D&D 5E Witchlight publishes the new official format for player character races.

[pukunui]

The only non-humanoid creature type that you can play so far in 5e is Fey. Centaurs, Satyrs, Hexblood, and now the Fairy. I would love to have other options, like Celestials (Bariaur, anyone?), Fiends (Cambions?), and Aberrations (maybe a Ceremorph lineage, like the Gnome Ceremorphs from Rime of the Frostmaiden).

But, yeah, so far there's only two creature types that you can play, and IMHO it sucks.

I'd be willing to even go so far as to make some races have more than one type.

Dragonborn could count as both humanoids and dragons, for instance. Warforged could be both humanoid and construct. Tieflings could be both humanoid and fiend, while aasimar could be both humanoid and celestial. And so on.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I'd be willing to even go so far as to make some races have more than one type.

Dragonborn could count as both humanoids and dragons, for instance. Warforged could be both humanoid and construct. Tieflings could be both humanoid and fiend, while aasimar could be both humanoid and celestial. And so on.

They tried that in the UA, and, like most good ideas, the community decided to shut it down immediately. I wish we had it, but apparently trying new things is a no-go for a lot of the D&D 5e community.

 

[Yaarel]

The alignment is absent from the races, but remains present for the monsters.

In Witchlight, for example. The Humanoid "bullywug knight" monster statblock is "Typically Lawful Good". The Fey "boggle" monster statblock is "Typically Chaotic Neutral".



Regarding the technical terms:
• "Lineage" is the broad term.
• "Race" only refers to the player character traits of a certain lineage.
• "Monster" only refers to the non-player traits of a same lineage.

Despite belonging to the same lineage, the race and the monster can have different traits.



Indirectly, the lineages that a player can play remain stereotyped by a particular alignment, including Evil.

Even so, the phrase "Typically" clarifies there are also others who have different alignments.

Moreover, even for the same lineage, the monster statblocks can have different alignments. For example. While the "bullywug knight" is "Typically Lawful Good", the "bullywug royal" that the knights serve might be "Any Alignment". So even among the monsters of the same lineage, there is more fluidity in alignment. The alignment seems to depend more on the particular encounter concept, rather than the lineage itself. Multiple variations of the same lineage are possible.



The designers seem to thread the needle by empowering the players to be free from unpleasant stereotypes, while minimizing the number of D&D traditionalists who become apoplectic at the loss of alignment.

The compromise will annoy some among both progressives and traditionalists. Businesswise, empowering the player while allowing the DM to handle the monsters is probably shrewd.

 

[NaturalZero]

The compromise will annoy some among both progressives and traditionalists. Businesswise, empowering the player while allowing the DM to handle the monsters is probably shrewd.

As both a player and a DM I feel like the flexibility is all upside with no downside. I remember getting into an argument on reddit with some folks who felt that letting elves take a +2 to Str during character creation took worldbuilding power out of the DM's hands and ruined settings. It blew my mind that some people can play the game for 30 years and not get that the DM can make every NPC in the world function however they want regardless of how one player chooses to build their PC.

 

[Scribe]

It blew my mind that some people can play the game for 30 years and not get that the DM can make every NPC in the world function however they want regardless of how one player chooses to build their PC.

Or change Alignment, if a default recommendation is too much to accept.

 

[bedir than]

Despite belonging to the same lineage, the race and the monster can have different traits.

So, exactly like the PHB and Monster Manual.

 

[Mistwell]

The alignment is absent from the races, but remains present for the monsters.

In Witchlight, for example. The Humanoid "bullywug knight" monster statblock is "Typically Lawful Good". The Fey "boggle" monster statblock is "Typically Chaotic Neutral".

That's helpful.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Currently playing a low level character with flight. You obviously haven't considered the potential downside: falling can easily be a death sentence. If you drop to 0 HP, you are getting a minimum of 1 failed death save. If falling from high enough, especially at lower levels, you can be killed outright. Depending on where you fall, the healer may not be able to get close enough to do so. The solution to this is to land at the end of every turn of combat, which minimizes the benefit of flight in the first place. Flight can a major problem for exploration challenges though, so they require more thought and preparation.

Even if you just don't stay high in the air when faced with opponents with highly effective ranged attacks, that is still a lot of creatures that you are just flat-out immune to, and many that you will take reduced damage from.
For the casters and ranged characters who would get the most out of this ability, the armour restriction - is not a significant restriction.

Plus, as you say, the ability to bypass a lot of exploration, stealth, obstacle-based challenges.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I like the new format.
The power level seems in line with most phb races.
There are some sweeping assumptions in the OP i won't explicitely adress.

 

[J-H]

Those rules seem to imply that goliaths and dwarves are now within normal human size ranges. WOTC editing strikes again!

The optional Tasha's rules for making all species more alike are still not being used in any game I run.