D&D General Vote Up A 5e-alike, Part 2.1: Some more heritage details

[Faolyn]

This is a multi-part question, because I honestly didn't even think to ask the first part.

Question 1: Should their be sub-races? Or should these sub-races be turned into cultures, which would be just generic enough to available to anyone?

Question 2: Should each heritage have options, a la Level Up's heritage gifts?

Question 3: Roughly how many traits should each heritage have?

And, of course, finally:

Question 4: I've been using the terms heritage, lineage, ancestry... what term should we actually use?

 

[Micah Sweet]

My general thought is: Level Up did this right.

 

[CreamCloud0]

This is a multi-part question, because I honestly didn't even think to ask the first part.

Question 1: Should their be sub-races? Or should these sub-races be turned into cultures, which would be just generic enough to available to anyone?

Question 2: Should each heritage have options, a la Level Up's heritage gifts?

Question 3: Roughly how many traits should each heritage have?

And, of course, finally:

Question 4: I've been using the terms heritage, lineage, ancestry... what term should we actually use?

i think my answer to the first question really depends on just how much you're trying to replicate DnD tonally, and on the features mentioned in the following questions, i think if you're providing a choosable list of traits then that's serving the purpose subraces were intended to serve for customisation and you'd only need one basic member of each species.

also, on Q3 is that asking the number of traits any given member of a species should have or the number available to pick from in total?

 

[Tonguez]

No Elfs!
No Subraces

Have a Fey-touched Lineage that gets 2-3 Heritage traits (Culture is Key)

 

[Faolyn]

i think my answer to the first question really depends on just how much you're trying to replicate DnD tonally,

Honestly, I don't know. We'll see how it comes out in the end, but so far the votes are suggesting at least a somewhat different direction.

and on the features mentioned in the following questions, i think if you're providing a choosable list of traits then that's serving the purpose subraces were intended to serve for customisation and you'd only need one basic member of each species.

also, on Q3 is that asking the number of traits any given member of a species should have or the number available to pick from in total?

The former.

Currently (and not including things like size, speed, creature type, and languages), dragonborn have two traits (breath weapon and damage resistance), mountain dwarfs have five (darkvision, resilience, weapon training, tool proficiency, and stonecunning), and high elves have six (darkvision, keen senses, fey ancestry, trance, elf weapon training, and cantrip). So as you can see, there's a big disparity in how many traits any one race has. Even if you take out the purely cultural bits (proficiencies, and potentially stonecunning and cantrips), there's still a gap--and dragonborn have no cultural traits except for language.

I had thought about doing a highly streamlined/"OSR-ified" version of Level Up, in which each heritage would have two traits plus choice of a gift (each of which had one trait in them). It really made me think about what each heritage actually needs to be iconically that heritage. Which for elves, was going to be keen vision and a cantrip. One of the gift options was fey ancestry; I don't think I found a really good second option).
I didn't really think much else was really needed to make them recognizably elves. (As it turns out, I think Level Up is a bit too complicated to be simplified enough for my goal.)

But anyway, that's what I mean: I think most people either want the races to have a bunch of special abilities, or to be very simple. D&D, currently, leans heavily towards having a bunch of special abilities.

 

[Tonguez]

I think phrasing plays a big part though - for instance Elf sleep resistance could be made part of Trance, Darkvision included as part of Keen Senses* and the cantrip be included as part of Fey Ancestry - so Elf Traits would be reduced to keen senses, fey ancestry (charm resistance), trance

Trance. Elves do not sleep, and can not be put to sleep by magic….
Fey Ancestry. You have a natural affinity for arcane magic and gain advantage on saving throws against being charmed. (then make the cantrip a Cultural gift)
Keen Senses. You have proficiency in the perception skill and do not suffer penalties for darkness
* Dark vision shouldn’t be an elf trait anyway

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think phrasing plays a big part though - for instance Elf sleep resistance could be made part of Trance, Darkvision included as part of Dark vision* and the cantrip be included as part of Fey Ancestry - so Elf Traits would be reduced to keen senses, fey ancestry (charm resistance), trance

Trance. Elves do not sleep, and can not be put to sleep by magic….
Fey Ancestry. You have a natural affinity for arcane magic and gain advantage on saving throws against being charmed. (then make the cantrip a Cultural gift)
Keen Senses. You have proficiency in the perception skill and do not suffer penalties for darkness
* Dark vision shouldn’t be an elf trait anyway

I would love it we didn't all operate under the assumption that brevity is to be strived for at all costs.

 

[Faolyn]

I would love it we didn't all operate under the assumption that brevity is to be strived for at all costs.

Neither verbose nor over-complicated entries are all that great, either.

 

[aco175]

If the point is to make a simpler game, then all races just get X and play something else if you want something else. If we are not using race, then use species. I find culture, ancestry and lineage to be non-specific towards race, and at least species is acurate- if a bit sci-fi.

 

[Lanefan]

There's no option under Question 1 for "just a few sub-species for each", which is what I'd have voted for; so take my vote for 50 types of Elf with a grain of salt.

The traits of a given species - however many there are, and there's no need to try to force the same number for each - should be locked in. You're a Dwarf. Good. That gives you night vision (underground), stone knowledge, mining skills, and a chance of determining your depth underground. That's it, no choice, no options.

Question 4 - "ancestry" just doesn't work as it's too easy to think it's referring to cultural background within a species e.g. faux-Norse vs faux-Egyptian vs faux-Japanese; which all have different ancestry but are all the same species (Human) and thus all use the same game mechanics: what we're differentating here for game-mechanical purposes is biological species. Same goes for "heritage". Same goes for "race", which is why the game switched to species; IMO one of WotC's shockingly-few good ideas over the last decade.