D&D (2024) Which races would YOU put into the 50th anniversary Players Handbook?

[EzekielRaiden]

Fortunately for me, perhaps, dragon breath*, celestial wings, and half-feats aren't things I need to worry about.

But the numbers IMO greatly inform what the species is all about and how it presents. For example, that a typical Elf is more dextrous and less strong than a typical Human tells me a rather great amount about Elves.

* - except from the opposition side, every now and then.

Significantly - it says "here's a species that doesn't do magic well". This, if course, is the downside that pays for the upside of their ideally being way better warriors than most others.

One can even take it a step further and say that magic items have a small chance of not functioning if used-held-worn by a Dwarf.

Wasn't intending to specifically pick on Dwarves; other than Humans I'd like pretty much every species to have a few banned classes in order to perhaps make Humans a bit more appealing to play.

Humans absolutely do not need more things to make people play them. They have always been the most popular option, period. Every edition, every non-D&D system I'm aware of that offers such a choice, (nearly) every video game for which we have statistics. Humans are far and away the most common option. If you count part-human options like tiefling, half-elf, etc. as humans too, then humans are legit an actual majority of characters in D&D.

There is no need to make them "more appealing." They already are appealing, immensely so. They would be appealing if they outright sucked, which they do not. (Well, standard human isn't great in 5e, it's passable but not very strong, but variant human is very powerful, and the listed human in One D&D is closer to the latter.)

The irony of course is that some popular options actually did suck in the PHB. Like dragonborn, which got a massive rework specifically because they were always a bit below par compared to nearly everything else in the PHB--and yet their popularity did nothing but grow over the three years we got clear stats from D&D Beyond (2017, 2018, 2019.)

 

[Bill Zebub]

If a dwarf isn't meaningfully different from a human,

I read that…and please tell me if I’m reading this wrong…to mean that you find an ASI, which anybody can get at 4th level, to be more “meaningfully different” than tremorsense.

Which I find surprising, since in the same post you decried powergaming, but seemed to care about flavor.

 

[Bill Zebub]

But the numbers IMO greatly inform what the species is all about and how it presents. For example, that a typical Elf is more dextrous and less strong than a typical Human tells me a rather great amount about Elves.

I know you have a preference for PCs and NPCs to be mechanically equivalent, using the same generation methods, but that’s just not the case in 5e.

So your “typical” elf can still be more dexterous and less strong than your “typical” human, regardless of PC chargen rules.

 

[Parmandur]

A bit late to the party here, but I'd actually be thrilled if the current UA just became the Race chapter in the new PHB.

 

[Bill Zebub]

A bit late to the party here, but I'd actually be thrilled if the current UA just became the Rave chapter in the new PHB.

They would have to add ecstasy to the equipment list.

 

[MoonSong]

I read that…and please tell me if I’m reading this wrong…to mean that you find an ASI, which anybody can get at 4th level, to be more “meaningfully different” than tremorsense.

Which I find surprising, since in the same post you decried powergaming, but seemed to care about flavor.

I care about mechanics and flavor as a whole. There is not one without the other. Without backing mechanics, flavor is just toothless easy to ignore fluff, without connected flavor mechanics are just a powergaming tool. If you aren't ready to commit a mechanical cost to your flavor, it is unearned. If you ignore how ridiculous and convoluted the flavor gets for a mechanical combo, you are a powergamer and not getting any meaningful experience you couldn't get from a videogame.

I invite you to read my tagline. It summarizes my views pretty well.

 

[SakanaSensei]

Human
Dwarf
Elf
Halfling
Orc
Goblin
Dragonborn
Tiefling (visually any of the above with influence from the lower planes)
Aasimar (visually any of the above with influence from the upper planes)

^ Would be my ideal set. Lots of the "normal" options, lots of the more typically seen as "monstrous" options so we can put them on a level playing field, then some outer planes shenanigans options.

In an ideal world, I'd love for biracial characters to be able to get some benefit from both parents a la A5E's approach, but I'm fine with the simplicity in the Origins UA.

 

[Bill Zebub]

If you aren't ready to commit a mechanical cost to your flavor, it is unearned.

Um, ok. I don't think continuing this dialog has any prayer of accomplishing anything.

Happy gaming.

 

[CleverNickName]

Human, Dwarf, Elf, and Halfling, and then some more robust rules for creating everything else per Tasha's Cauldron of Everything.

 

[Lanefan]

I know you have a preference for PCs and NPCs to be mechanically equivalent, using the same generation methods, but that’s just not the case in 5e.

So your “typical” elf can still be more dexterous and less strong than your “typical” human, regardless of PC chargen rules.

And if PC char-gen rules don't reflect the differences inherent in the greater setting population then they're useless. 5e flat-out has this wrong, and is a poorer game for it.