Tiefling and half-orc should not be in the PHB

[avin]

I want to be able to start a Planescape game from day one.

 

[steeldragons]

Basic/Beginner Set/"Classic" Game: Humans, Elves, Dwarves and Halflings. This is no brainer. Noone's going to be insulted with these offerings.

"Advanced" PHB/Expert Set/"Legacy" Game options: Gnomes, Half-Elves, Half-Orcs (for their "traditional" rank, being in the game from day 2)
Dragonborn and Tieflings (for their popularity with/in the later editions) I personally, have no love for either of them and don't have them in my games/world setting. But people like them and, imho, would bay at the moons if they were not considered legitimate options for play out of the gate.

For me, its the Eladrin that need to be thrown (with their Eladrin bath water) into the abyss.

There have been "High elves" (which every elf character was originally assumed to be unless stated otherwise) and "Grey Elves" from the beginning. And, despite the misnomer of Eladrin being "High[er] Elves", they were not dimensional jumping extra-magicky-more-elfy-elves.

Eladrin need to go the way of the dodo.

 

[Klaus]

I didn't like it when the half-orc appeared in 3e, and I liked it even less when i saw Tiefling in 4e. These types of half races should just be stuffed in some addon book somewhere. Give me the basic races in the PHB: Human, elf, halfling, and dwarf.

The reason is that I usually don't play with half-monster races, and I am tired of hearing "but it's in the Player's Handbook..." anytime I form a group to play in my local book store.

You don't like them, and you are tired, but your very next sentence indicates that you are aware that there are people who like them and aren't tired.

 

[Minigiant]

You are forgetting that we're talking about core, the first PHB, i.e. the starting point.

Moving away from a classical view (both mechanics and flavor) is exactly what caused problems to 4e. You, me and everybody else who's been playing D&D long enough may want to move further to uncharted territories. But we all start from the same starting point to even define what would be original, we may want to go towards different directions, and there's a lot of others who don't feel the need to or are just starting to play D&D for the first time.

Trying something new in the core means to drag everybody else into the same direction, which is only one in thousands possible directions. Let campaign settings take care of that (we will never have too many of them), and supplements provide sparse bits for each DM to craft their own. But the core desperately needs to be stereotypically D&D, and recent history has simply proved that.

But core doesn't have to be boring.
5E is a unity edition, yes. It should still be D&D. D&D is a game with a load of intelligent races walking around. Many of them are humanoid or somewhat humanoid. Is it top much to have 2 or 3 of the races than surround the kingdom playable if they aren't brainwashed into evil? There are goblins, orcs, drow, gnomes, and the like right over there but you can't be one?

 

[Khaalis]

You are forgetting that we're talking about core, the first PHB, i.e. the starting point.

Moving away from a classical view (both mechanics and flavor) is exactly what caused problems to 4e. You, me and everybody else who's been playing D&D long enough may want to move further to uncharted territories. But we all start from the same starting point to even define what would be original, we may want to go towards different directions, and there's a lot of others who don't feel the need to or are just starting to play D&D for the first time.

Trying something new in the core means to drag everybody else into the same direction, which is only one in thousands possible directions. Let campaign settings take care of that (we will never have too many of them), and supplements provide sparse bits for each DM to craft their own. But the core desperately needs to be stereotypically D&D, and recent history has simply proved that.

The problem I have with this, is that it is basically unrealistic. If this were true, D&D Next is already done. They just published it - the re-release of AD&D 1E.

Intellectual property needs to grow and expand lest it become stale and unsellable. Thus the ever-growing number of different game systems to choose from. If people wanted the same old thing, they wouldn't want a new edition.

As a correlation, it would be like taking the same movie and remaking it over and over. There are only so many times people are willing to see the same exact thing, without new reinterpretation to make it "unique" before they simply stop consuming it. The same goes for fantasy material and especially the game system. If the game doesn't grow and evolve, it will die.

The problem with 4E is that it seems to me from reading here and the WotC boards, that "most" people feel that the changes to the game that hurt it weren't about details like new races, but in the fact that a classic RPG was turned into something more like Battletech (a tactical board game). The game simply became 90% about combat and that I think is what really hurt them. JMHO.

 

[Danzauker]

Personally I'd like to see the half-Elf and Half-Orc go the way of the dodo. I'd much rather see only "full stock" races (i.e. Elves, Humans, Orcs) with the possibility of taking racial feats like Human-blood, Elf-blood, Orc-blood, Dwarf-blood, etc. to gain the mixed breeds. It would also allow differentiation such as the half-elf that is more elf then human (Elf with Human-blood feat) or vice versa.

Yep, I'm much on the same boat.

Why having Half-Elves if you have Humans and Elves and you could just select features from one or the other? I hope in the modular approach they are devising they are taking care of this.

Oh, BTW, I'd really like to see "cultural" race features to be some sort of "backgroud pack" I can choose, and not hardwired in the races themselves.

It's ok for ability modifiers and aother innate things like darkvision to be hardwired, but why should ALL elves be skilled with bow and sword? If they made that a "background pack", I could easily strap it on, for example, to humans or orcs, if I wanted.

 

[variant]

Not everyone like Tolkienesque games.

There were far more Tieflings, Aasimars and Dragonborn characters in the games I play than Dwarves and Gnomes or Halflings. And I play since AD&D2E.

I've never seen Gray Elf and Wood Elf at table.

I'm in for a PHB1 with at least 10 races.

In fact, I think the most popular races would be Humans, Elves, Drow and Dwarves.

That is why they make expansion books. It is content for groups and players that insist on having niche content.

Again, if you are going to put niche races in the Player's Handbook, there is no reason to stop at the arbitrary number of 10. I have seen requests from people to play the most obscure monsters.

You don't like them, and you are tired, but your very next sentence indicates that you are aware that there are people who like them and aren't tired.

I am not arguing for them to be completely taken out of Dungeons & Dragons. Just that they shouldn't be in the Player's Handbook.

 

[malkav666]

I really don't care what races are in the PHB with two conditions:

1. They have to get the basics in there: Human, Dwarf, Elf

2.Theres not a ton of new races at the exclusion of tradition favorites. Im ok with them trying something new, in fact I expect it. I just don't want to give up races that have been in PHBs for years to make room for dragon people and bling elves again or any similar scenario. No offense to those who like such things they just weren't my cup of tea.

As far as tieflings go I think they are badass. Their inclusion in the core books was one of the few things I feel 4e did absolutely right. As far as half orcs or half anythings really I don't think they need to be in any book, I think they should be handled with a paragraph or two under an optional heading in the description of the pure race that they want to be half of. As for including orcs in general in the PHB? Id be down, I cant really imagine a fantasy world where orcs and goblins and such don't have a home. And I find it just as likely that an orc would leave its tribe and set out on a personal adventure as I do a dwarf leaving its home to do the same.

love,

malkav

 

[Buugipopuu]

I can deal with everything but the ECL.
ECL needs to DIE IN A FIRE!

Why? If a player wants to play a Nymph or an Ethergaunt, why shouldn't the rules allow for that possibility? Sure, there'll be social things to deal with, but if the player knows the consequences, they should be able to play whatever they want. All fantasy races are not created equal, and ECL lets players who want to play powerful races do so without completely dominating the game with their extra powers.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

You don't like them, and you are tired, but your very next sentence indicates that you are aware that there are people who like them and aren't tired.

And still I can understand him.
A d&d group usually looks like a freak show. IMHO the number of races available is too high and humans are to rarely found. Or at least usualy demihumans.
It is a lot easier to create a world, where only a few races are encountered regularly.
Some races should be playable, but rarer. One half-orc in the group is interesting... but when every character in the group is a "freak", then it gets strange very soon.

So IMHO humans should maybe be as flexible as in 4e. a generally good choice for every race with a strong incentive to take them.
Maybe all other races should be presented as optional and clearly state, that you may have difficulties when you come into an area mainly settled by humans.

Campaign settings should specify which races are how well represented in which areas and how normal people would react.

With all races besides humans presented as options, it is easy for a DM to say: no, this option is not available in my campaign.

And I guess, this way you have the best of both worlds.

[MENTION=2167]Khaalis[/MENTION]: 4e does not play like battle tech, sry... those rumors are wrong... "the everything is core" and "players may dictate, what the DM has to do" mentality is what really hurt the game.