D&D Players, Tell Me Your Unpopular Race Hot Takes
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 окт 2024
- Tell Me Your Unpopular Race Hot Takes.
Please Check Out @TheForeverDMAdventures
Community Discord: / discord
www.brianvaugh...
Editor: @mc_cheshire
Song: Just Another Day - Fire Emblem: Three Heroes
/ tell_me_your_unpopular...
Stay tuned for more awesome DnD content!
*Please ignore YT God's feeding zone down below!
#mrripper #dungeons and dragons #dnd stories #reddit stories #please sub for nat 20s #how to play dnd #one dnd #one d&d #how to play dungeons and dragons #dnd character creation #dnd 5e #asmr #reddit stories compilation #reddit stories funny #dnd story #ask reddit videos #family friendly gaming #dungeons and dragons how to play #dungeon master screen #tabletop simulator d&d #player character #dnd encounters #dnd campaigns
DND players, what was your funniest “nat 20” moment? (r/askreddit)
What stunt did your D&D players pull that completely derailed the campaign?
DND players, what was your funniest “rolled a 1” moment? (r/askreddit)
DnD players: What is the most creative character you've seen someone play as?
DND players, what was your funniest “nat 20” moment? Part 2 (r/askreddit)
What’s the DUMBEST thing a player rolled for and Succeeded?
D&D players, what was the NAT20 that made your DM facepalm?
What's the funniest thing PC's latched onto? #1 (r/dndstories)
Marathons
Aint nobody got time watch a bunch of people with different athletic skills run, bike, and swim.
Honestly, I hate sprints. Just too darn fast.
Its all about how its played. Ive got a PC playing a "half minotaur, half centaur; but only the human bits. " He's got tiny horns, but everyone in the world just thinks hes a weird looking tiefling. its absolutely hilarious.
Remember folks. It doesnt matter what you play, but how you play it.
I agree, and I think a lot of the sentiment with many of the opinions in the video comes from an unspoken semyiment of most people not being good at roleplaying. So IF they are at least open to it, they twnd to default to a lame, yet sexier version of themselves.
Thus, making all the races 'blend' together by making them all intelligent, 'equal' in the official lore, making them 'cutesy' , and making them all havs access to the same stats, deprives your run-of-the-mill player of valuable narrative tools that can guide them towards having an interesting character. And now we have a lot of those players - which is not a bad thing on it's own - but that leads to 'mediocrity' being more noticable. And the frustrating part is WOTC have gone all-in on appealing to what they percieve as the lowest common denominator. Which can be annoying for people who are more heavily invested into the hobby and want something more substantial to sink their teeth in.
The 400m dash has no reason to exist. The 100m is a test of speed, 800m+ is a test of endurance, but 400m is a sad middle ground where it's too far to go all out but not far enough to be the same kind of test as a longer race.
I’m gonna say it. Street racing is VASTLY superior to those filthy nascar races. Congratulations, you can turn a single direction. The cars also lack the striking aesthetic of street racers. Instead they have more stickers than the kids section of a dollar store. How much more abhorrently inferior can a race be?
"what do you mean i cant eat the flesh of creatures that can think and talk?"
"what do you mean i cant hunt a god and be an iconoclast?"
"what do you mean i should accept this as currency?"
when the table expects the lizard folk to act within the societal behavior of humans...
If I dont eat the flesh of slain enemy warriors how can I honor their skill in battle?
The time I played a Lizardfolk I thankfully had a DM that was okay with most of the animalistic behavior I got up to which included;
-Harvesting rations from slain enemies in the form of limbs. Made the other PCs super uncomfortable when, while on a march, I'd pull a partially rotting human arm from my sack of food and start snacking.
-Completely ignoring social concepts like manners, money and most laws simply because he both didn't understand and didn't care about them. The party had to keep me on a short leash whenever we were in town.
-Completely ignoring party dynamics since my character was written to be a solo. The other players stopped trying to make plans that included me because my character would do his own thing and disregard any and all level of planning.
5e Way of the Long Death(SCAG) Monk/Assassin Rogue. I called him my Velociraptor because of how I could effectively teleport around and ambush anyone, even during combat, was super fun to play. He wasn't a raptor though, he was more like a bipedal Komodo.
Man, the title...
I had to double take 💀💀
Literally went 😨😨😨
"I blame inflation on the gnomes!"
@@nl4realplease dont inflate the gnomes, we dont want the deviantartists to invade
It's called clickbait
Dark vision is easier to work with than some people realize you can only see stuff in back and white something a dm could exploit with the classic describing water and it’s actually blood etc. But a lot of these are some good points.
Also dark vision turns darkness into dim light, creatures have disadvantage on perception checks when in dim light. Take advantage of that a few times and your players will obsess over torches before long.
I have Dark Vision IRL and it's almost impossible to read
Colour-based puzzles are a great thing to use here.
I set up rules about different colours being used on magic runes affecting what the rune does, and applied these to magic circles made using those runes.
Players had to work out which effects were likely to occur based on what they'd seen during earlier sessions. Lots of fun when they get it right (And even more when they get it wrong)
Yeah, I feel like just a simple explanation and talking with the PCs can fix the person's problem super quickly, and just say "I may describe a dark room, but I will get to what the people with darkvision see after describing it". There, problem fixed.
Also, removing darkvision? That feels super dumb to me, unless the alternative is cool and interesting
Orcs look like wild boars/warthogs. Half-orcs look like domestic pigs.
In one of my homebrews i had two types of orcs, wild hillbilly orcs that look like wild boars and 19th century industrialist orcs that look like domestic pigs in top hats and monocles.
Halflings = Midget Humans
Gnomes = Midget Dwarves
Goblins = Midget Orcs
Kobolds = Midget Dragonborn
Also this one's true in my homebrew campaign:
Elves + Dwarves = Enemies
Elves + Drow = Enemies
Dwarves + Duregar = Enemies
Drow + Duregar = Co-Existing Allies
If goblins are midget orcs, what are hobgoblins and bugbears?
@@Wyatt-kj7ou redneck orcs and their inbred cousins
I'm sorry, Gnomes are midget Dwarves? Gnomes are friendly, mad scientists, inventors, and alchemists, Dwarves are sirly at best and xenophobic isolationist at worst, black smiths and stone crafters. Other than the fact they both mine and are both smaller than everyone else (except Goblins+Kobolds) on the size scale they are NOT the same. It's your and your party's fault for playing them that way, but vanilla lore they are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT races.
Oh and when I say Gnomes are inventors I don't mean they make traps out of wood and stones. I mean they make machines made of metal that you wouldn't think is out of place in a steam punk setting. Any other race's trap is a giant boulder to roll onto you. A Gnome trap is a vat of acid that floods a hallway making it impossible to travel. Which brings me to one of my race hot takes. All of those ridiculously intricite traps that DMs have their Kobolds make in their layers. The Kobolds wouldn't do that because, as a race, they're NOT SMART ENOUGH. They would just drown you in simple traps, not incredibly intricate ones that launch saw blades down a 200 foot hallway at average human height. All of those incredibly creative trap ideas are what Gnomes would make as traps, not Kobolds.
Gnomes have pointy ears like elves
Wasn't kidding about these being hottakes. Even the narrator had hot takes on this one.
Templates, alternative class features, and new classes would have really improved 5E. The game is old enough to give us depth now.
Fear not the min/maxer but do not cater to them; what you should despise is the bland uninteresting samey corporatist slop where they flatten your world lore and options and condemn all critics.
Can I offer you a Pathfinder in these trying times?
"Should maybe try an older version of D&D" 5e has comparatively few playable races compared to the older editions because there is no dedicated system for balancing monsters as races. 3.5 had well over 200.
100% agree with the Firbolg bit.
I dunno, Pumat Sol and Caduceous Clay, and the other firbolgs in crit look like they're sticking with the design ideas set by 5E Firbolgs going by the fan and official art. Maybe people just don't like the 5e interpretation?
I agree with the guy saying not all races should be equal. I hate the fact that a goliath can have the same starting strength as a gnome.
Every race has areas where they shine and those where they do not. Choosing +2/+1 gets rid of that.
Not equal but congruent! overall equal but different.
That is only one reason 2024 sucks. removing half races is already enough to boycott the trash.
I dunno, why can’t a gnome work really friggin hard on their strength training and get just as swole as a Goliath? What makes races different is the real question. What makes a species unique is their features in 5E, not their stats. Anyone can train their stats to buck the trend of their stereotype, it is a perfect foundation for a heroic adventurer who works hard to succeed at something people don’t expect from them. However, a Goliath is going to have abilities specific to their race that no gnome can replicate, even if their stats are the same. That IMHO is a far more nuanced way to show the difference in the different races than otherwise.
@@boomkruncher325zzshred5 Of course a gnome can work really hard on their strength and become as strong as a goliath. But a goliath may do the same and outperform a gnome, due to its biology.
Not every goliath is stronger than every gnome, but peak strength goliath is stronger than peak strength gnome.
The "working really hard" part is, for me, the base stats. As a gnome, I can put a 15 in strength. Maybe a goliath puts 10, because he does not work out, but gets a +2 for 12 in total. Gnome worked hard and is stronger than a goliath. But a goliath may put 15 in strength, too, for working hard, but due to its biological advantage, these +2 get him to 17.
I get that the mechanical reason for that is that if somebody wants to play a gnome barbarian, he will be behind in stats as opposed to goliath barbarians. But it still does not sit right with me.
Well, you have to remember the players are pretty much the exceptions. They are incredibly special and unique people that sometimes go past even the laws of the universe. Maybe the explanation is magical more than physical or such, but either way they are unique and I don't have a problem with it. You can still make the npcs follow those rules, but the PCs don't have to
@@QuatarTarandir That is true, I'm not denying that. I'm fine with a PC gnome that is stronger than even above average NPC goliath warrior, but a PC goliath should be stronger then PC gnome (strength-wise), if they both decide to play the strongest character possible.
Goliath with incredible strength being on the same level as a gnome with incredible strength, for me, feels like downplaying a goliath character.
I get that it is a mechanical reason, for gnome barbarians not to lag behind on damage and chance to hit. When I play such a character, I like to reskin their damage and hit as gnomes being more intelligent and analytic, so their attacks are not as strong, but more well timed and precise, hence the same damage and hit chance as goliaths. But it still feels lackluster for me, since, for example, their intelligence saving throws are the same and then it's downplaying gnome advantages, etc.
Dwarves, regardless of sex, grow magnificent beards. Cutting it off is seen as dishonorable and a huge taboo amongst dwarves. In some drawvrn societies, cutting off a beard is a form of exile. They also don't grow back after being cut, so if you're exiled as a dwarf, it's over for you.
I have something similar in my setting, with the added lore that the reason shaving a Dwarf is associated with exile is because the beard serves as a sort of natural dust filter for underground air, and without it a Dwarf is a lot more susceptible to suffocation and disease from airborne particulate if they try to continue living in their underground homes instead of the surface they are exiled to.
I don't like that last part because it means in theory you can be screwed over by someone else.
"Nice argument, Senator. Now, how about you back it up with a source?"
This isn't a hot take, this is a cool ass worldbuilding idea.
The beards, "Don't grow back after being cut"
Dwarves would never become adventurers then. The first bad fight would have a monster tear chunks of beard out or an enemy warrior slash their chest where the beard hangs. One dragon breath would scorch the beard right off. Then the dwarf would look exiled and outcast for life. It would never be worth the risk
I'm playing an Infernal Heritage Tiefling in a Ravenloft game using the 2024 rules and part of her backstory literally states she is unfairly viewed as the "Daughter of Asmodeus" due to the fact she was born a Tiefling due to the fact her mother is a Fiend Warlock who is in a pact with the Archdevil. And despite being good people my character and her mother are still treated like crap by other people that even going out in public they're in danger from attacks at the hands of racist people.
Ok incoming lore dump explanation but my hot take? Orcs are the victims of the other races.
To clarify, in Forgotten Realms lore the myth goes that all the pantheons of the races got together and divided up the world between their races. Dwarves got mountains, elves got woods etc. Only two races did NOT get anything, Halflings and Orcs. Why you might ask?
Well for Halflings the head of their pantheon, Yondalla, stole bits and pieces from the other races in order to make the halflings and got caught red handed by the other pantheons and the conditions to not being punished more severely was Yondalla had to get rid of her thieving aspect AND halflings would get no land and rely on the hospitality of other races. And Yondalla didn't even do that she secretly split her dark thieving half off into another god, Dallah Thaun, who halflings secretly worship to this day but remains unknown to other gods.
Orcs on the other hand got screwed for no reason. When Gruumsh wen to claim land for the orcs he was told by the elf god Corellon (gaslighting dick that he is) that there was no room left for orcs and that no room would be made for them in the world. Gruumsh, understandably pissed off about this fought Corellon resulting in the loss of his eye and to Loth's eventual betrayal of Corellon. But tell me in what universe is that fair?
Halflings' deity engages and is caught in a demonstrable crime gets mildly punished. The orcs' deity on the other hand has a reputation for being mildly unpleasant, gets gaslit, and then orcs get to be the fodder for other races. And remember Corellon is the "good" deity and Gruumsh is the "evil" one. Gruumsh did nothing wrong! Justice for the orcs!
I always feel like the tale of Corellon and Gruumsh's rivalry (and how this translates out into the rivalry between orcs and elves, and how this somehow makes Corellon and the elves the good guys), is one of those "Wow, that's what the history books say, huh? Who wrote those history books? Was it the elves?" deals.
@@stephenwood6663 There’s an apocryphal myth that Corellon and Gruumsh are brothers and basically their parents gave them different martial gifts to fight in the dawn war. IE Gruumsh is ugly and strong but Corellon is beautiful and graceful. Orcs and Elves both deny this myth. But my headcanon is it’s true and Corellon represents a sort of sanitized and romanticized idea of warfare whereas Gruumsh is the ugly truth of warfare that people would rather ignore.
@stephenwood6663 always a fun aspect to play on. History is written by those who choose to write it.
They may be victims but that doesn't make it wrong to defend ourselves from them.
Would some maybe feel sorry for the Orcs, abandoned by the gods and world? yeah most likely.
But they would still slay as many as they need to without mercy to defend their homes.
If there is a pointless race, it's gnomes. Next to dwarves and halflings, they struggle to have any real identity. Incidentally, halflings are among my favorites. They just hit the right spot between ordinary and special and a palate cleanser to all the weird critters that encompass commonly played D&D races now. I would have liked those a long time ago, but these days I prefer something more "normal" to the point that I even play a human in my group (would have been unimaginable 10 years ago).
Now, something that's apparently an actual hot take, but really shouldn't be: There's nothing wrong with "evil races" (although using that word makes it sound worse than it is). People act like portraying the entirety of certain sentient fantasy creatures makes you racist, which is just laughable and shows even less faith in people than I have. It really only becomes a problem if those creatures resemble real life human cultures. Beyond that, most people are perfectly capable of distinguishing between fantasy monsters and human beings. And those that aren't, are intentionally projecting their racist views upon them.
4e is the only edition to make gnomes interesting. Back then, they were paranoid doomsday preppers who were on constant alert for slayers. Going so far as to have secret police in each village to make sure there they stayed slaver free.
Someone told me gnomes are the jackasses of D&D, they live every day as their last even with the fact they can live longer than most races, they are chaotic in a nutshell
Anyone can learn to live and love. Understanding how genetics work among species and how a world is filled with taboos and norms creates a lot of headaches. However, some moments drive players, such as a human learning magic to romance a fire elemental without being killed by proximity.
Or a certain general learning gravity magic so he can still ride his tiny horse...
Mine is quite simple. Alignment and race are NOT mutually exclusive. Just because someone is an Orc. Goblin, Ogre, Red Dragon etc does not automatically make them evil. And vice versa just because someone is an Aasimar, Elf, Dwarf, Forest Nymph etc does not automatically make them good either. Every smart race has an equal capacity for being good, evil, or just not giving as far as they can toss something that's heavy to them. So yes, have a continent where evil won in the past and all of the societies generally skew towards some form of evil. Just don't make them exclusively the home of "traditionally bad guy races" and evil Humans. And same goes for your generally good continents and countries as well. Don't fill them exclusively with "traditionally good guy races" and good Humans. It's boring, it robs the game world of depth, and worst of all it teaches your players to limit their expectations to "Good guy race, trust them implicitly, bad guy race, kill them at first chance". You know, instead of actually having them engage in your game world and with your NPCs to sus out if they're actually helping you because they're good or if they're helping you because they want something in return, something that the players aren't going to like having to do but will be honour bound to do anyway.
The lore of species in D&D CAN, and SHOULD be separate from their identity. Lore is dependent on setting, identity is what makes each species unique. Example: Elves having a connection to nature is part of the identity, while their coming from the Feywild, or being byproducts of a battle between Corellon and Grumsch is lore.
Alignment tends to get tied to lore more than identity. This means, as you were saying, that every species/race has the capacity for either good or evil. It ultimately comes down to the lore that one establishes for their world. It is why I have complained about connections, and some of them continuing, between Gods and species (looking at you Lloth, and your hold on the Drow).
For a DM that wants to change the LORE of a species, they will be working to stay ahead of player expectations. Example: Shifting Drow origins away from Lloth (as well as Corellon) and the Underdark, to the Feywild (research Thelania, Unseelie Court Queen of Dusk and Shadows) to be inline with the other sub-races/species of Elves would require a DM to establish that lore ahead of players creating characters. At the very least communicating a plan for different origins, lest a player put in work to create a character and backstory based on PHB lore.
Creating a deep and immersive world, with wonderful complexity of people and places, will require a worldbuilder to develop the lore of those elements. From there, details on culture and alignment will start to fall into place. No one should feel like they have to copy/paste from previous editions, or campaign settings (i.e. official worlds).
My reasoning is many of the "evil" races either products of being entranced by an evil god (which doesn't affect those that can break away but does affect the majority) like goblinoids or just their dominant cultures are evil.
Best advice for anyone who is excessively stereotyping: Play your character. Do NOT let your character play you.
Only problem with darkvision is that nobody read lore/rules.
In dark you use see in dim light and in blurry monochrome in most cases (see some night vision googles)
or termovision if they are underdark natives.
You need light source to see normally even with dark vision(exception is devil sight, you see even worse with light).
This force you to use light in all somewhat complex task like reading, searching, crafting etc. without penalty.
Not to mention identifying what you fight, 3m burly shadow can be many thing.
"I dont want cute! I want realistic."
In a setting that is, by its very foundation, unrealistic. Like, i get what he was trying to say, but thay was worded so poorly.
But i do agree, that minotaur artwork is pretty bad
i believe there is a distinction between realistic for our world, and realistic for the setting.
Stop that. Do not feed fuel to the fire of 'magic exists so it's not realistic'. It's nonsense.
@@swapertxkingI hear ya, but what *isn’t* realistic for D&D at this point? It’s all possible technically. There’s some goofy-ahh Minotaurs wandering around because why the eff not? Is there a lore-specific reason all Minotaurs *have* to be ugly?
@@swapertxkingwhat you mean is logical consistency for successful suspension of disbelief. Wildest magic can exist as long as it follows rules.
My racial hot take is that demons and devils are way too varied to have tieflings as just "Red skin with horns and tails" Give them spines, wings, sharp claws, disgusting features such as semi digitigrade legs or hunched over backs! They should look like a fiend and that's what adds to their "foul blooded" nature! Same thing for aasimar! Whenever I make a tiefling, I always try to base it off of a particular devil and work that into its design
Not really a hot take because that's how tieflings are described in the books- with various colors and various features depending on the lineage. Players are just stuck on the stereotypical archetype of red with horns
The problem is people who want that aren't the ones who pick tieflings. If you enforced that, the people who DO pick tieflings would probably just switch to a different race.
Congrats, you justified the tiefling racial traits table from the 2e Planewalker's Handbook.
@@uberculexGood! They all seem to just want hot lgbtq+ race a way, and Changelings are right there, they can literally change every part of their appearance on a whim, Tieflings have so much more potential than what they kept getting seen as.
Halflings and Gnomes are just, visually, really similar, and a lot of newcomers to DnD and TTRPGs struggle to tell the difference.
That’s why, going forward, I wanna make halflings into Mice People. Think An American Tale, or Stuart Little. Like 2ft-3ft tall, Halfling luck, naturally stealthy, all the Halfling traits and whatnot.. but they’re now just more distinct now
I've been toying with a similar idea except instead of being full mice people they're still mostly humanoid but have rodent-like ears and lower legs/feet, and possibly vestigial tails.
Gnomes are to Halflings like Elves are to Humans, really. They're treated like basically weirdling variants of the other by most people, but when I play a halfling, I *want* to play into the perils of being smaller, generally weaker, with the big scary world where my wit and deftness carry me through, and I DON'T have the benefit of living more than 70 years, assuming nothing kills me. I like most the settings where being the little one means I'm either underestimated, viewed with suspicion due to propensity for being sneaky, or treated as in need of protection.
Really, it's more that people rarely, if ever, actually explore the consequences and meaning of there being long lived and short lived species. I mean, how often does it come up that the elf who's been here for 400 years would get the opportunity to actually *show that* at the table? And yet we get the ancient human of a mere 90 years giving a lecture to the nearly eldritchly old elf who's basically an adventurer because that's what they're doing with their midlife crisis.
I approve more anthros :3
I played an original Raccoon Person race years ago and used the Lightfoot Halfling statline for em.
Three hot takes:
1) Your race/class combination does not make you special. In fact quite the opposite. More often than not, being a race that isn’t normal for the setting is all you care about, and you don’t care about backstory. That human that gives me a story about how they came from a poor former noble family out to reclaim their nobility? That character is interesting.
2) not every class should have darkvision. In my games, I split races between types: infravision and ultravision. Infravision lets you see the heat from different surfaces and is possessed by those that normally live underground. Ultra vision lets you see easier in twilight. Edit: If your race mostly lives in the light (e.g. humans, elves, halflings, forest gnomes), you get neither.
3) All dwarves have beards. All of them. Part of the mating process for dwarves is using spying and subtle questions to figure out what type of relationship you have. Some female dwarves braid their hair, wear makeup, dresses, and hair bows, but would never shave their beards.there’s being openly female, and then there’s just not being a dwarf (thank you Terry Pratchett)
And I don't care what anyone says, Sazza from BG3 should have been a Romance option.
I hold the opposite opinion on the Shadar-kai, I liked it better when they were humans who feared death and made a pact with the Raven Queen for immortality. Say what you want about 4th ed, but both the Raven Queen and the Shadar-kai were 1000× more interesting then.
Personally, I don't like the stereotypes that everyone expect when someone is playing certain races. And would rather give them unique twists.
For orcs, instead of just being pure brutes, they're also quite intelligent and poetic. Leading to a Orc becoming a bard who moves many to tears with his songs.
While elves would have talent with magic and look down on other races massive egos, many would respect the other races and wouldn't use their magical talent in favor of what they see as their passion. Of course, it really depends on where they lives. Since a city populated purely by elves would have majority of the people there look down on other races.
Dwarves, while they are skilled blacksmiths, brewers and miners. They would also be great geologist due to their knowledge and experience with the earth. Allowing them to get an understanding of geomancy/earth magic.
The thing is both player (and character ovbiously) and npcs should expect the orc to behave like any orc. To break the rules first you must know them
That's why the reveal of The Gourmet's identity in Skyrim worked so well.
No one would expect the true race of a world renowned chef to be what they are.
Orcs being poetic is literally Tolkein. The movies and media lost that in translation. Everyone was singing and saying poetry in LotR.
Love the immediate shift from the comment talking about all the value in the wide range of races to the comment talking about how there are too many races.
Personally, I agree with the first comment. D&D is such a fantastical world that is meant to facilitate player creativity and fun. Having more variety in what you can make your character can contrbute to that fun. I genuinely find human/human adjacent races to be a bit boring. Humans, dwarves, gnomes, elves, halflings, half-elves etc. Obviously I have some characters that are these races and the race itself does not an interesting character make, but still, I find it hard to not be drawn to the more outlandish, monstrous, or animalistic races. They provide more visual, thematic, and flavor interest to a character a lot of the time. And then you have the middle range of races, human-esc with strong differences. Genasi, half-orcs, firbolgs, tieflings, triton, aasimar, etc. In the middle range of interest for me.
Also, I don't care if having a furry race for every animal is lazy, I still find its exclusions confusing. If we can have characters based on cats, lions, hippos, elephants, eagles, crows, owls, lizards, rabbits, turtles, fish, bulls, hyenas, bugs, snakes, monkeys, and even goddamn dragons, why then don't we have dogs, bears, boars, rodents, or anything else like that? If you're gonna have that subset of races exist, you may as well commit and go all the way.
Also, Dragonborn should have tails. Lore-buffs, don't at me.
I alsways saw dragon having tails. Argonian from TES comes to mind first to me. I grew up with that series.
@@guzonjaguzic9742 I view Argonians more akin to Lizardfolk rather than Dragonborn, but I also know next to nothing about those games' lore. Either way, agreed on the tails thing.
@@matthewscorner2990 well, in lore they are similar to lizardfolk in lifestyle but more like dragonborn in society. Lizardfolk in lore dont have emotion as others do and view the world completely different. Everything is food and survival is the point of life for them apparently. I dont know any other race that is described as such. So they enique and hard to roleplay somebody like that xD
@@guzonjaguzic9742 Fair, I forgot Argonians don't have that distinction.
I actually have a Lizardfolk meant to specifically contradict that bit of lore. He's able to feel proper emotions, but doesn't really realize it, comprehend it, or know how to deal with it. He seems relatively normal on the surface as he's very reclusive and objective, so that passes off as unfeeling. But I would love to play him a good roleplay party that can really explore that side of him.
@@matthewscorner2990 nice, i hope you get your chance to play it. Sounds like a interesting concept but i dont know if i could pull it of.
I can't relate to D&D's humans because I do have darkvision. I have autism and the fact that humans in D&D can't see in moonlight means I'm not normal to the.
The traits associated with changelings in mythology closely line up with what is recognised nowadays as symptoms of autism.
So yeah, being autistic would in some parts of history mean that you wouldn't actually be seen as human.
As someone with blue eyes, I can't relate either. There have been studies that noted how well people with light eyes can see in low light. It's been a part of my life so long it's become "normal" for me.
Autism has nothing to do with your eyesight. if you have good night vision it has nothing to do with autism.
In my homebrew i'd rule for lore that ALL weird little guys (dwarves, Gnomes, haflings and goblins) are actually pretty closley relsted biologically...
Kobolds?
The whole "Exotic species draws attention" thing?
Yeah, my Paladin's party has that. We have currently: A Tiefling Wizard, a Half-Elf Wizard, a Firbolg Druid, a Loxodon Barbarian, and finally my Naga Paladin.
Only my Paladin is an OG character from the start of the campaign, and I'm the only OG player in the group.
As for the exoticness... My character's introduction was LITERALLY him arriving in a town and getting picked up by the Town Guard with a request to come with them, because he was making people uncomfortable. And then joining the Adventurer's Guild because membership would help people be less immediately wary of him.
To the point where he's mostly grown out of the learned habit of holding up said membership token whenever he meets someone. Combined with the fact that he's more well-known around the continent as a good person, honestly.
But, he knows the town guard of ANY city he visits will still be keeping an eye on him. Which is why HE is the party treasurer. Because with the town guard keeping an eye on him, anybody trying to rob him is just BEGGING to get arrested. If they don't get fucked up by him and/or the rest of the party first.
You do need to be a half orc to be a player. Orc’s a monster. A level 1 orc would have the stats of a level 4 human.
Making them a half orc makes their biology work right for game mechanics
For Dragonborn, don't give them Darkvision. Too overused. Give them Blindsight.
Can’t some reptiles sense by licking their air or something? Could do something like that.
Im sorry but the last one rubs me the wrong way. Orcs can be both. A player can be an ork and heroic and orcs can be brutish savages. Its fine to have exceptions. Not every race needs to be white washes into perfect civilized cultures. Its okay to have savage brutish races like orcs and goblins who are generally antagonists due to nature. Its also fine to have them be playable with exceptions to this rule. All scrubbing does is remove what made them special and make them another slightly different human race like elves tend to be.
Its also fine to not have certain races available like that one guy tried to argue. They can still exist but be rare and unique beings seldom seen meaning you dont want them as player characters. Or heck maybe you don't want to have to incorporate them in your world. Not every game has to be all inclusive of every race and want. Some dms want to keep characters simple and familiar. Some want to run a more classic tolkien fantasy. Dnd is meant to be a flexible ttrpg system first and foremost. That means for both players and DMs.
I believe those races are very interesting, but don't complain if players or npcs don't expect the one orc in a million that happens to be good... To be good.
Edit: Unless you want a world that works like that and you can talk it with your GM. Everything can be talked, some things must be talked :/
Personally, only allow one tiefling party. tiefling Suppose to be super rare, and it seems like most parties Wanna have a 2 or 3.
Just because some are rare doesn't mean that chance isn't in their favor.
But that depends on the DM, and while yes, they are very rare, the world can accomodate to their ends and have those odds, but again, it's up to the dm
Rare doesn't mean so scarce that it's an event that two of them are seen at the same table at the in - that's Frieren's elves levels of endangered species. If you want a "only one in the party" really look into the setting you're playing in, and take note of the geography. Tieflings *just happen* because someone got nasty with a devil, or their parent was a warlock, or a devil cursed a guy 13 generations ago, or what ever.
If Tieflings are so rare that you will hardly see more than 1 of them in your LIFE, then there shouldn't be nearly as much suspicion and distrust about them, simply because they're that unknown to the average joe - they should only be getting the "Fear of the Unknown" sorts of biases and suspicions, rather than the "Devilspawn walked into town thinking they could pull the wool over our eyes by asking if we could sell them food and water" that they do get.
Needs to be common enough that they're recognizable even out in the boonies where someone might go most to their entire lives without actually meeting one, while in a particularly large city, there might be enough of them that not even they know the count of how many of them there are unless they looked into the local census; only that they're a few dozen to a couple hundred at the upper end, in a city numbering the high hundreds to high thousands.
I dont play them ever I'm a human and half-elf enjoyer.
Tieflings are considered a common race according to the book they came in, so no, they aren’t super rare.
*DAMN GOOBLERS, STINKIN UP DA PLACE!*
-Borgus
PANR has tuned back in.
What the fuck is pan r
Sea Elves are just worse Tritons....
I did like a moment in Legends of Avantris when a character got briefly transformed into a Mammon tiefling, and the player played him as something between a Jersey used car salesman and a Ferengi.
thats amazing lol.
I play a Half Orc in a game that I WANTED the discrimination so he could overcome it, but every campaign I am in treats every race the same! I even had my parents be lawfully married, as my father was captured by a tribe, with his mom who was a captive but a member of an enemy tribe, helping him escape in exchange for his also helping her escape. But noooooooo... All races have to be inclusive.... No more plot drama...
I like Shadowrun in that regard bc technically all races are equal but there's still a ton of race tension between conservative humans and metahumans
That sounds like something you should discuss with your DM. If you want your character to overcome prejudice, make sure the DM is aware that you're ok with NPCs acting prejudiced against them
I see racism from player characters a lot in my games, and its a good thing! fictional racism helps tell a good story.
People who cant distinguish reality from fiction should never come within a trillion miles of D&D
Yeah, as I DM I find those ideas interesting, so I usually have some sort of "racism" that I will remove if a player or players are uncomfortable with it
Rakasta tried to cover too many bases by including every cat, big and small, in a single species. A lot of cats have pretty different physicality like tigers being absurdly good at jumping for how huge they are or how, as represented by the more current tabaxi, cheetahs aren't very good at climbing. It'd be more interesting if the Mystara setting included leonin, tabaxi, and possibly a new tiger or puma race and had the rakasta really lean into more domestic cat tropes to distinguish them. Give them an ability that gives them proficiency in acrobatics and advantage on checks made to maintain balance. Too bad it'll never happen because Mystara likely isn't coming back.
Speaking of orcs not needing to be subhuman, I like how one anime did it, "I became an adventurer at 30." One of the characters is an Orc named Broughston. He was raised around regular orcs who were subhuman brutes, but Broughston was blessed with high intelligence and incredible strength. As far as I'm aware, no human lineage, just got incredibly lucky.
Video idea:
What was a “we’re just gonna pretend that didn’t happen” moment in one of your campaigns?
2:20 I'm living this one. I'm playing a kobold in the Humblewood setting. A Primal Soul Kobold. She claims she's a Tilia orphan (a kind of geckofolk from another continent) who was raised by a hermit wizard.
I don't agree that tieflings should be a lineage. Tieflings are the result of HUMANS having relations with fiends. Elves have Fey'ri, orcs have tanarukk, haflings had wisplings and dwarves had maeluth. If anything, shadar-kai and tieflings should become human sub-races
I think a tiefling should be possible to be born to 2 human parents like an Aasimar. Tieflings are basically the anti-aasimar so it makes sense for them to work in a similar way.
It makes more sense for Dragonborn to be the dragon equivalent of Tieflings than to be a whole seperate race.
3.5 had them as a template for those you whole heatedly served bahamut. It was pretty cool.
I like both ideas honestly...
@@Uhhhhhhhhhhh6honestly, I like both as well. I love the Abeir Dragonborn, but I admit the other former human dragonborn sound pretty cool ngl. In the lore, Im pretty sure there are both able to coexist
If furry races are unrealistic, so are humans. They're just anthro apes. Also, I like the term ancestry over races.
I am so stealing that lol. Humans are just anthro apes!
Wah
Not a race hot take, but I will stand my ground on Oath based Paladins being more real paladins than the old god based ones. I want to play a Paladin not a more fighty cleric.
Agreed.
I also agree that half humans are WAY too common. Humans just won't interbreed with other races that often, and the likely hood of having any offspring at all is low, let alone having fertile offspring.
My main issue with all the DnD race stuff has always been that the lore for them should be suggestive, and setting dependent. In the PHB they should suggest multiple different ways how they could fit into a setting, not reduce them to a single type of person. That way, DMs and players can determine the norms and exceptions for their worlds and generate better stories. This game is supposed to be creative, so use everything as a tool to create and change whatever you don't like.
"This author wrote this race to be like this so that's how they should be!" Drives me up the FUCKING WALL! Just because orcs in LOTR are all brutal monsters doesn't mean I have to have them be so in my game. If I want them to be pacifist island dwellers, you can't fucking stop me if I'm behind DM screen. If I want Halflings to be the predominant race due to them grabbing soft by the shorthairs and creating a society where they are top dog, why not? All respect to the authors who had established the tropes of fantasy, but it's a game where dragon people shoot fire out their fucking faces, we don't have to be entirely realistic.
i dont like how a lot of people handle Goliaths in 5e. they’re giant-kin, roving bands of tight-knit tribes with a complex society based on honor and capability. to a goliath, the thought of being unable to surpass one’s own goals is worse than death. they’re staunch sense or honor is nigh-unbreakable, if a goliath were to disarm someone in combat, they would sooner cast aside their own weapons and risk dying than have an unfair fight. i hate it when they’re depicted as oafs or idiots, goliaths take after their giant ancestors quite closely. also, the average goliath is 7-8 feet tall and weighs 300 lbs, make these motherfuckers large creatures.
9:12 This is why I love the Unexpectables Aasimars because they look like. Like Brork Bronze fang, an Aasimar that came from an ork tribe. Hammergnar, a half dwarf half elf aasimar that has to deal with the conflicting feelings of drinking hard liquor some days and wines on others
Most of these are just people who don't like fun
Or are just outright dumb. Case in point, the 'too many furry races' guy that claims that a race for every anthropomorphic animal is lazy. How the fuck is having a race for every one of those 'lazy'!?
I think having some resistance is good. Having access to everything just makes everything more boring. Being forced to playing only a certain list of races either big or small forces you to become more creative.
Just think aboit some of the best movies ever. Majority of them did not have all the money in the world to do whatever they want. Meabwhile nearly every movie with literal hundreds of millions of dollars to make the movie, nearly all of them are shit and not even worth watching. Restricting races is better than letting all 100+ races being available.
@E2J25 There's a big difference between "I like to restrict these things at my table" and "these things shouldn't be in the game at all." Some people like garbage, and that's okay.
On races not being equal, man, hard agree. Kobolds became my favorite race in 3.5 precisely BECAUSE of their terrible stat line contrasting against their racial pride and animosity for almost all other creatures. A spiteful little ball of scales that seethes with righteous indignation at a world that dismisses them as 'vermin', but have the deepest connection to magic next to dragons themselves, an industrious spirit that would make humans and dwarves blush in comparison, and ingenious trap, crossbow, and alchemical technology that actually SURPASSES human civilization in some areas. Nothing felt more satisfying than taking my little murder lizard rogue with -4 to strength and cutting down foes many times his size thanks to his cunning and ingenuity.
Now, however, there's absolutely no penalty that makes the kobolds the 'underdog' to the world. They're just another race as PCs. While, at the SAME TIME the race has gotten flanderized to the point of being slapstick comedy! The kobold canon, three kobolds in a trench coat, their depiction in BG3 as barely speaking common comedic relief or drunkards. It's a sad state of affairs to their depiction in Races of the Dragon as a proud and advanced race despite their tribal social structure, with actually a pretty legitimate grievance against gnomes to justify their eternal race war.
I have no issue with "furry" or anthropomorphic races. I do have the issue of having races appealing to the eye and be cutesy and sexy.
The funny thing is, with all of the fur suits I've seen that cost thousands of dollars to make. I think a lot of public furies would agree with you! (buh duh, tss)
How dare someone look good!
@@zeehero7280My personal issue is when EVERYONE looks really good. Like if you’re super attractive, how is being an adventurer you’re only real source of income in most D&D settings?
3:27 that's pure FACTS. As someone who didn't start roleplaying in D&D when I saw everything that isn't a full on human gets darkvision I was quite confused... I still don't know whats the point on that
Edit: And I just learnt that the dragonborn, a race that should absolutely have dark vision doesn't have it... What?
Yuan-Ti can be more than cobras and vipers. Where’s our hognose Yuan-Ti characters??
0:15 Daggerford? Come on now, that's clearly Daggerfall. I know thine tricks thoust cannot decive me
16:12 in my setting a population orcs have been at war with the human led empire for centuries. Massive invasions have formed the politics and militaristic nature of the empire. But for 100 year there was relative peace aside from a few smaller warbands every now and then. No "greentides".
Why? Because the orcs are not stupid but were heavily dogmatisedby Gruumsh. War, plunder and destruction was their culture due to an effective theocratic leadership and might makes right mentality. But now the veil between the gods and mortals grows thicker. Divine influence grows weaker. More orcs are wondering if live always has to be about strife and violence. So more and more orc chieftains want to create an orc civilisation that rebels against Gruumsh's revenge and hate. So for the past 100 years, orcs have been busy in a civil war over religious zealotry.
While on the other side of zhe planet, in a deadly desert, a different kind of orc exists. A type of orc that grew strong amidst a place only the strongest creature survived. There are not many of these desert orcs. But only a handful of them are enough to destroy even fortified city. But they are more myths among the people near the desert.
I also dislike 'cute goblins'
...and avoiding tiefling racism (or speciesism in general)
...and when ppl don't actually roleplay any of their species' traits and just play them as humans
... but I LOVE halflings, and that person can shush lol
I know right? I don't know why was he so mad about halflings lol
Actually the Tiefling racism thing is tied to how mine became a death domain cleric working for the Collector of Souls
@@darioschottlender Maybe a halfling stole some of his jewlery one time and threw it into a volcano.
Dealing with the fantasy racism was supposed to be one of the appeals and challenges of playing a Tiefling.
The fact that 11:06 is considered a "hot take" probably says more about the community that 5e / WotC has cultivated than anything. Further, the fact that it even needs to be said is more concerning than any of the "hot takes" in the video...
My hot take is that all racial stat modifiers should be considers recommendations and restrictions. No stat block should hold players back from writing a compelling character
Every group has people that are wicked smart or dumb as bricks in spite of their background. Someone from a "strong" race could have a partial physical disability that lead to them being patient and wise. Some characters maybe spent more time trying to be funny and charming instead of honing their race's natural dexterity
Required preset racial stat modifiers are dumb
But this is what rolled stats or pointbuy is for.
@@zeehero7280Those don't allow for the savants and Olympic level performers that are naturally in every population
Just think of how many people have compromised on character creation, character development, and character concepts over the years/decades to get that extra +2 to a stat
Edit: Picture Peter Dinklage vs Eddie Hall. Same species/race but you would never say they come with the same natural modifiers. Creatures and genetics just have too much variety to say, "All creatures of this type have to be good at this thing"
If minmaxing is holding you back from running a compelling character, that’s literally a you problem. Part of the role-play can be the unoptimized build. I hate having low Constitution but my main character has a minus to the constitution, you play into it. He’s weak and he needs protection, creates an interesting dynamic.
If you let the numbers run things, you’re not a role player, and that’s fine but don’t pretend it’s the game holding you back. You were always going to Buckle for the optimal choice.
For "unpopular hot takes," most of these takes aren't that unpopular.
Yeah, and several of them were just “me hate new stuff”.
Humans are the best. Yes, even standard humans. Roleplay, versatility, relatability, no darkvision to trivialize the entire darkness mechanic, no ability-based special features that feel wasted if not used or conflict/overlap with class features. I seriously just want my characters to be real imaginary people dealing with real imaginary problems.
" no darkvision to trivialize the entire darkness mechanic" Just cast a light spell. Congrats, darkness trivialized.
Hardly. Now the whole party is illuminated and ripe for ambush while everything more than 40ft out remains obscured. Moreover the DM can now describe how various woodland creatures or creepy crawlies seem to be constantly darting away from the edge of the light, or shadows cast by the party's torches moving in strange ways.
Hot Takes about Goliaths:
Goliaths should not be that tall. What is the advantage of being 8 feet tall while living high on the mountain peaks? There isnt much food at a height of 6km and all of it has to sustain 2,50 metres tall,muscular Giants everyday. And not even one of them,we are talking about a whole group. They would starve to death up there. Also they are often too heavy and/or too tall to be efficiant climbers. Noone can tell me that a fuckin Ice bear would be good as a climber. Why not make it so that they live in the mountains in general? They could hunt in the valleys and in the mountains then and be somewhat smaller,like maaaybe 2m tops.
This brings me to my second point: They should absolutely have a climbing speed: They live in the fucking mountain peaks. Even Lizardfolk get a climbing speed(for whatever fuckin reason) but not the one race who actually needs it to survive?
And how come that they are so isolated? Arent there like atleast two other races nearby who also live in the Mountains? Like Dwarfs and Gnomes. Granted they could live there,atleast in the caves,but still,a portion of them would still inhabit the mountains and have some relationship to them,good or bad. And wouldnt those groups not tell anyone else? Would they not write it down atleast?
but then why call them Goliaths?
@@zeehero7280 I don't know,i didnt pick that name. I wouldve picked small,goatlike people or something for mountaintops.
I just think that they live in the wrong Environment.
Maybe in the Hills, or on Grassland or near the Coast would be better.
Or have them live in the colder regions up north where it would make somewhat more sense for them to be big.
They could still be isolated,but simply less. Maybe more because of their nature regarding outsiders. They could just want to be left alone.
Thank you for your Feedback btw,i appreciate it.
It's based on Norse legend. You're losing the plot.
@@uberculex That might very well be. But i(and probably many others) dont know this myth and get confused when there are Giants in the mountains. Also someone couldve placed everything up there,even newly created stuff. I for one would put other Folklore creatures like the Krakonoš,Dwarfen Kings,Mountain spirits,Trolls,Mountain Devils and all kinds of Folklore from Medieval Europe. A much better choice in my opinion than Giants. Fuck im dumb. Its all just a matter of taste.
as a furry, i get it. but at the same time:
fuck being simply 'former human' or 'once was a leaf loving knife eared elf', i want to play an anthro dragon that isn't based on some other race or species, as i already spend my entire actual life being a boring ass human. it's why i like more modern takes on Dragonborn and (as far as i know with my normie DnD groups) nobody has questioned the big armorclad artificer knight when i bring him to the party.
also. the idea for We Be Goblins is cool and all but it wears itself thin VERY FAST. Variety is the spice of life and what drives the inter-party drama.
EDIT: also fuck elves. not in the horny way like one of my DMs, but like. they're just pointy eared humans with longer lifespans who treehug in most cases, and the more interesting ones are edgy as fuck drow.
easy way around darkvision: with dark vision, you can only see shades, not colors.
good luck putting the green key into the green lock, if you can't see the color.
suddenly, the guy who brought a torch has an advantage.
I don't know if the issue for it Is balance, it's just weird that everything that isn't a human (beside the dragonborn who should absolutely have it apparently) have dark vision. I don't know why
Why do so many people insist on trying to counter a mid feature? If I’m expected to bring a torch everywhere despite being able to see in the dark because of all the colour-based locks and puzzles, what’s the point of even having the feature?
Besides, you can just use fog.
My hot take: Racial Weapons and Armor makes no sense, not talking about Natural Weapons or Armor. Always bugs me that Dwarfs get a whole bunch of weapons and armors just by being a Dwarf. The world and character background don't have any impact on that either. You could be a Dwarf raised entirely by Giants never even seeing another Dwarf but are really good with an Axe for no reason other than genetics?. I could possibly see Elves having temporary ones because their like reliving a past life or such but even that is a little bit of a stretch.
Tieflings are one reason I refuse to play 5E. So tired of pizza cutters.
What makes halflings even WORSE, is that Gary gigax didn't want to add them, he HATED Hobbits, but was bombarded with letters about how Hobbits needed to be in dnd at the time, so he did, and made them really bad at the time.
People who can't come up with an interesting character and instead think they can pick an interesting race to make up for it, need some help adjusting to roleplay.
Additionally, Freakshow Parties are a little, idk, annoying? Not really the right word but it rubs me weird when my party is like a circus sideshow, you got a tortle, harrengan, tiefling, fire genasi, kenku, and something that passes for humanoid (I'm sure most of those races are considered humanoid but they definitely shouldn't count) and it's like, no shot we're ever going to be able to pull a discrete job guys.
My D&D species hot take: humans are better villain characters. Humans in D&D - to me - don't seem much different from humans in real life, but they're often written as a noble people how can do anything and despite being one of the youngest, most short-lived species in D&D are treated as some of the most clever and intelligent people in existence. Why? I genuinely don't see it. Elves live longer and have closer ties to magic. Gnomes are craftier. Dwarves have greater connections to the earth and stone. But humans? There's nothing distinct about them outside of that lack of distinctness. Wouldn't that fill the average human with so much jealousy? So much anger that they'd try to take those special traits from other species to use for their own ends?
Because of adaptability maybe.
Humans adapt to their enviroment and thus that might come the part of them being the apex of the survival in the world
But then again. Humans can be both heroes and villains, it just depends on how to make them
In my campaign humans act as mediators between elves and dwarves since the two societies don't see eye to eye, which gives humans a nice trade profit. It's not that evil humans don't exist, but they tend to live away from civilization or otherwise try to hide their activities.
Probably to do with the fact that they are so "short" lived, it makes what they can accomplish in such a comparatively short amount of time seem more impressive. They don't have the luxury of centuries to be able to figure things out, they need it done in decades.
Elves have centuries to learn and master magic. Humans have one, so a human becoming a master mage, even if it means they're in their 90's by the time they reach that level, well hot damn, they did in 85 years what it might take an elf 500 to do.
Most races are really specific. They kinda fill in a niche. Goliaths live on top of the mountains and you will probably never find one anywhere else. Aaracokra live in the treetops,Dwarfs mostly in Caves or in the mountains(same for Gnomes),and most of them specify in a certain thing,so while Dwarfes might be excellent smiths, they could be terrible sailors,swimmers or cartographers(because why would they if they call the mountains their home).
Humans on the other hand are like natures multitool. They can live everywhere,they are probably far more numerous than most of the long living races and they can basically do everything that all the others can. They are more versatile and adaptable.
Also you could just play them as being very innovative,ambitious and competitive because they are weaker than the rest. Goblins basically do the same,what they lack in size or strength,they make up for by using traps. Or Humans could be seen as really brave when they are able to compete with others in their field. Wow you still pick a fight with them,even though they outclass you in strength? Thats brave. And that would make them good tacticians.
Average humans are usually stereotyped in-game to be greedy opportunistic pricks.
Never played dnd but I love these stories 💯
Well, since no one else has made this take,
I suppose I'll be the one to burn at the stake.
I like the inclusion of negative traits for races.
Honestly, good take.
Different races and species would have different natural aptitudes on a wider level before personal interest and skill is involved, and leaning into or working around them would make for good roleplay scenarios.
Orcs are strong, but clumsy and a bit stupid for the most part, lending them to be good barbarians and fighters, but they really have to work at being mages or rogues. A smart orc could either be a good tactical fighter, or really push to be a powerful mage through application and study.
Elves are wise, smart, dexterous, and charismatic, owing to their longevity, but are frail and weak due to their reliance on healing spells agility. A particularly old elf could be a bit of a racist bastard depending on the background of world, maybe a young elf has taken an interest in smithing after seeing a smith of another race demonstrate the more physical art and starts building themselves up through more martial practices to be strong enough to work the forge.
Typical stuff like that.
I can see something like a Tiefling allowing for more freedom in stat placement depending on the demon/devil whose lineage they are a part of, but they have a natural substantial charisma hit due to their demonic visage.
etc.
etc.
the darkvision thing is easy to overcome you start making puzzles that are color based. Remember with only 1 exception (and thats a class with a very specific ability taken) darkvision is black and white only. The Orc thing Allow me to introduce you to Obald Many Arrows. The chosen of Gruumsh. Why because he was exactly the opposite of what the person complaining about orcs claimed.
just hope your players aren't colorblind, hard to imagine what "red" is if you've never seen it!
@@zeehero7280 that and if people would just read what the ability does its not nearly as powerful as people make out. Because you need to remember what effects dim light gives
@@tazman2253So you admit the feature isn’t that good, but you also want to go out of your way to counter it? Why?
@@MayHugger just pointing out how easy it is to overcome for Dms that get tired of everyone having dark vision and refuse to read up on what the ability actually does
I agree with the goblin thing and honestly extend it to the kobolds as well. Like they shouldn’t be supermodel attractive but they can look appealing to someone like in the way some people find lizards bugs etc as cute but others scream in horror when they see them. Like I don’t mind if they look appealing enough that someone wanting to well bed one is believeable but I rather not be staring at like the message said a green or red halfling
I prefer a mix of both.
If humans can come in all forms of complexions, so can everyone else.
@@mmangalisomasinga432 not wrong there I just wish the extremes especially the smut extreme wasnt as popular
@@SuperGamefreak18 The majority of people will always want their characters to be attractive. That's it.
Halflings have a serious lack of identity as a lineage, that's why I love playing mine as playful little pranksters.
I think i might actually remove orcs and halflings from old school d&d when i run it, for basically the same reason that was explained here about halflings being pointless.
I think i want to run more of a fairy tale inspired game, instead of a traditional d&d style one anyway. So that would mean most of the creatures (playable or not) simply exist. And there's plenty to draw from in actual folklore without needing additional races pulled specifically from one guy's books.
Dragonborn SHOULD have darkvision, as well as one free feat for their racial feats (wings should have left UA with a 30ft fly speed rather than a 20ft, and then there are fear and hide. you should get 1 of these at level 1 if you play dragonborn for free)
Fizban's dragonborn should be the default in EVERY 5e campaign and should get the "gift of the X dragon" feat for free at a high level (thinking 17, but that might be too high. but it's a free feat)
with X=whatever dragonborn type you picked (metallic dragonborn (gold, bronze, silver etc) get gift of the metallic dragon for example)
That #dnd is doing the job of Atlas in stopping this man from getting cancelled.
Honestly if you really want to, you can just go along and do these things anyway, it's roleplay nothing is stopping you from having a tiefling made by a demon pact, a heroic orc, darkvision dragonborn, firbolgs of a different design, ugly looking races, or just not using a halfling - though a DM may argue with it if it doesn't coincide with the worldbuilding of the setting - but the whole 'just add it to the core rules so we don't have to discuss it with the DM' dispute just feels a tad lazy, essentially wanting to role reverse with people following the core rules that are disagreed with. Honestly players should talk to the DM about character creation too, it helps them find ways to tailor adventures to the group and the individual.
Btw it's 'free ren', really good anime would recommend but it is more like a gentle stroll than a high action anime
"You can't be racist against elves because they're not people."
- Pelinal Whitestrake, probably
The concept of evil races shouldn't be abandoned. It wasn't so bad when orcs and goblins were evil by default. Humans are also an example of an evil race. You need only read a history book to see what I mean.
Why are there no canine races in base D&D? And no, werewolves do not count: that's an additive much like vampirism. We have Tabaxi, Leonin and Harengon. I have to go to homebrew for something like Lupin, and the campaign setting like Dark Sun for Khenra. They love their cats (cats and bunnies are cute), but we need canines too. If anything, in Japan, Kobolds are canines and not dragon blood lizards.
None of the post Tasha's custom lineage rules races, or the stuff in 2024 PHB are worthwhile.
If you can't convert them back out of a lineage style racial option, they're just a human wearing body paint. In a way that a green humanoid like an orc never was.
Lineages and the new stuff actually homogenizes the game. It kills all the plurality.
In a game about being or becoming or doing something great and special, they have actively taken steps to make everyone the same. And I hate it.
Ripper, man I love your videos, but Frieren is not pronounce "fry-er-ren", it's "Free-ren" (as in Kylo "ren"), that just hurt to hear 😭
I absolutely hate what was done to half-orcs from 3e onwards, and I'm still bitter about it.
I find it funny that despite human's still being the most popular race to play as, they're the most vocal for thinking that non-human races are getting too popular.
fr, they always act like they’re so unique and outlandish for literally picking the default popular option. Like good for you bro for liking them, but you’re not special for it.
I don't get why dragonborns can't have wings...
At this point dragonborns have various forms of breath weapons, resistances and while not official lore, commonly are depicted with tails. We have many races that can fly and others with unique movement types.
If I could add flight to a dragonborn, I would make it so they choose between flight or resistance.
Except that flight is much more universally useful and kinda broken, while a resistance is kinda niche
As a DM, screw giving any more races flight. "I fly over the trap. I fly away from the creature that can only hit with melee." SCREW YOU! AT LEAST SPEND A RESOURCE!
That Critical Role convince a few of my players that Minotaurs are Hot Dudes with Horns. FFS.
The oversimplification of character building made most of the races homogeneous in 5th edition; the removal of racial ability penalties enabling more powergaming, the removal of templates shrunk every race option down to a few subraces each, the removal of monstrous features from inhuman races reducing them to unusual humanoids, the lack of racial feats further dividing the pampered basic core and forgetting anything remotely exotic, condensing the skill list to less than twenty when any given character can pick up almost half them doesn't lend to variety, ect. It's no wonder most of the homebrew is for races & classes, but that's my two cents.
Speaking of orcs... why only human half-orcs? Why not any other combination? Sure, some combinations doesn't make sense due to how they breed, but other? Why no half-orc/half-elf, or half-orc/half-goliath?
Well that's up to you to decide. I believe the lore/flavor text says it's an orc and human mix but there's nothing stopping you from changing it. Flavor is free, just leave the mechanics of your racial features the same of course.
Pathfinder 2e made half-elf and half-orc a Versatile Heritage any Ancestry can take for this very reason.
8:40 Yup, that's exactly how Pathfinder handles them.
My unpopular "D&D" race opinion: Common wisdom says that humans are stupid, boring, and the worst possible choice in all cases. That's false. Humans are great. If you can't come up with an interesting human character, that's a problem with your imagination, not the race.
"No one should be able to tell the sex of a dwarf just by looking." Except a dwarf.
Thats unpopular? The first one I mean. Female Dwarves never have beards. You just rarely see them as most prefer to stay in the mountainhome crafting things for their families and clans.
Back when races had their own starting stat modifiers, humans had a +1 to all stats, making them one of the smartest and wisest races.
You know those damn bla-
8:31 thats how I do it in my campaigns. Half-elf and half orc being the only acceptions to the base race due to the fact they are cannotically already lineages.
Here's my hot take: There is nothing wrong with tieflings as a race. People are just lazy at utilizing them effectively and are unwilling to put the effort in to bring out their full lore, roleplaying and story potential.