D&D 5E What is the appeal of the weird fantasy races?

[Scribe]

Are you not a Tiefling, if you are the spawn of a fiend, regardless of if you're a dwarf too

No, that is something else. Name escapes me, but it's a distinct thing. Same with Elf, Halfling, and Orc versions.

I'd have to dig in to see the mechanical differences if any but Tiefling is plane touched Human.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Outcast is one of the most basic tropes that could be absolutely applied to any race you can imagine if that race is tightly codified.
Hunter of own kind? Bounty Hunters? I'm stunned you would think this is in any way race specific.
Atoner. Absolutely any race can do something which later generations feel the need to atone for. From betraying ones family or clan, offending ones gods, or perpetrating some kind of evil. The list could be endless, literally.
Bael Turath - Yes, the major cultural hook for the change to 4e style is important, I'll give you that. However hoping for ones lost heritage to return to prominence? Thats a Dwarf Trope if I have ever seen one.
Devilish Heritage - Any fiend planetouched (and there are more than Human based ones) could do this. Its not a cultural issue at all?
Rivalry with Dragonborn - Yes, you are looking at a 4e setting specific hook, but...that doesnt mean I'm wrong. Any race can do this.
Big Horns - You may be kidding, but that still is the major call out here, especially if you are not looking at it from a 4e setting specific POV.

(...)

So please dont take this as me hating Tieflings. What I dont accept is that the change to Tieflings appearance, has improved anything WHATSOEVER, and that it was at all meaningful or necessary.

To ME (and I'm using caps for emphasis since this thread is touchy and 230+ pages) the part that makes Tieflings a 'Weird' Race, is simply the stupid f'ning 4e Horns.

We didnt need it, and it added nothing of value, while it is a net LOSS to diversity, if played by the default appearance and descriptions and 'all Tieflings are Asmodeous blah blah' trash from 4e.

So yeah, when I look at your list, outside the obvious 4e setting tie ins, there is literally nothing but 'I wanted horns' that screams Tiefling.

Ok, I get the feeling that I am not understanding your point, so help me out here, and bear in mind that I don't have a particular knowledge of pre-4th ed. tiefling lore.

You seem to be saying that pre-4th ed., tieflings were not a "weird" race, but since 4th edition, they are? If so, that interpretation of what constitutes a "weird" race seems to be very different than how other people are using the term. And I am not sure how having horns makes tieflings any more or less "weird".

 

[FrozenNorth]

Taken as a whole? Perhaps. Drop the Culturally Distinct or Visually Distinct ones?

• Outcast.
• Hunter of own kind. Bounty Hunter.
• Atoner.
• Devilish Heritage.
• Rivalry with Dragonborn

That absolutely can apply to Human, Elf, Dwarf, or Halfling, off the top of my head if you include past lore/books and drop them into the current setting where Dragonborn are a thing.

Ummm...no. A tiefling that hates devils and specializes in hunting them down and killing them is an interesting character (and makes for an interesting cleric or paladin). A dwarf that hates dwarves and specializes in hunting them down and killing them is a serial killer (and possibly an interesting villain for the party to face, but in any event, a very different character).

Likewise, an elf that is an outcast for any reason is not quite in the same boat as a tiefling who is an outcast because of ancestors who consorted with devils. The tiefling would likely have to rely on magic to conceal his appearance as a tiefling, while the elf wouldn't. (Note: this is under the assumption that the tiefling player was the driving force behind playing this background. As a DM, I would never force this on a player).

 

[Oofta]

Ummm...no. A tiefling that hates devils and specializes in hunting them down and killing them is an interesting character (and makes for an interesting cleric or paladin). A dwarf that hates dwarves and specializes in hunting them down and killing them is a serial killer (and possibly an interesting villain for the party to face, but in any event, a very different character).

Likewise, an elf that is an outcast for any reason is not quite in the same boat as a tiefling who is an outcast because of ancestors who consorted with devils. The tiefling would likely have to rely on magic to conceal his appearance as a tiefling, while the elf wouldn't. (Note: this is under the assumption that the tiefling player was the driving force behind playing this background. As a DM, I would never force this on a player).

Replace "hunts fellow dwarves" with "followers of the evil cult in which they were raised". Add in that the cult is fairly well known for the prominent tattoos they bear and that the PC has said tattoos.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

Ummm...no. A tiefling that hates devils and specializes in hunting them down and killing them is an interesting character (and makes for an interesting cleric or paladin). A dwarf that hates dwarves and specializes in hunting them down and killing them is a serial killer (and possibly an interesting villain for the party to face, but in any event, a very different character).

Likewise, an elf that is an outcast for any reason is not quite in the same boat as a tiefling who is an outcast because of ancestors who consorted with devils. The tiefling would likely have to rely on magic to conceal his appearance as a tiefling, while the elf wouldn't. (Note: this is under the assumption that the tiefling player was the driving force behind playing this background. As a DM, I would never force this on a player).

To simplify....

You can't tell the story of Blade if Blade were just a normal human. His vampire half makes his story different...

 

[Scribe]

Are you not a Tiefling, if you are the spawn of a fiend, regardless of if you're a dwarf too?

Wispling = Halfling Planetouched.
Maeluth = Dwarf Planetouched.
Tiefling = Human Planetouched.

Fiend Folio, 3ed (?)

You seem to be saying that pre-4th ed., tieflings were not a "weird" race, but since 4th edition, they are? If so, that interpretation of what constitutes a "weird" race seems to be very different than how other people are using the term. And I am not sure how having horns makes tieflings any more or less "weird".

Correct.

3rd Edition. Monster Manual.

"Aside from a demeanor that many find disturbing, many tieflings are indistinguishable from humans..."

You do not think bright red skin, huge bulbous growths/horns, and an obvious tail would make someone seem 'weird' in comparison to someone that is 'indistinguishable from...' a human?

Ummm...no. A tiefling that hates devils and specializes in hunting them down and killing them is an interesting character (and makes for an interesting cleric or paladin). A dwarf that hates dwarves and specializes in hunting them down and killing them is a serial killer (and possibly an interesting villain for the party to face, but in any event, a very different character).

That wasnt the argument. It was tiefling hunting tiefling. If its Tiefling hunting Devils, then yeah sure.

However it could be as noted X race hunting devils because Y member of said race was in a cult, or is the spawn of a cult, and is planetouched as well.

You can't tell the story of Blade if Blade were just a normal human. His vampire half makes his story different...

I would agree! However why?

Because he is fundamentally 'other' than both Human (needs blood, benefits of Vampirism) and Vampire (walk in the daylight, assuming the movie was accurate to the character I dont know, I didnt read the comics).

Which gets back to is the point of tieflings to be so clearly, openly, distinctly 'other' and if so, do they stand out to the point of being 'weird' for a setting and potentially detrimental from the POV of the DM.

Again, I'm all for Tieflings, at least the pre 4e ones, but I do not see them as (outside of mechanics) doing anything really that cannot be RP by another race, UNLESS they depend on looking wildly different, aka the 4e look. They are fundamentally planetouched humans.

Essentially: If they must be so distinctly other, then yes they are 'weird'. I personally do not believe that needs to be case, but that is because I refuse to accept 4e visual representation, and the Asmodeus lore change in my head canon and so for me, Tieflings are not 'required' to play the tropes listed as arguments for their inclusion. It can be done in another race, with a different back story, unless.

1. You need the mechanics of a Tiefling.
2. You want the horns.
3. You specifically are playing within the FR setting within the regions explicitly defined within the Tiefling lore of that period.

 

[Mecheon]

Again, I'm all for Tieflings, at least the pre 4e ones, but I do not see them as (outside of mechanics) doing anything really that cannot be RP by another race, UNLESS they depend on looking wildly different, aka the 4e look. They are fundamentally planetouched humans.

There's a reason the 4E look stuck around and they didn't go back to the pre-4E look: Its popular.

Like, even as a pre-4E Tiefling fan, even I gotta admit that folks like that consistent look and what it brings to their character. And the demon-y look is what people are going to play Tieflings for. There's a reason they're super popular in the LGBT+ space, and its... A very complicated reason I am not the best person to talk about, but ties into that whole thing.

also quite frankly if we want to talk 'weird' races bringing in 3.5E's endless pile of 'Its like X but different' probably ain't the best. 2E counters parts of that 3.5E lore, especially on the dwarf bit, given earth genasi are just, earth genasi regardless of the parent race.

 

[Scribe]

There's a reason the 4E look stuck around and they didn't go back to the pre-4E look: Its popular.

And there is a reason they also backed off from 'all the Tieflings are Asmodeus Tieflings' and SCAG gave us 'Tiefling Variants'.

"Since not all Teiflings are of the Blood of Asmodeus..."
"Your Tiefling might not look like other teiflings. Rather than having the physical characteristics described in the PHB..."

Because its not popular with enough of us, that they gave us a way out of this mess.

EDIT: And this again goes back to the argument that consistently is the last one standing. The looks, which are what (as of 4e) make them 'weird' and 'other'.

Like, even as a pre-4E Tiefling fan, even I gotta admit that folks like that consistent look and what it brings to their character. And the demon-y look is what people are going to play Tieflings for.

I'm pretty sure I'm not interested in the LGBT ramifications, as I'm 99.9% sure whatever they are didnt matter to me when I was looking at Tieflings in Planescape.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Because its not popular with enough of us, that they gave us a way out of this mess.

. . . Or because they just wanted to give more options. You're leaping to conclusions.

 

[Scribe]

. . . Or because they just wanted to give more options. You're leaping to conclusions.

I was looking up things based on this discussion, you dont have to look hard to find pushback against the 4e representation, going back many many years on other forums.

If you think its leaping to conclusions that people are resistant to change (and yes, I acknowledge that is part of my disdain for 4e version) that's fine, but I've looked, and its not at all the case that the 4e version is universally accepted.