D&D 5E What races do you expect to see in the core books?

[Quentin3212]

I would like to see them release the PHB with all the races they currently have in her play test simply because they already allowed access to said classes and denying the access could be disappointing to players playing any of those races.

As for issues you may have with various races, just ask your players to not play them, for example I'm currently in a FR setting campaign in which the DM specifically requested no one play Kender or Warforged, both because they aren't native to the plane, and because he like many people has an issue with Kender,

 

[Argyle King]

They also usurped the name of the Eladrin that had been in the game in 2e and 3e, which is problematic both for player confusion and in-setting continuity.

I wouldn't be averse to keeping the 4e "eladrin" in 5e, but it needs a different name altogether, especially if they're seemingly going back to the Great Wheel cosmology.

I think -as far as cosmology goes- I'd prefer a combination of Great Wheel and 4E. (Truth be told, I'd actually prefer most of the 4E cosmology, but I'm trying to think of a compromise.) I really liked the concepts of Shadowfell and Feywild; I'd like to keep those. If the Great Wheel is a set in stone piece of 5E, I think it would be a good idea to think of the Shadowfell, Material Plane, and Feywild as an axle, with The Great Wheel rotating around that axle.

Keep the story of the Feywild and the Shadowfell being echoes of the Material Plane. Something like this: 0-0-0

As I said, that would create an 'axle' for the rest of the Great Wheel to rotate around. The three circles above represent the Material Plane being in the middle; flanked by Shadowfell and Feywild. The other planes would spin and move around those three. I'm also implying that the Great Wheel shouldn't be assumed to be static; I think the Wheel should move.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


I do agree that having two different creatures called Eladrin is somewhat confusing. I'm not sure what the right answer for that might be. If the Feywild were to be kept as part of the core cosmology, a name which denotes a deeper connection between 4E Eladrin and that plane would probably work.

 

[CM]

I think it would be a good idea to think of the Shadowfell, Material Plane, and Feywild as an axle, with The Great Wheel rotating around that axle.

We'll call it The Great Drivetrain

(Dislike the names, but I very much like the feywild and shadowfell)

Back on topic...

I'll go along with "all the races ever appearing in a PHB" like they originally said they wanted. To play nice with prior material I would like to see the diabolic 4e tiefling as an ancient, true-breeding subrace of the general tiefling. I would like to see an aasimar race. In 4e I just reskin devas as aasimar.

I'm also not sure why some races need to be labeled as optional. Everything is the DM's option.

 

[fjw70]

I'm also not sure why some races need to be labeled as optional. Everything is the DM's option.

I think it has to do with player expectation. Some DMs need/want the options label so they can say they aren't change the rules. They can just say they are not using options rules.

Personally I don't need the option label, but it won't bother me if it's there.

 

[Li Shenron]

Just for the fun of guessing...

PHB > the classic four, including current subraces
DMG > all the others that were in the playtest

I wouldn't be surprised with splitting them between PHB and DMG. It still grants them the "core" label, but at the same time suggests they are not by default within "player's entitlement". Also, they might need to bump a bit the size of the DMG, as currently it sounds it's going to be quite slim.

 

[Yaarel]

I hope the Players Handbook is the ONLY core book.

This Players Hanbook is like the 0e Rules Cyclopedia, the 4e Rules Compendium, the 3e SRD and Pathfinder Rulebook, and so on. This book has all the rules for both the DM and the heroes, and is the only book that players need to buy to play a game of D&D. It includes combat rules for terrains, such as aquatic and flying. It has all the rules for a complete game. But then the DM uses the races for the hostiles in combat encounters.

All other books are supplimental.

The Dungeon Masters Guide goes into depth about designing adventures (compare 4e DMG 1 and 2) and gives all the ‘advanced’ game-changing mechanics (compare 1e Unearthed Arcana), including tactical grid wargame style.

The Setting Guides are more important in 5e than in previous editions. Because 5e is highly modular, each Setting Guide sellects the specific options for a particular playstyle, genre, and mood. Setting Guides include Planescape, Forgotten Realms, Nerath, Eberron, Dark Sun, Dragonlance, hopefully Modern Urban Arcana (but with normal D&D classes), Ravenloft, and so on.

Setting Guides subdivide into ‘World Settings’ and ‘Regional Settings’. The World Setting defines the Setting as a brand name, and focuses on the cosmology, religions, and overall premise of the Setting. The Regional Settings are specific locations that can easily plug-and-play into any Setting. For example, one can easily plug the subterranean Drow city Menzoberranzan, which is one of the Forgotten Realms Regional Settings, into the Dark Sun World Setting. Oppositely, a Dark Sun city could plug into the Forgotten Realms World Setting as a location in a desert region, or even in the Plane of Fire.

The Monster Manual is a bestiary that adds new kinds of monsters that the DM can use as exotic hostiles. Possibly the Monster Manual needs to divide up by setting. So, ‘Monster Manual of Planescape’, ‘Monster Manual of Eberron’, ‘Monster Manual of Nerath’, ‘Monster Manual of Forgotten Realms’, ‘Monster Manual of Ravenloft’, and so on. Even if the Monster Manuals divide by settings, the entries need to be designed for straightforward plug-and-play into any setting.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Back in 2e, in addition to the base Monster Manual were Monstrous Compendiums set for each individual setting. Often a setting would have more than one (Dark Sun had two). In 3e, Monsters of Faerun was printed, and there may have been such books for other 3e settings. I know there was one for Dragonlance, but I can't recall the name.

Even 4e technically has "Threats to the Nentir Vale" but most of the creatures are generic enough you can use them anywhere.

I would actually expect D&DN to use the 2e model. Draconians don't need to be in the MM, but could be in the Monsters of Dragonlance supplement.

 

[Mistwell]

I hope the Players Handbook is the ONLY core book.

This Players Hanbook is like the 0e Rules Cyclopedia,

Which had monsters,

the 4e Rules Compendium,

Which did not have monsters

the 3e SRD

Which had monsters, but only online

and Pathfinder Rulebook,

Which does not have monsters.

There is no consistency here with regard to monsters. Are you saying you want the PHB to have monsters, or not?

But then the DM uses the races for the hostiles in combat encounters.

So it will not be dungeons and DRAGONS? The second half of the name will be a supplement? The only edition that did this is the 0e Rules Cyclopedia, and that was only because they were combining five other books into one book. All the rest don't do it that way.

And while you can have just NPCs, that's not really any form of traditional D&D. Traditional D&D includes monsters. I hate to say "that's not D&D" but...it's hard to view D&D as a game where there are no monsters in the core book(s). It's a defining characteristic of the game.

 

[Yaarel]

There is no consistency here with regard to monsters. Are you saying you want the PHB to have monsters, or not?

So it will not be dungeons and DRAGONS? The second half of the name will be a supplement? The only edition that did this is the 0e Rules Cyclopedia, and that was only because they were combining five other books into one book. All the rest don't do it that way.

And while you can have just NPCs, that's not really any form of traditional D&D. Traditional D&D includes monsters. I hate to say "that's not D&D" but...it's hard to view D&D as a game where there are no monsters in the core book(s). It's a defining characteristic of the game.

Correct, the core Players Handbook has no monsters. The DM uses races, as NPCs, for combat hostiles.

Fair point about ‘Dragons’ needing to be in the ‘core’ handbook. Now that you mention it, I want a true Dragon as a playable race in the Players Handbook anyway. Note, the Dragonborn is a Half-Dragon (Dragon and Human hybrid). This true Dragon race might be Metallic and Chromatic, or might be a separate branch of the Dragon family.

Of course, most players will buy the Dungeon Masters Guide and the Monster Manual(s) because they are useful and appealing. But the Players Handbook as the only ‘core’ is the only book that is strictly need for all the rules to play.

Also for marketing purposes, it is important for there to be only one book that is necessary, so there is no ambiguity or confusion about which book to buy.

 

[LightPhoenix]

I pretty much expect what's in the Races document to be the final lineup and layout (common/uncommon), with some expansion on the uncommon races. The one notable exception that I would like to see is Aasimar; if we're going to have Tieflings and Drow, I would like to see at least one "good" race.