultural rather than genetic differentiations), but that's another matter.

*actually, if the MM has indications on how to use common humanoid monsters are races, then it will be ok

 

[Tuft]

I'd really, really love to see catfolk, merfolk, some kind of non-foul non-evil harpy variant, centaurs, kitsune, satyrs, and other similar species with a mythological touch being brought into the official material at some point.

 

[Tuft]

Then I'd like too see some suggestions for human subraces (but with cultural rather than genetic differentiations), but that's another matter.

The problem with human subraces is that if you make them too distinct, with game-affecting modifiers, you may run into allegations of racism and racial stereotyping.

Various human cultures, as opposed to subraces, feels like something for a setting book.