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

[Maxperson]

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.

 

[Faolyn]

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.

 

[jayoungr]

WotC was definitely intending certain class/race combos.

Encouraging is not the same as mandating.

 

[HammerMan]

They were both Aasimar anyway, as were the Dunedain.

I was so about to say that...

 

[Faolyn]

Encouraging is not the same as mandating.

Strongly encouraging, which is close.

 

[jayoungr]

Strongly encouraging, which is close.

See, I don't think the encouragement is that strong. I think it's in the eye and preferences of the beholder.

 

[Scribe]

Strongly encouraging, which is close.

It's literally not close. Look at the math.

It's not REMOTELY close to a mandatory value.

 

[Faolyn]

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]

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]

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.