log in or register to remove this ad

 

D&D 5E Wow! No more subraces. The Players Handbook races reformat to the new race format going forward.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
The moment you can prove that Tieflings, Aasimar, and Genasi don't exist in 5e.
Of course they are in 5e as completely separate races. That's what I've been saying.
Or that they don't represent people infused with the energies of the planes.
Not really relevant. There is no planetouched category 5e.
I thought about going that route, but it is a much harder route, as it requires figuring out a way to balance getting elf abilities and the bloodline abilities.
I'm just sort of assuming that the lower planar traits and energies override the base race. It's a bit lazy, but it works out and doesn't require any changes except lore.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

jayoungr

Legend
Supporter
Again the issue is the WOTC nudged players into thinking 16 or more in your primary was normal and they extremely emphasized the importance of ability scores.
I wouldn't blame it on WotC. I think they actually tried to dial it back by making it impossible to get a 20 in your primary score at level 1. I was on this board at the time, and I remember the howls of anguish about that.
 

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
I wouldn't blame it on WotC. I think they actually tried to dial it back by making it impossible to get a 20 in your primary score at level 1. I was on this board at the time, and I remember the howls of anguish about that.

The issue isn't the 16. The issue is that you could only get a 16 by playing a racial stereotype.

WOTC: Fighters have Strength and Dexterity as primary score. You should pick human, dwarf, elf, dragonborn, half orc or forest gnome if you play a fighter to get 16 Str or Dex.

Player 1: Cool.

Player 2: Nah. I wanna be a Tiefling Fighter like my warlord in 4e.

Player 3: Half Elf Fighter for me. I wanna be a loner outsider of both worlds who roams the lands.

Player 4: Sword &Board Gadget Tunnelfighting Gnome. Gnome Batman with a shield.

WOTC: :oops: you wanna play a WHAT?!
 

Chaosmancer

Legend
Of course they are in 5e as completely separate races. That's what I've been saying.

Not really relevant. There is no planetouched category 5e.

How is "how a Genasi is born" not relevant to a discussion about Genasi being born?

Also, let us posit for a second two brothers, since your previous claims of "race" relied on genetics. One is the child of a traveling bard and an angel. The other is the child of the same traveling bard and a Djinn. They would be half-brothers, but how does it make logical sense to say they are "completely separate races"? They are literally related by blood.

I'm just sort of assuming that the lower planar traits and energies override the base race. It's a bit lazy, but it works out and doesn't require any changes except lore.

And that is the model I think WOTC tried to go with, but it just doesn't work, in my opinion.
 


jayoungr

Legend
Supporter
The issue isn't the 16. The issue is that you could only get a 16 by playing a racial stereotype.
Okay, I see where you're coming from. But again, I don't blame WotC. A lot of players just aren't happy unless they have made their character as numerically effective as possible within the rules. (And no, that has nothing to do with whether they also create interesting personalities for those characters.)

WOTC: Fighters have Strength and Dexterity as primary score. You should pick human, dwarf, elf, dragonborn, half orc or forest gnome if you play a fighter to get 16 Str or Dex.
WotC didn't say, "You should pick human, dwarf, elf [etc.] if you play a fighter." They set things up so that those were the options if you wanted a 16 str/dex, and players themselves then decreed that those were the "acceptable" options because they were the ones that granted a 16.

WOTC: :oops: you wanna play a WHAT?!
Again, it's not WotC that says that--it's (certain but relatively common) players at (some) tables.
 
Last edited:


Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
How is "how a Genasi is born" not relevant to a discussion about Genasi being born?
False Equivalence. Similarities in birth don't make you the same race. Elves, halflings, and humans are all born the same way. After a long labor. With two arms, two legs and a head. And so on.

Demons are not celestials which are not slaads which are not geneies which are not... They are objectively not the same races. This is born out by the books.

Also, let us posit for a second two brothers, since your previous claims of "race" relied on genetics. One is the child of a traveling bard and an angel. The other is the child of the same traveling bard and a Djinn. They would be half-brothers, but how does it make logical sense to say they are "completely separate races"? They are literally related by blood.
Those would not be a genasi or an aasimar. Those would be a half-genie and a half-celestial, which is very different. And yes, they are different races and have been in every edition with half-races. Just like a half-elf is a different race from both of his parents.

And again, since you keep dodging it. Please address the fact that planetouched isn't even a thing in 5e.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
It's not unprecedented in Fantasy. Elrond identified as an elf, his full brother Elros as human.
Both are half-elves, though. Elrond the half-elven lives as an elf does, but is not a full elf. Elros the half-elves lived as a human did, but was not human. Still, neither was elf or human, so they were their own race.
 

jayoungr

Legend
Supporter
Both are half-elves, though. Elrond the half-elven lives as an elf does, but is not a full elf. Elros the half-elves lived as a human did, but was not human. Still, neither was elf or human, so they were their own race.
Eh well, not to get too deep into Tolkien lore, but being a half-elf in that world is really nothing like being a half-elf in D&D. Half-elves in Tolkien are physically elves, and the only thing that makes them different is that they have a choice about where they go when they die.

Half-elves in D&D, on the other hand, are physically distinct from both elves and humans. They have a longer lifespan than a human, but not as long as an elf. In illustrations, their ears tend to be shaped somewhere between elf ears and human ears, with a slight point but not as pronounced as an elf's. And male half-elves are often portrayed with small beards, unlike male elves (who tend to be beardless) or male humans (who tend to be drawn with thicker beards if bearded).
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
Eh well, not to get too deep into Tolkien lore, but being a half-elf in that world is really nothing like being a half-elf in D&D. Half-elves in Tolkien are physically elves, and the only thing that makes them different is that they have a choice about where they go when they die.
They were both Aasimar anyway, as were the Dunedain. :p
 

Faolyn

(she/her)
WotC didn't say, "You should pick human, dwarf, elf [etc.] if you play a fighter." They set things up so that those were the options if you wanted a 16 str/dex, and players themselves then decreed that those were the "acceptable" options because they were the ones that granted a 16.
In the DMG, where they give examples of how to make a new race, they talk about how they wanted aasimar to be good clerics and paladins (using those words), and so gave them ASIs to support that.

In 2e, where tieflings were introduced, they get a -2 Charisma penalty. In 5e, where Charisma-based warlocks are a thing and of course tieflings are going to be fiendlocks, they get a Charisma bonus. (I have no idea what tiefs were like in 4e).

WotC was definitely intending certain class/race combos.
 






Faolyn

(she/her)
It's literally not close. Look at the math.

It's not REMOTELY close to a mandatory value.
It's not mandatory because the classes don't have minimum stat requirements. But it's literally designed (according to the DMG) to encourage people to play particular race/class combos.
 

Scribe

Hero
It's not mandatory because the classes don't have minimum stat requirements. But it's literally designed (according to the DMG) to encourage people to play particular race/class combos.
The underlying assumption of the math, mandates nothing.

Wizards wants you to be as successful as possible, they want you to win, they want 5e to be 'heroic' so they don't say 'yeah give your fighter a str of 8'.

There is no mandated requirement, and the math is extremely generous.

You don't need a 16 to start.
 

Faolyn

(she/her)
The underlying assumption of the math, mandates nothing.

Wizards wants you to be as successful as possible, they want you to win, they want 5e to be 'heroic' so they don't say 'yeah give your fighter a str of 8'.

There is no mandated requirement, and the math is extremely generous.

You don't need a 16 to start.
If your only definition of "mandate" is the book telling you that you need a certain number in a certain stat, then yes, I already agreed with you it doesn't. But I'm not talking about the books saying you need a certain number in a certain stat. I'm talking about how the books wrote the races specifically for certain race/class combos, and even said so in the DMG (page 286) when building the aasimar:
Here are our basic goals for the aasimar:
  • Aasimar should make effective clerics and paladins.
  • Aasimar should be to celestials and humans what tieflings are to fiends and humans.
So whether you want to say it's not "mandated," the design--at least when the game was first created--was so that certain races were "meant" to play certain classes.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top