D&D 5E What Races (classes) do you allow or disallow in your campaign?

[hawkeyefan]

I think setting like Dark Sun or Eberron would be perfect for the more esoteric races such as Dragonborn or Tieflings, even Chaotic stupid er I mean neutral would work well.

Settings like Greyhawk or Forgotten Realms I personally do not think would be ok for such races, but thats just me.

That's fine...but why? What is it about Greyhawk or Forgotten Realms that makes you think Dragonborn or Teiflings are a poor fit.

In my 5E Greyhawk campaign I do allow humans, half-orcs , half-elves, Tieflings (Half-devils no half-demons) (they need to be lawful neutral or lawful good), gnomes (half- humans )

Also classes are restricted, Several priesthoods, most for humans, half elves get elonnah, gnomes get ulaa, Halforcs get Kord or Hextor. No Moon druids only land druids. Only Halfelves can be EK only Gnomes specialised illusionists only humans Pala and only LG and only Heironeus. Arcane Trickster only half elf and gnome. No Sorcerer Barbarian or monk.

It is a whole table of combinations possible these are just some, and partly the reason is the setting which I did put technologically into a 30 years war period just w/o gunpowder. Barbarians would not be fitting. Elves and dwarfes are few and pretty isolated.
Greyhawk did not have sorcs in 2e, monks I would have allowed if somehow "westernised"

The actual party consists of gnome illusionist human dex battlemaster with high charisma for Rping, human Pala, half elf swashbuckler (SCAG subclass of rogue). Most of my players prefer humans or races quite similar to humans because they are easyer to rp.

27 Point buy, 1 feat free at the start human only variant (so they get 2 feat at the start). XP are by kills and some quest boons and if someone does not appear he lags behind. Which is absolutely no problem 5 E easily allows for 1-2 levels difference.

I also use silver based prices and the party can literally buy everything nonmagic, but also healing pots and scrolls with every spell in the books no limits, it just costs 1 gold = 20 silver = 240 copper

There is no chainmail but full plate is AC19 and if someone uses a shield it will be a buckler. no TWF except Rapier main gauge (+1 AC 1w4) But you can buy a lantern shield, a chronometer, a sextant, a scrying glass etc.

You can buy Horses carts ships and war machines

I would have implemented guns cannons and gunpowder but one of my players objected, so I replaced these with crossbows of any size and war machines.

Hope that helps

A bit....but again, why? I get the war vibe, so the gear you are talking about makes sense....but the class and racial restrictions seem mostly to mimic those of the 2e era. Is that the case? If so, why?

For example, what does your setting gain by having the Illusionist subclass only be available to Gnomes?

Most of the time I have no restrictions. Did a "weird"west setting once with PF, with humans only, and restricted classes. Sorcerers were allowed, but no wizards, for example. Am thinking about an Elizabethan setting where there would also be restrictions. For more standard DnD campaigns, it's pretty much anything goes.

What's the reason for saying yes to Sorcerers but not Wizards? That setting certainly seems different enough from standard D&D to warrant some changes....but I'm curious on that.

For the Elizabethan flavor....out of curiosity, what classes or races would you think would not be suitable?

 

[GreenTengu]

I'm not a big fan of elves, but your screed(s) seem to be cherry picking the worst and totally ignoring anything that cuts against elves (and in 5e, they're okay but not super). I get disliking elves, but I just don't have your issues even playing with book elves, in any edition except 2e with the Greatest Handbook of Elven Cheese. And if were in 2e with the Elven Handbook on the table, I'd likely agree with most (not all) of your points. As it is, we aren't, and your hate on for elves really does come across as a wordier version of 'elves suck, mmkay?'

I am pretty sure I overstated my case to the point that my point got lost in my example.

To say that simply because a race idea or the idea of using a certain race came about after Tolkein doesn't meam someone is a wrong or bad player because a certain idea appeals to them.

I was simply attempting to illustrate that because so many writers and designers were enchanted by the idea of elves that they have tended to be given the best everything and almost no real flaws through the years.

In contrast, if a person wants to play a character who comes from a super primitive and brual culture, even if they rise above it, the idea of being an Orc shouldn't be dismissed.

If someone wants to be from a culture that was strict and brual and held high expectations for themselves and others, Hobgoblin seems perfect.

If someone wants to play a character that the whole world dismisses as having any value and treats dismissively thus having a higher bar they must meet to be just accepted, Kobold or Goblin seems good.

Not every nonhuman character should come from a culture that is viewed as superhuman and superior to that from which the general human pc arises.

A character who comes from a society that is deeply flawed and who are likely to appear as antagonists should be treated as an equally valid option.

Granted, the proof that everyone assigned to actually design the game clearly feels the opposite given their endless stacking of elves with endless nonmechanical benefits and utter incompetence in designing decent racial stat blocks for the commonly evil basic races.

Whatever that wrote the racial stat block for Volo's guide deserves to be slapped each time someone uses that crap.

 

[BookBarbarian]

Anything published is allowed, anything from UA or 3rd party or homebrew is up for discussion, and if allowed could be tweaked or disallowed down the road.

I don't care if somebody wants to bring a Dragonborn into a setting that doesn't typically have them. We can make that fun.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I am pretty sure I overstated my case to the point that my point got lost in my example.

To say that simply because a race idea or the idea of using a certain race came about after Tolkein doesn't meam someone is a wrong or bad player because a certain idea appeals to them.

I was simply attempting to illustrate that because so many writers and designers were enchanted by the idea of elves that they have tended to be given the best everything and almost no real flaws through the years.

In contrast, if a person wants to play a character who comes from a super primitive and brual culture, even if they rise above it, the idea of being an Orc shouldn't be dismissed.

If someone wants to be from a culture that was strict and brual and held high expectations for themselves and others, Hobgoblin seems perfect.

If someone wants to play a character that the whole world dismisses as having any value and treats dismissively thus having a higher bar they must meet to be just accepted, Kobold or Goblin seems good.

Not every nonhuman character should come from a culture that is viewed as superhuman and superior to that from which the general human pc arises.

A character who comes from a society that is deeply flawed and who are likely to appear as antagonists should be treated as an equally valid option.

Granted, the proof that everyone assigned to actually design the game clearly feels the opposite given their endless stacking of elves with endless nonmechanical benefits and utter incompetence in designing decent racial stat blocks for the commonly evil basic races.

Whatever that wrote the racial stat block for Volo's guide deserves to be slapped each time someone uses that crap.

Realms elves have been bad for awhile. You should try my elves one day: brutal, xenophobic bastards who view the shorter lived races like overbreeding cockroaches. Playing one of them outside an enclave is tough. People are either fanboy level excited to meet a super cool elf or already hate you for being an elf, not much in between.

Or my other game, where elves aren't any longer lived than any other race, except for those brutal pirate elves from over the ocean, and then no one knows how long they live (a long time, it turns out, and they're still really pissed at the rest of the world for sealing the gates back to their home plane a few thousand years ago, even if everyone else has forgotten it).

 

[Arilyn]

That's fine...but why? What is it about Greyhawk or Forgotten Realms that makes you think Dragonborn or Teiflings are a poor fit.



A bit....but again, why? I get the war vibe, so the gear you are talking about makes sense....but the class and racial restrictions seem mostly to mimic those of the 2e era. Is that the case? If so, why?

For example, what does your setting gain by having the Illusionist subclass only be available to Gnomes?



What's the reason for saying yes to Sorcerers but not Wizards? That setting certainly seems different enough from standard D&D to warrant some changes....but I'm curious on that.

For the Elizabethan flavor....out of curiosity, what classes or races would you think would not be suitable?

I used PF which gave a lot of class options. Magic existed, but rare, not something you could study, so sorcerers could exist. Also, of course, there were gunslingers, shaman, alchemists, but flavoured for weird science instead of magic, all the non magic classes, and the clockworker, which is a 3rd party class that fit my themes.

As for Elizabethan, not sure yet. Once again, PF gives lots of choice. I like swashbuckler, investigator, alchemist, bard, wizard, urban barbarian, maybe druid as remnant of old faith. Probably Oracle instead of cleric. And of course pretty much all non magic classes. Once again, clockworker would be great thematically.

In 5e, warlocks would fit, especially as bad guys.

I guess in my Elizabethan campaign the biggest restriction would be "humans only." That's strictly
a taste thing, as I have seen plenty of more modern campaigns utilize a variety of races. Shadowirun and Pelgrane's Owlhoot Trail, for example. Would want magic to be known, but only rare folk can wield it, players for example.

 

[GreenTengu]

Realms elves have been bad for awhile. You should try my elves one day: brutal, xenophobic bastards who view the shorter lived races like overbreeding cockroaches. Playing one of them outside an enclave is tough. People are either fanboy level excited to meet a super cool elf or already hate you for being an elf, not much in between.

Or my other game, where elves aren't any longer lived than any other race, except for those brutal pirate elves from over the ocean, and then no one knows how long they live (a long time, it turns out, and they're still really pissed at the rest of the world for sealing the gates back to their home plane a few thousand years ago, even if everyone else has forgotten it).

I already stated with example I think it is fine to do more with the elf.

Stating the average member of the people acts loathesometowards typical world denizens already adds aflaw that would make them better.

 

[Coroc]

That's fine...but why? What is it about Greyhawk or Forgotten Realms that makes you think Dragonborn or Teiflings are a poor fit.



A bit....but again, why? I get the war vibe, so the gear you are talking about makes sense....but the class and racial restrictions seem mostly to mimic those of the 2e era. Is that the case? If so, why?

For example, what does your setting gain by having the Illusionist subclass only be available to Gnomes?



What's the reason for saying yes to Sorcerers but not Wizards? That setting certainly seems different enough from standard D&D to warrant some changes....but I'm curious on that.

For the Elizabethan flavor....out of curiosity, what classes or races would you think would not be suitable?

Ahm yes it reflects 2e since I use converted 2e material blue box atm that for one,
I use the npcs with least possible fiddling. Humans can specialise wizard in any other type than illusion, and half elves can be diviners or enchanters (so that is like 2e elves)
I would allow warlocks (humans and deviltieflings only hell patron only you guessed it probably )

The latter for thematic: Iuz the permanent nemesis is a technically a T'anari (abyss / demons) so I want players to be associated with something opposite which would be a WL based on a patron in the 9 hells. But no player chose to play a WL.

The sorcerer thing is, one there is a college of wizards so every full arcane caster would be rather a wizard, the original circle of 8 is a wizard and I would have to refluff some of these wizards being sorcerers.

The other thing comes from a former campaign where I allowed sorcerer, and when I do allow sorcerer I want them to be extraordinary damage dealers so I use the convert slots to points. A level 8 or nine sorcerer can trivialize several of my encounters in this campaign since the encounters are designed differently.
I use gritty healing on the one hand which means 1 night sleep is a short rest, a long rest is a weekend at the inn or a week of camping. On the other hand is use tailored encounters and not 8 a day but only 2 or 3 but those are hard. This is due to RL limited gaming time also. With a 8-9 level sorcerer to a lesser extend a 6th level can trivialise these, in casting e.g. multiple fireballs at a group of orcs, which would mean I would have to make more encounters and weaker opponents to not endanger the rest of the group. (My orcs are built a bit like PCs they are different than the orcs from the MM). That is one thing, the other thing is in the City of Greyhawk where some of the adventures take place it is a nono to throw around fireballs, it is better to have some nice utility spells instead, since some of the adventures are rather investigation or roleplay and a sorcerer tends to have to few of these. My players were informed beforehand that I will not allow sorcs and no one wanted to play a sorc, the player who did play the sorc in the other campaign thought in fact a sorc is to weak but I think he did not utilize the slot - sp conversion to his maximum advantage only in the end of the campaign he did so.

Concerning your Q about Elizabethan age: Take a look at the technology first it answers many of your questions. Think about what makes sense e.g. some artificer rather than a wizard, a swashbuckler pirate rather than a barbarian or maybe a barbarian from some island. Take a world like Greyhawk or mystara and put it into the desired time period and leave out what would not fit. Add special gimmicks like firearms and airships eventually. That is a quick fix which can work for you. Allow halfelves or halforcs rather than elves or orcs or dwarfs.

 

[Ancalagon]

There is a disappointing lack of slugmen in this thread.

 

[Ovinomancer]

There is a disappointing lack of slugmen in this thread.

There's a wound you don't want salt in!

 

[Kite474]

Generally, the only thing I really ban is half races. You either go the whole hog or go home. This is mainly due to most half race characters tend to just kind of be either "Human +1" or usually angsty as all hell.

Besides that, it's everything goes and that goes with classes as well. Though usually if the class is causing problems mechanically we will put it aside for a bit to fix it. As for the fluff, we usually will just change it as needed.

Anyone who picks a Beastman gets an extra gold because of yeah Gnolls!