D&D General What it means for a race to end up in the PHB, its has huge significance

[EzekielRaiden]

Mechanics matter to you. Who are the “some people “?

Again, the difference between a 2024 half elf and a 2014 half elf mechanically is two skills

Well, and as noted, always having magic (cantrips and wizard or druid magic), trancing rather than sleeping, and being locked into only one skill rather than having a completely flexible choice of two skills.

Or, y'know, being an absolutely mundane human with 1/day inspiration, one flexible skill, and a feat (since they seem to be making "variant" human the default again.) Well, and you'll have lower stats, since one of the big draws of half-elf was that it had two flexible +1s rather than one fixed +1.

Yes, it's thin. Races are thin in 5e. In context, I personally consider that a pretty significant difference.

 

[Hussar]

Yes, it's thin. Races are thin in 5e. In context, I personally consider that a pretty significant difference.

See, I guess that's my point. Races are thin mechanically. The difference is negligible. Class and Background are both going to make far more difference to a character than the mechanics of a race. Now, the flavor of a race? That makes huge differences. People play their dragonborn or half-elf or dwarf or human differently. Not because one has a slightly higher stealth score than another but because virtually all the markers for race (or species, I guess we should be saying now) are based in flavor, not mechanics.

This is a legacy element that just hasn't really faded completely. In earlier editions, it made an enormous difference what race you chose for your character. It limited your maximum levels in a class, limited your stats (in a game where stats were very difficult to change), impacted what classes you could choose, and even allowed things like multiclassing.

Race used to have mechanical impact. But, now? The mechanical differences between any of the races is so slight that they might as well all be "featureless gray blobs". I mean, you mention having a cantrip. But, which cantrip defines you as a half-elf? Or an elf for that matter? Does taking Druidcraft make me more "elfy" than Poison Spray? Maybe Spare the Dying?

See, that's the point I keep trying to make here. Virtually none of the mechanics actually define the race. There are a few - dragon breath for dragon born, hellish rebuke for tieflings, I'd argue that dwarves having a speed of 25 but not being slowed by heavy armor is a defining trait - but a cantrip? Really? Something that nearly every class gets anyway? And something that every class is a single feat away from having? That does not say "elf" to me at all.

 

[Shardstone]

See, I guess that's my point. Races are thin mechanically. The difference is negligible. Class and Background are both going to make far more difference to a character than the mechanics of a race. Now, the flavor of a race? That makes huge differences. People play their dragonborn or half-elf or dwarf or human differently. Not because one has a slightly higher stealth score than another but because virtually all the markers for race (or species, I guess we should be saying now) are based in flavor, not mechanics.

This is a legacy element that just hasn't really faded completely. In earlier editions, it made an enormous difference what race you chose for your character. It limited your maximum levels in a class, limited your stats (in a game where stats were very difficult to change), impacted what classes you could choose, and even allowed things like multiclassing.

Race used to have mechanical impact. But, now? The mechanical differences between any of the races is so slight that they might as well all be "featureless gray blobs". I mean, you mention having a cantrip. But, which cantrip defines you as a half-elf? Or an elf for that matter? Does taking Druidcraft make me more "elfy" than Poison Spray? Maybe Spare the Dying?

See, that's the point I keep trying to make here. Virtually none of the mechanics actually define the race. There are a few - dragon breath for dragon born, hellish rebuke for tieflings, I'd argue that dwarves having a speed of 25 but not being slowed by heavy armor is a defining trait - but a cantrip? Really? Something that nearly every class gets anyway? And something that every class is a single feat away from having? That does not say "elf" to me at all.

Everything here is right but one thing; background doesn't mean anything. A lot of players don't even really pick a background anymore, just some skills. Race means a LOT more then background.

Peope usually tell you about their Elf Ranger, not their Acolyte Ranger

 

[Greg K]

What do you think is the effect of a race getting added to the PHB?

I expect that most players will assume they are available to them. However, races being in the PHB has no bearing on which PC races I allow in a campaign.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Everything here is right but one thing; background doesn't mean anything. A lot of players don't even really pick a background anymore, just some skills. Race means a LOT more then background.

Peope usually tell you about their Elf Ranger, not their Acolyte Ranger

Completely agreed. Background, while mechanically relevant (and even moreso in 5.5e, where all BGs will grant a feat), is pretty much nil in terms of thematic import. Like...it does kind of matter, but when you need to summarize what your character is in the shortest possible terms, Background is pretty high on the list of stuff to chuck. Class is the only thing that has higher weight on that front than race; if you have to summarize what you're playing in a single word, class will always win out over race, but if you're allowed just one more word, it will always be race.

Background is less likely to show up than alignment, subrace (e.g. "red dragonborn" or "high elf"), subclass, or in some cases even pretty specialized things like feats or styles (e.g. "with a greatsword"/"sword and shield," "pyromancer"), unless that bacakground is so deeply fundamental to who the character is that it colors almost everything they do.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Everything here is right but one thing; background doesn't mean anything. A lot of players don't even really pick a background anymore, just some skills. Race means a LOT more then background.

Peope usually tell you about their Elf Ranger, not their Acolyte Ranger

Agreed, but it's a dang shame. Backgrounds can add so much if you actually play them.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

litter of kittens. Mum was black, dad was ginger at white. Most of the kitten were black, one was ginger and white. There were zero ginger and black, black and white, or ginger black and white kittens.

 

[Hussar]

Everything here is right but one thing; background doesn't mean anything. A lot of players don't even really pick a background anymore, just some skills. Race means a LOT more then background.

Peope usually tell you about their Elf Ranger, not their Acolyte Ranger

That has not been my experience. Most players will lean pretty hard into their backgrounds - be it a criminal background which gets referenced often at the table when the old lady monk talks about her mis-spent youth, or the con-artist barbarian trying to con an organization into giving her better armor in return for what might be a worthless promise of ownership of a mine. Even the dragonborn warlock's history and background has come up in play on occasion. Far more than the fact that the fact that the character is a dragonborn anyway. I mean, I can remember the dragonborn character talking about their family background and why they are on the run from their family, but, so far, I have not seen the dragonborn use a single breath weapon attack.

So, I don't know about "a lot of players." I know my players lean pretty hard into their backgrounds.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Backgrounds very much depends on the player. I don’t think it’s possible to say “most players this” or “most players that”.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Oops.