I'm not sure I agree about Gnome Cunning. It's against all magic, and afaik a LOT of effects that would require those saving throws would be magical in nature (am I wrong about that? I really don't know). But if gnomes get advantage on the significant majority of mental saves, that's a huge deal. Consider resilient gets +1 and proficiency in a single save for a whole feat (which is worth a lot of points here). I'd argue that until at least level 9 advantage is mechanically stronger than proficiency. Of course Int+Cha come up less often, but the beauty of the gnome is that you can not worry so much about dumping 1 or 2 mental stats as you often must with optimised builds, and you can always get proficiency later through feats once your core build is done. However getting advantage on saving throws is nigh impossible outside of racial and niche subclass features. Given how few other features gnomes get I'm not sure they could get out of D tier anyway. I think Cunning is a better feature than 25 points though (certainly better than Relentless Endurance, which is a 1/day feature)
Yeah I have gnome wizard and halfling cleric in party that has gone from level 5 to 10. I have seen Gnome Cunning be the VIP a lot more then I have seen Lucky save the player's skin. Had a Mind Flayer dungeon, A dungeon with Undead, and cliff full of harpies were Gnome was shrugging every supernatural mental effect throw at it.
Agreed. I like the more systematic approach of a tier list with a concrete breakdown of what different features are worth, but I find myself disagreeing with a number of the values assigned. Particularly Gnome Cunning, walking speeds (they ARE noticeable, but I don’t know about +/- 20 for those) and any inherent spellcasting I personally would score higher (even if you can’t choose your spellcasting attribute, IMO they’re generally more useful than their values would indicate). Still, it’s interesting to go through, and I’m looking forward to see what’s to come!
Even so, Intelligence and Charisma saves are rare but when they *do* happen they are often very save-or-suck. I'd say the gnomes lose their stock value once you get to the races with *functional* Magic Resistance, Satyr and Yaun-Ti Pureblood (not the Monsters of the Multiverse versions that don't even protect against a lot of newer "spell-like actions" monsters).
He only hates on Gnomes as a meme tbf Also Pass Without Trace being bonkers depends on your party, if it’s not full of optimisers it’s less elite, whereas other spells like Web are consistently elite.
I’d like to add that while Lucky is already valuable as it is it can be much much better then anything else on this tier list: patreon supporters often roll that 1 followed by a 20 on their most important rolls!
Yeah, this sounds about right. Thou I am a little surprised the High Elf and Half-elf didn't place better. Kind of gives you an idea of how much power creep there has been over the years.
Early on it was higher value on flexible ASI and flexbile skills, but that's gone away as of tasha. And aye, the more standard innate spellcasting left the high elves in the dust, one cantrip doesn't cut it against cantrip, first and 2nd level.
The reason so many people rate half elfs so high is the flexible ASI's, but most of all the racial feats and since it doesn't look like Chris takes those into consideration. They are ending up lower on the tier list.
I think one issue is that he posted a +2 ASI being equal to two +1s. That isn't true. Since characters are often focused on two to three abilities only, a +2, +1, +1 is much better than the base human's 6 +1s, and the hill dwarf's +2 +2 is EVEN BETTER. Since that is essentially only going to be three to four +1s at best and then some wasted +1s in even scores. If you are standard arraying, the base human is going to leave you with a 13, an 11, and a 9. I doubt very much that you are going to be burning ASIs in bumping your lowest scores to even numbers (even the 13 is your 4th highest score, so bumping it seems limited at best unless you are playing the maddest of builds). It gets a bit better with point buy, since you can give yourself all odd scores, but even then, you are assuming a character that doesn't want any dump stats at all.
There's very little that is a Wisdom, Int or Cha save that isn't a spell or magical effect. I think the Gnome Cunning is way, way too strong of a feature to justify just giving it willy nilly to a race. And it gets better the longer the game goes, since Wisdom saves are much more prevalent in the late game and much more deadly as well. And it gets even better when you consider the fact that a single feat makes it from a very strong to an outright broken feature (Resilient: Wisdom). It basically makes it impossible to fail all but the absolute highest of wisdom saves, since, if we follow convention, DCs don't escalate all that quickly until you get to 20+ CR monsters. I would personally rate Gnome Cunning at more than 25 points. Probably around 40.
The right question to ask is: if Gnome Cunning was available as a feat, how often would you take it? IMO, very often, which makes it worth roughly what a feat is worth.
@@garyco766 Resilient Wisdom also gives a +1 though, and Cha saves and Int saves are both pretty rare. I think it's worth a lot more than 25 points (closer to 50), but it's not worth a full feat unless it was a half feat.
I really like how you have done this. Really easy to see where your thoughts came from. Easy to disagree and recalculate. I have a theory for why Half-Elf seems like it's a great race on gut reactions. Specifically, I think it was much more powerful prior to Tasha's. That extra point is far less useful and being customizable isn't the asset it used to be before the change.
Chris also doesn't add points for racial feat access, which for a lot of people is a big reason to take an elf variant. (elven accuracy) Even some of the other PHB races get access to sometimes decent racial feats. (dragon fear, dwarven fortitude or infernal constitution) I access to racial feats would give more points and depending on the decency of those feats, you'd see a clearer picture in line with most peoples gut feeling.
@jugglejunk Firstly, I do agree that quantifying racial feats would make the rankings a little better, but I personally think it's quite marginal. You have to wait until 4th level and you expend a half feat option in most cases, which means you give up things like fey touched or telekinesis at that level as well. So now you have to rank the value of elven accuracy in this case against the other powerful half feats and assign a score. Useful for sure, but I don't think it's as huge a viability boost, especially compared to other elves that can take that feat.
Another reason half elf might be undervalued is I still think he is undervaluing +4 races. Feats are worth 125 points. ASI improvements are very comparable to feats. And while I agree feats should be worth more than ASI improvements I find it very weird that a feat is 125 points, but somehow half an ASI is only 20 being worth less than 1/6 of a feat.
@Treantmonk's Temple the new version (from the UA) is waaaay better, it's just straight advantage on mental saves whether the effect is magic or not. No more arguments with the DM over whether a Gibbering Mouther babbling or a Sea Hag's true form are magical effects or not, gnomes get advantage on all of it!
@@PsyrenXY Technically, "magical" is defined. It needs to say "magical" or "magic" in the description. Yes it is a terrible definition, but it is somewhere in the sage advice compendium
I would have given Tiefling just slightly higher. I think Hellish Rebuke (2nd level) is a great addition as a reaction; you’re only using it when shield or absorb elements wouldn’t have helped you, so it’s basically free extra damage on your enemy 1/day with minimal action economy cost. Feels better than 5 points!
2d10 per long rest isn't a great feature, it's pretty good at pevel 3, but after it's too little, and also fire damage, if you could use your spells it'd be pretty good, otherwise 5-8 points max seems fair
Not sure I see how Stonecunning, which I've always thought of as the ribbonyist feature of all the ribbony features out there, gets more than 1 point. You'd really be three times happier to get a highly situational bonus on history checks than you would be to get longbow proficiency? My dwarvophobic quibbles asside, tho, great video--can't wait to watch the rest
I definitely think the first round here highlights what you mentioned in the intro to this series, that even the worst mechanical races are still useful for the right characters. I think that's a cool thing about the original PHB races, that even the races with weaker features mostly have something unique about them, and honestly the more races that come out, the more I start to feel like some of the new ones are just new combinations of old features, like having a natural weapon, some kind of bonus teleport, or innate spells. Watching this I feel like you could absolutely use just the PHB races and still have a solid game, with all the race options being pretty simple to play, which is a great trait for the base game to have.
This is a really good vid and i love this rating system. I think it's worth pointing out though that its a general rating that is fully disconnected from possible builds. Some builds need specific races that are usually considered weak but optimal for that build.
I actually found the opposite. A lot of the ratings he gives features are biased by his use in individual builds, and I think he should be considering the generality more. In fact, I think certain races should be getting bonuses for their ability to be useful across all builds. For instance, the half-elf should get a significant bonus because every single feature is adaptable to any build you want.
Also, I agree on Halfling Lucky being 50 points. As one who rolls so many 1s he's actually still gotten a 1 a few times for his Halfling despite having to roll it twice in a row, I can tell you that this feature is a lifesaver.
I would argue having Darkvision is just as valuable as +5 or -5 movement speed...like think about how much Darkvision comes up, I think they should both be 10 points...if you still think having +5 or -5 movement speed is still worth a lot, then 15 points feels right...20 points feels like it is a bit much.
Darkvision is something you can easily work around not having, whether through a feat, darkvision spell, light cantrip, or hooking a lantern to your belt. Keep in mind darkvision only lets you barely see in complete darkness, and you don't get advantage against creatures without darkvision only negated disadvantage. You also have disadvantage on perception checks made with darkvision. In a more stealth orientated party not having darkvision is a major drawback, but otherwise it's not worth that much.
The relative weakness of feats available at 1st Level in a year or so (assuming current OneDnD-UA becomes law) is going to drop that free EXTRA feat worth 125 to something more in line with the other races, I imagine. It won't leapfrog Human to S-Tier automatically.
Mostly agree with the point system, although I think weapon and armor proficiencies should be given more points, especially post-Tasha's, since they can enable major build options for non-martial classes. Otherwise, I think most skills should be as valued as much as a utility cantrip; skills are always undervalued imo, they are an integral part of the exploration pillar of the game. There is no scenario where I'd rather have Artificer's Lore (5 points) over Perception proficiency (4 points).
My recommendation is you determine how much you think it's worth then add that amount to each race that counts as an elf in this series for new rankings based on your evaluation.
@TreantmonksTemple The High Elf also can be a very good boon to Rogues, Clerics, and any Intelligence based caster with that free cantrip of your choice. Hell it contributed to a lot of the damage of your Phantom Steed build, and Elven Accuracy helps even more. On Eldritch Knights and classes that get only one attack like Clerics, Booming Blade is always a good choice for free.
@@jcdenton2187 Yup. The SCAG cantrips make a big difference to something like a Rogue. It is one of those that when its applicable its worth a lot lot more, but when not its merely OK.
@@jcdenton2187 Started the campaign pre-Tasha's, so that was a factor, but part of why I chose an elf for my artificer was to get a ton of downtime crafting done via the Trance feature elves get, and since it was the High Elf that got the INT boost, that was the elf variety that made sense- the extra magic definitely helped sort out the question of which cantrips to take early on, especially when I was the lone magic-user for a while.
I thought the same thing when I was watching the video. Access to a powerful racial feat really accounts for so much. I wish all the other races had a feat that made me want to play them like EA. Otherwise, I'm 100% on-board with the rankings. So what number is appropriate? 20? 15? 10? I'm not really sure, but it seems like more than a stat bump point-wise and it's extra accuracy in a bounded system. That has to count for something. On the other hand, it's a drain on your finite ASI resource, and isn't going to make sense in every build.
I love the video. I feel like NOT having Darkvision *feels* like having a 25 feet movement speed. -20 points for no Darkvision! (Counterpoint - Tasha's Custom Lineage puts darkvision = to a proficiency, so there's that.)
Gotta say that for Drow, the Sunlight Sensitivity penalty is quite variable based on class and campaign. I took a Drow sorcerer to level 11 through many dungeon crawl adventures, and Sunlight Sensitivity came up exactly once, so I just cast an AoE spell instead of Fire Bolt . YMMV, obviously, but it's not always the albatross you make it out to be.
@@ignaciogasconha9309 Be sure to have a blend of spells that are both "to hit" and Save-based. That's the quick, easy workaround. Other than, lean into it RP-wise. ;)
To be honest I’m not surprised by the **SPOILER**’s lowest ranking. I’ve always felt they were fairly bad. That’s why I’m so excited about the UA version, more than any other species so far!
I use a lot of half elves when I build a character just because I like elven accuracy and I like to make feat hungry characters so the extra ability point over normal elves can make a difference. So I don’t disagree with your rank but some people may put access to certain feats as a major factor in their own ranks.
I just don't understand how weapon training with a martial weapon, which with Tasha's is now any weapon in that same class, is only worth 1 point. I've seen you choose a specific race for a build because it needed that weapon training, which it couldn't otherwise get without multiclassing or a feat. That has got to be worth more than 1 point. Particularly since you given one point for tool proficiency, and tool proficiency can be gained by any PC using Downtime Rules in the DMG. The DMG ranks it the same as a Language Proficiency, which I note you give 0 points for. Weapon Proficiency? Not so much, you can't just gain it any time with the Downtime Rules. They're clearly not ranked the same.
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing on these. I'd take weapon and armor proficiencies over Stonecunning any day. I realize it doesn't help a ton on a class who already had the proficiencies, but Tasha's at least gives you something you can do with those rather than wasting them. And if you're on a class that doesn't, it saves you the multiclassing or feat, like you mentioned.
I’d say maybe the first martial weapon proficiency could be worth more points, what with customise your origin, with subsequent weapon proficiencies not really providing anything of value.
The low value makes sense to me. Classes that rely on weapons typically already have the weapon proficiencies that are useful to them, and those they don't rely on weapons are usually just getting +1 damage on an inefficient last option.
Playing devil's advocate here. - 4/13 base classes get access to all martial weapons (Barbarian, Fighter, Paladin, Ranger) - Some classes get selective martial weapon proficiency which covers both Str and Dex weapons/builds, as well as certain subclasses grant martial weapon prof: - Bard: Base Class (hand crossbows, longswords, rapiers, shorts words), Valor (all martial weapons), Swords (scimitar), - Cleric: Death, Tempest, Twilight, War (all martial weapons) - Druid: Base Class (Scimitar) - Monk: Base Class (Shortsword), Kensei (any 2 weapons) - Rogue: Base Class (hand crossbows, longswords, rapiers, shortswords) - Warlock: Base Class (any melee weapon if you have Pact of the Blade), Improved Pact Weapon Invocation (shortbow, longbow, light crossbow, or heavy crossbow) - Wizard: Bladesinger (a single one-handed weapon) So, as you can see, a lot of classes + subclasses get some form of martial weapon proficiency. Especially the ones that explicitly support weapon use in combat with their mechanics. The one's who tend not to get any form of weapon proficiency have playstyles that push them towards exclusively spellcasting, or have limitations such as Monk's dedicated weapons/rogues sneak attack. TLDR: Basically, if your class/subclass leans towards using any weapons, it probably already offers you several proficiency options. Meaning an extra martial weapon proficiency from your race is a dead feature if: - You're a Barb/Pal/Fighter/Ranger/Warlock (Pact of Blade) - OR it's fairly redundant if you chose any of the subclasses listed above, as weapons in 5e are pretty much only different due to their damage die and like 3 feats. This would make much more of a difference if 5e weapons had similar unique abilities like the upcoming playtest. - OR the martial weapons you can utilize are restricted by class features (Monk, Rogue) - OR you have a completely different combat playstyle that doesn't utilize weapons (Spellcaster, Wildshape, etc). This pretty much only leaves you absolutely needing a martial weapon proficiency when you don't have one for more niche builds, or to raise your weapon damage by like a damage die. Not the vast majority of characters/builds require this, meaning you'd be in the minority. Compare this to an extra tool proficiency, which can be used by ANY class/character and can be chosen to enhance skill checks or provide another service/role that your class may otherwise not be able to perform. Do you value the tool proficiency that'll always have a use (albeit minor one) for any character as less? Or do you value the martial weapon proficiency that'll be a dead feature for the majority of character builds as more?
Great start to the series! I also think it's pretty clear Tasha's and Monsters of the Multiverse signposted WOTC's current direction, and the PC options in the 2024 PHB will be brought into line with those later works.
You have to forgo skill versatility for 5 feet of movement. That only nets 10 more points based on the criteria he's using, so it would still be C tier.
@@MaximanLP I dunno, I feel it's all just too subjective pro pretend the point system actually has any real math in it. Also, a lot of those abilities change in real relevance depending on class/subclass, etc. Frankly the openly subjective tier list sounds more pragmatic in the end of the day.
@@Tentacl I can see your perspective, but he noted in the preview video that it was just his best attempt at "objectively" rating the races. You can weight things differently/assign different values based on different playstyles or settings to make your own tier list. Just think of it as a template that he applied based on his experience. I mean, I personally value the two +2 stat bonuses and medium armor more than he does, so I would put mountain dwarf a lot higher.
What I've ranked here is the half-elf in the PHB (which does not differentiate half-wood elves and half-anything else elves). However, if you would like to know the point total for the variants from SCAG, you can work it out really easily. Losing skill versatility is -10 points, then add the replacement feature values (which are all covered in this video) to get the new point total.
I’ve always dismissed halfling offhand due to no dark vision. I have since rethought my life decisions based on this video and will be playing a Mastiff mounted halfling. Much respect for your data driven approach.
Yeah, I agree with other people that Gnome Cunning is a bit more powerful than you put here. Having said that, I do find Gnomes a bit dull, their active abilities almost never come up, and their strongest ability is both passive, which means you can't build around it or use it in cool ways, and also unclear on what exactly is magic. So I'm definitely in favour of Gnome redesigns!
I like seeing the point values, makes it super easy to figure out where my own homebrew versions would sit on this scale. Currently running a mini campaign for 2 dnd newcomers where I decided to give the standard 30 foot speed for both players (a forest gnome and a mountain dwarf). Also gave the forest gnome a slight buff in that she is able to talk to ALL beasts, but may have disadvantage on Charisma (Persuasion, Intimidation) rolls with beasts larger than her
Hey treantmonk, what about the optional rule for half elfs to change their skill versatility for an elf trait, the rule is from sword coast but i have yet to see a dm that didn't allow me to use it.
I bet there will be a “sourcebook rankings” video later, but it’ll be fairly easy to break down. 10 points for the skills could become 8 points for a Cantrip from a half High Elf, technically a bit worse. Not sure I fully agree with the result, since I think I’d rather have a Cantrip than two skills on many characters, but so it goes, and it’s still pretty close. Half-drow gains the most, with 34 points for their magic without sunlight sensitivity, should be enough to move from C to B tier. Half Wood Elf would be 20 points instead of 10, but still C tier within these rankings.
I didn't cover them, but determining a new point total is something you can do yourself quite easily. The Half-Elf variants don't get skill versatility, so that's -10, then every replacement has a point amount I've covered in this video, which you can add to get the new point total.
Human is probably should be higher due to its ability to ensure multi passing but that context is lost in a pure number estimate. I do think you were too hard on magic resistance and skills. And I think the lack of racial feat acknowledgment hurt elves. And it feels wrong that you double count dwarves resilience. Is it that many times better than any of the elf features? Its interesting to see how you rank them though. It shows both perspective and personal biases which I really like. I'm really looking forward to this series.
I think you're undervaluing racial cantrips. Even ignoring how they match against non-spell features, I find racial cantrips are consistently much more impactful than once per day 1st level spells.
booming blade or green flame blade are great if your class both uses martial weapons and doesn't get access to those cantrips. Fighters and clerics certainly enjoy the option, even if you go EK and eventually get access to them it's still very nice to have.
Seeing Sesame Street old school muppets fainting already made this one of my fav videos! Soaking all this up before I make guides for BG3 of which PHB races are the options to choose! TY Chris!
I think extra points should be added for races with race specific feats. Surely the ability to take elven accuracy for example is worth something. Much more than a ribbon feature I would imagine. Same fore bountiful luck on the halflings, the option to take that feat gives them some value even if you want to debate how much it is worth.
Cool video. Hopefully the new players handbook fixes things like not choosing your casting stat for spells, where you put your ability scores and the ability to use your own spell slots for all these racial spells.
Sunlight sensitivity almost never comes up in our game. Rarely had combats in direct sunlight for some reason over the 10 years we've played 5e. I personally would have assigned a lesser penalty for that flaw.
I think this would be very table/campaign dependent. I would say that probably half of my table's combats happen in enough direct sunlight to screw someone with sunlight sensitivity. But it would vary a lot. If you don't fight in the sun, then the old kobold is insane and I don't know why everyone isn't playing it.
Could you explain how Feat is so valuable in your books? Maybe I misunderstood something about your scoring video, in which case, sorry for the pointless comment. If I got it correctly, with 125 points you get Resistance against all types of damage except force and Radiant (and physical ones). Or 25 optional skills (basically you could give a race proficiency with every skill and tool). Or 40 base movement, swim and climb speed, telepathy, trance, darkvision 120 feet and +1 to all abilities (+1 to all i presume). If this ranking is based purely on combat, I might understand the scoring more, but still.. 40 base movement, resistance to necrotic, poison and fire and +6 to ability scores vs feat. I understand that a feat can be used to customize a character in many ways, but do you really think it's that valuable?
125 points if you deliberately intend to completely break the game with your build, when combined with all the other delicious Cheese on the 5E plate. - Maybe 75 points, or somewhat more, otherwise.
I feel like the ability scores as a total isn't representative of the actual benefits you'd feel in game. The way I would have scored them is something along these lines: +2 = 30 pt 2*+2 = 50 pt +1 = 10 pt 2*+1 = 20pt Every +1 higher gives a bonus lower by two, so 6*+1 = 40 pt Or even every +1 after the first 2 just flat out +4 so 6*+1 = 36 pt You'd might want to scale those numbers down (I wouldn't personally), but I feel like these ratios show the benefits of a half elf over normal human for example.
I know I know about the disclaimer XD But. I feel like many racial options benefitted a lot by having split features. For example, the gnomes have 1 big feature which is worth in this rating as +25 points for all magical saving throws vs magic, where the dwarves got 10 points for saving throws vs poison, and the elves got 10 points for saving throws vs being charmed. If the gnomes had 10 features, each an advantage vs a specific magical condition or effect, like charmed, frightened, etc. They would get 100 points. I'm not saying its worth 100 points. Just a thought, but if there was a feat that game advantage vs all mental magical saving throw, I would consider it, while a feat to gain poison resist + advantage, I probably would not.
Quickly, in the spells, you have frightened, charmed, paralysed, incapacitated, blinded, stunned, deafened, unconscious, petrified, (cursed, slowed, confused)
thoroughly agree. it's hard to beat vhuman, but stout halfling, wood elf, and mountain dwarf definitely have their classes/subclasses. a Wood Elf Scout w/ Elven Accuracy and Wood Elf Magic feats is bonkers.
I had a thought: It might be worth making a second tier list based only on the score of the highest-ranked feature, minus the points subtracted for the features with negative points. This is because people rarely make builds based on _all_ the features, instead only taking the relevant one into account and the negative features. The other features might as well not exist at that point, if only for the influence on the choice of race.
The only real surprise for me is mountain dwarf and high Elf but that all makes sense on a mathematical level that they'd just rank that low. I guess I'm spoiled a little since my playgroup has adopted the one dnd character creation - the 1st level feat and lineage spells are definitely an improvement.
Halflings: i always ask the DM to exchange Luvky for Bountiful Luck. Rerolling my friends' rolls is amazing, it happens more often, and it really brings home the idea "OH THAT'S WHY we brought a 3 ft tall, 35 lbs halfling with us!" It reminds me of DCC rpg Lucky Charm ability :)
This is the kind of thing I was looking for when they announced Custom Lineage. A point based system for you to build your own race/species/lineage using a pool of attributes.
What about Race specific feats that raise many builds to optimal levels? Half-elf and Elf can pick Elven accuracy, which are a part of optimizing a lot of builds.
@@nickm9102 I don't know about that. It seems like access to racial feats should be considered along with everything else. If this was a separate feature listed with the base race description I am sure that this would increase the score of races that have access to optimal feats. I don't see how you separate the two issues because a tier list of racial options should include that as just another racial option. (Same for Gnome, Dragonborn, Half-Orc, etc. feats with the score varying depending on the strength of those feats from zero on up.)
@@mattf5935 the issue is that you are address something that doesn't apply to a single Race the majority of the time Drow high magic is one of the few that only applies to full Drow. The big part is how often are the racial feats taken? Elven Accuracy, ok but flames of Phlegethos or infernal constitution? Looking up the spelling I gut saw fade away and I bought Xanathar's on release.
I highly value the half elf stat spread because it lets you get 16/16/14 on point buy without dumping a stat. Though I recognize dump stats dont matter much from an optimization standpoint - I just think it's nice to have.
Dear treantmonk, You are doing an amazing job! I think though that your factors for a race miss a foundamental parameter: the specific racial feat access that a specific race grants es elven accuracy or similar
Okay question on the half-elf (and I'll admit, I'm pretty biased, as most characters I make are half-elves): shouldn't the half-elf get more points on its ability score bonuses as you get far more freedom with the ability scores than normal? Sure with Tasha's everyone gets +2 and +1 or three +1s, but the fact that if you're in Adventurer's League and let's say you don't take the Tasha's book you can get wide versatility with your ability score bumps is not nothing. And being able to have more ability scores that are better helps with passing saving throws, if not also with skills and combat rolls (which also give bonuses at other levels). I'm fine with the ranking as it is, I suppose, but it just feels like we're undercutting that this is one of the few races that can build strong stats for three stats, which some classes really need
Really well done and I really like the point system you created for analysis. It also makes it easy to see where our valuations would differ. For example, I think darkvision is underrated at 10 points, especially compared to the -20 penalty to movement. I would give it a +20 value. I also agree with the other comments I've seen about access to racial feats, but I can see how that would create the need to evaluate a whole other set of data, but those do have a large impact for some races (Elves). My biggest critique though is on the valuations of proficiencies. My tables are possibly more RP and downtime focused than many, but generally speaking I think you have undervalued these. I think the problem is one of diminishing returns: your first tool/weapon/skill proficiency is going to have much more impact than the following ones. I would suggest something along the lines of 5 points for the first in each category, 2 for the second, and one for each additional. It wouldn't make a massive difference, but I think it would cause some shuffling in the ranks.
Are you sure about weapon proficiency giving only 1 point per weapon? Because with Tasha, we can swap weapons within category for another one, so those Dwarves, Elves or Drow, they all can access weapons like Whip, Pole-arm, Heavy XBow, Hand XBow, Longbow or Warhammer with classes like Rogue, Trickery Cleric, Monk and this can be almost game-changing for them (gaining ability to attack melee with reach, gain second attack (PAM, XBE), gain d10 attack that works with Crusher - Monk with Warhammer,…). Why didn’t you diversify Martial and Simple weapons? Why didn’t you give more points for the first proficiency and then less for any additional one (because value of 4 is much less than 4x one weapon)?
I'm fine with 1 per point. Weapon Proficiency from lineage is typically bad. Either you're a class that needs weapons, and it'll almost always give you access to the proficiency you need, or you tend to be from a class that doesn't really need to use weapons, so proficiency doesn't matter. Cases where you can actually take advantage of a weapon proficiency that isn't from your class are rare. Basically just Monks as far as I figure, and even then, using a d8 versatile d10 weapon isn't that much better than using a d6 versatile d8 versatile weapon.
@@thebitterfig9903 In monk’s case, it is 8.775 instead of 7.725, but 2-3 times per round, so the difference is cca 14%! Then there is Rogue that with heavy XBow also gains more than 1 flat dmg. In case with whip, Rogue can now attack with melee from 10 ft away, so he can either hide or dash instead of disengage BA. All Clerics without Martial Weapon prof (at least 8 of them if I can remember correctly) can profit from this (and some of them gets lvl 8 ability that boosts weapons attacks). Either Heavy Xbow or Greataxe mean 1 flat dmg bonus over classic choices, but when you have DEX Cleric, it means 1d8 instead of 1d4! Or you have the same dmg as dagger, but with reach - Whip. And with Clerics and weapons like Greatsword, Maul, Pole-Arms, Pike,… profits are much bigger than you think! Or dual-wielding DEX based Cleric - 2x d6 vs d4 or even 2xd8 vs d4 with Fual Wielder feat. Just check how many subclasses have only simple weapon proficiency and you will see.
Even though I really think that Darkvision (which is really painful not to have), extra Weapon and Armor proficiencies, and extra ability scores should be worth more, I don't think it'd move the needle all that much from what you're showing. I watch a lot of the optimization videos and see Variant Human picked all the time for that free feat, but I've yet to be in a 5E campaign that actually took Variant Human. I guess the Crossbow Expert, Sharpshooter, Great Weapon Master, or whatever feat choice is THAT important at 1st level just doesn't make the vanilla human worth taking over just about every other race to any of the groups I play with. We definitely wouldn't put 125 points on that for us. But to each their own. I know a lot of people swear by it.
I mean, from an optimising perspective, feats are super important, and almost always better than a straight ASI. One extra feat is powerful, but you get it earlier than everyone else. PAM, GWM, CBE, SS for martials and even things like War Caster or Alert for casters at level 1. I find it tails off at higher levels, when everyone else has nearly as many feats and you've raised your primary ability score to 20 anyway. Treatmonk tends to optimise for levels 1-10, and so I'd agree at these ranges that the free feat is worth a lot.
An inconsistency in how these are scored that results in the standard human not getting enough points. Variant human scores -20 for a +2 ability score becoming +1. Half elf shows getting single added +1 score to be worth 20pt. So a std human has an additional plus one in three scores which would be worth 60, and -20 for having a +2 downgrade. So for the scoring to be consistent a standard humans array is worth forty.
I'm not in the same field with some features values, for example, Darkvision is way more valuable from my point of view because being so common made not having it a big liability for many groups, and humans should be more penalized for not having it.
As a relatively new DM, I was considering asking my players to dial back on the non-PHB races. Seeing this ranking is making me wonder how reasonable that request might have been.
A big part of the difference between the gut instinct chart and the scored chart is also likely the fact that when you create builds the value of a race has to do with their comparative advantage in a specific playstyle/niche. Some of the lower scorers may fit builds more often so they rank higher by "gut" because they are in fact more valuable than a higher scoring race that does not often fit a desired build or play style due to being too general, having features that don't synergize, etc
I think poison resistance should count as worse than other damage resistances as it’s rare to be hit by (from what I’ve seen) and is by far the worst damage type as there are easily the most enemies resistant to it and it’s not even close. Great video though, I’m excited to see more
First, I really like this system. I think the points for a proficiency is kinda showing. I feel getting to choose or getting a an always good one (like perception) is really strong - something you'll be rolling every session, often multiple times. But something like a weapon prof, or some of these other things.. But that's must me!
I think for half elf it is worth giving some extra points to the fact that it was one of the first races and still has a slight edge even after tashas in the ability score option. Ya get Cha 2 and 1 in 2 other abilities. That is pretty potent especially for any of the Cha based classes.
Why did Minor Illusion get marked down for not being able to choose ability score? As far as I know, casting ability score has never come into to play when I've used Minor Illusion. I would have thought the number of points off, if any, would very much depend on which cantrip.
Enemies can determine if something is an illusion, based off a dc set by the casting score. Warlock gnome with -8 int has mediocre minor illusion spell save dc. Same style of ability from later books lets you say "i want charisma as my dc," which is just superior. Quick addition: I'd rule passive insight, but it miiiiight be investigation as written.
@@ParaisoFlower yeah, maybe it's important for some players with some DMs... I just don't remember any of my DMs ever challenging illusions that way 🤷♀
@@notallwhowanderarelost4797 That's both the joy and detriment of the game. Any build or advice you find online is only as relevant as your table. DM likes bonus action potions and doesn't enforce spellcasting/free-hand mechanics? W00t. DM makes you count arrows and item weight, and includes exactly zero magic items in a campaign? Not so w00t, but also valid.
I tend to agree. If your DM is strict on darkvision and properly applies disadvantage on Perception (including -5 passive Perception) in dim light, then not having darkvision is a nightmare. You effectively cannot use Stealth at all in dark environments because you have to constantly give away your position with a light source, and everything with darkvision has a chance to surprise you. I think it's undervalued because it's common. But try playing as the lone character without darkvision in a party and see how important it is.
@@zerokid2007 I'd argue outside of stealth darkvision is only needed on one character per group, redundant sources of darkvision doesn't add much especially without perception proficiency.
Mostly here to say that I liked how you ranked Hill Dwarf toughness as though they had a full +1 stat. The HP is about half of what you kid get from a +2 in Constitution, the HP but not the saving throw increase. I’ve often heard folks say how great the Mountain Dwarf is while completely ignoring Hill, and that just feels wrong. Consider a character who already has medium armor, and now the value would be effectively the same. Hill might actually be better, since the toughness allows you to go over the 20 cap. A rare circumstance, but still. Really liking the series so far. I think it’s fascinating and a great example of how a tier list works better to begin a conversation, rather than the conclusion of discussion.
I think feat access should factor in somewhat. As an elf you don't automatically get elven accuracy, but the possibility of getting it is definitely a reason to play them. And not all racial feats are created equal.
I think one thing missing from the methodology, if I’m not mistaken, is the presence of race prerequisites in feats. Elves should probably have a score bump due to the ability to take Elven Accuracy.
I think what is so interesting about this is the distinct ways in which people values things and how certain classes or ways of playing can completely mitigate the negative factors of some of the classes. I would much rather have 2 skill proficiencies than poison resistance. Those skills are likely to come up every other session, while poison resistance is much less common. Lower speed is huge, but if you are playing ranged or have teleportation it is effectively a non issue. This isn't to disagree with anything, just interesting to note how some bad races can be saved.
When you view races in a vacuum they tend to seem worse, cause a lot of class features can easily fix these issues, if a halfling is too slow you can go rogue and cunning action to outrun people, if a dwarf is too slow you can go barbarian and enjoy the movement speed bonus negating your penalty.
Seeing the half-elf so low really caught me offguard. The extra +1 on an ability helps out a lot on some builds. I am curious to see where the rest of the races end up. The tierlist could be a good opportunity to re-evaluate several races I have overlooked.
This is exactly why you cannot assign default values to each ability without differentiating the class you pair it up with. Results in half of races defined "unuseable" by you.
He specifically said that none of the races are unusable, and that almost any build can be powerful using any of the races. Its just a general power level, not specifically looking at combo's with specific features which would be far beyond the scope of something like this. Imagine looking at every different synergy and interaction for all the 70 something races with every single class and subclass, that would be insane.
This is more about overall power not specific synergies. Also no race is unusable, just subpar in a general sense. Treantmonk in his guides often points out that you can make a character using suboptimal options and still have a good character and a fun time.
@@luka2784 Ok I didnt catch that he said something like that, but what would be the point of having this tier list, if all the synergies and interactions have such a crutial part in race's performance.
@@michalgabriel9647 I guess that in a large number of race/ class/ subclass options, their wont be a particular interaction. While their their are some instances where a particular interaction will make a race a lot better than it would otherwise be, this tier list would give you an indication of roughly how much power a race will bring to a build. A lot of racial features are quite generic and don't combo much, eg skill proficiencies, boost to saving thows, ect, and being able to evaluate those against each other is useful. With very specific features eg minitours hammering horns, its clearly going to be more useful on particular builds, but might still have some value on a lot of character that don't specialise in it, and so I guess would be rated around that. Its kind of like how the assassin rouge is a pretty bad subclass by itself, but can be very powerful in a gloomstalker nova build. Its still fair to rank assassin quite badly, but just have a stipulation that it has potential.
So Minor Illusion with INT gets 8 points and ANY Wizard cantrip with INT gets also 8 points? Where is versatility factor reflected? We can take Booming Blade (so INT doesn’t matter) on Rogue or Mobile Trickery Cleric, Firebolt on Psy Warrior to cover range or even that Minor Illusion if we want to and you give these abilities the same bonus? It doesn’t seem fair!
I know it’s mostly a ribbon feature, but races with a particularly long life Spand I think you should have some point value associated with it, because there are effects that can magically age characters to death, most of the time it’s just role-play applications not mechanical, but worth considering.
I suspect part of why the gnome is so bad is that, pre-Tasha's, +2 INT was kind of a unique thing for a race to have, and potentially a powerful one, with Wizards generally seen as being the most powerful class by higher levels.
I think the one parameter that is potentially worth considering for ranking races are race-specific Feats. Sure, Variant Human and Custom Lineage get a "free" Feat, but they can never take Feats like Bountiful Luck (Halflings), Elven Accuracy (Elves), or Dragon Fear (Dragonborn).
I feel that a low ranking on such a popular rac like the half elf is an indication that there is a flaw somewhere. If I had to take a stab at it, it’s the freedom of choice. I think being able to choose the ability score increases is more valuable than not being able to. For example I do not agree that the variant human should have a -20 because they only have a total +2. I think the fact that you can choose makes it more valuable or at the least a more desirable race to pic than others that don’t give you a choice. Too a lesser degree, the same would apply to skills. Skills you can choose should be more valuable than skills that are picked for you. These choices are what make the half elf so popular in my opinion.
I've got an upcoming campaign with two phb races... and a dhampir... I've tried to rank their abilities myself to try and balance them all out, so I'm very curious if my ranking will be similar to yours! Great series so far :)
the 25 ft speed always makes me re-think if i REALLY want to play this kind of character. The slowness feels like a penalty. In this case, i can understand about boosting those slow characters up to 30 ft speed in the 2024 5e/OneD&D rules.
I think many folks rate flexibility in racial options highly (more highly than you are here) because flexibility unlocks or completes so many effective or interesting builds. For example, High Elf being able to choose ANY Wizard cantrip is strictly better than Forest Gnome receiving Minor Illusion (which is a very strong cantrip), since choosing a cantrip opens up lots of build options. For example, an Int-based Booming Blade has no real downsides from being Int-based and unlocks tons of effective blade-cantrip builds. Similarly, Half Elf receiving a +1 to two separate ability scores on top of its +2 is uniquely valuable in getting point-buy starting ability scores to 16s, which is a critical threshold.
A few things that I find interesting is how few points you assign to darkvision. I would rate it at 25 or 30 points on your scale. It is particularly noticeable when you have a party with only one player without darkvision who needs to pull out a torch or use a spell slot. I also would push additional stat points higher, 1 stat point is a half an asi and 2 a full asi. Comparing vhuman to half elf, there is a large score difference when the total "asi" level is the same. I think it is a little stronger for the vhuman because they will get access to a feat earlier than the half elf, but by the time they are level 4 the difference is much smaller, with the difference in stats/feats just being that the vhuman could pick 2 feats or the half elf could have 2 asi worth of stats extra. For different stat allocation than the standard +2+1, such as +1+1+1, +2+2, +2+1+1 could also be seen as being slightly inequal and could have a range of points similar to how different kind of resistances are evaluated slightly differently. I wonder if these will be talking points when you go to evaluate your rankings at the end. I do also think that many of these races were balanced partially around how well their stats synergized when initially printed, and that letting the stats be assigned freely exasperated the difference in racial features. I.e. str+con is very good combo for a melee fighter, or having int+cha tends to only have one of the stats be in the players focus and the other is about as useful as a ribbon feature.
With dwarves ans small races (halflings, gnomes and some others), you can take the feat "Squat nimbleness" from Xanathar, it gives you +1 strenght/dexterity, +5" speed, proficiency in athletics/acrobatics and advantage on checks you make to escape from being grappled. Not too bad.
I think I would put lucky at 40 and movement speed penalty at -12. I think lack of dark vision should be a penalty more than dark vision should be a boon, it is relatively rare to not have it across the races and stands out. Also I think extra armor proficiency is WAY more impactful than a weapon proficiency, also the extra ability score post Tashas is much more impactful as well than given credit for. I also think a feat is massively impactful, but not quite as much as you did. Generally I think the order with my numbers wouldn't change things much, but there would be a few shifts back toward your gut feeling ranking I suspect.
So about the Monsters of the Multiverse races, will the shifter "subraces" be counted separately or will all of them be bundled into one? And about the shifter, I think Wildhunt is kinda underrated. The obvious perk with the "creatures can't gain advantage vs you" would be something like a Barbarian's Reckless Attack, where you would have advantage, but now the enemy won't (unless they're further than 30 ft. away). An application I found out for myself recently is going prone to give ranged attacks disadvantage vs you, but attacks made within 5 ft. of you will lose out on the advantage they'd normally get. It's pretty niche, but I think the interaction's pretty cool.
Are racial feats not being taken into account? Wood elf magic is a very powerful feat and imo makes the wood elf a more powerful racial option. Also are you going to talk about the half elf variants later or are you not accounting for them because the +5 speed variant should help them out according to your method.
I'm not sure I agree about Gnome Cunning. It's against all magic, and afaik a LOT of effects that would require those saving throws would be magical in nature (am I wrong about that? I really don't know). But if gnomes get advantage on the significant majority of mental saves, that's a huge deal.
Consider resilient gets +1 and proficiency in a single save for a whole feat (which is worth a lot of points here). I'd argue that until at least level 9 advantage is mechanically stronger than proficiency. Of course Int+Cha come up less often, but the beauty of the gnome is that you can not worry so much about dumping 1 or 2 mental stats as you often must with optimised builds, and you can always get proficiency later through feats once your core build is done. However getting advantage on saving throws is nigh impossible outside of racial and niche subclass features.
Given how few other features gnomes get I'm not sure they could get out of D tier anyway. I think Cunning is a better feature than 25 points though (certainly better than Relentless Endurance, which is a 1/day feature)
You are not wrong. I will be addressing this later in the series and make adjustments.
Yeah I have gnome wizard and halfling cleric in party that has gone from level 5 to 10. I have seen Gnome Cunning be the VIP a lot more then I have seen Lucky save the player's skin. Had a Mind Flayer dungeon, A dungeon with Undead, and cliff full of harpies were Gnome was shrugging every supernatural mental effect throw at it.
Agreed. I like the more systematic approach of a tier list with a concrete breakdown of what different features are worth, but I find myself disagreeing with a number of the values assigned.
Particularly Gnome Cunning, walking speeds (they ARE noticeable, but I don’t know about +/- 20 for those) and any inherent spellcasting I personally would score higher (even if you can’t choose your spellcasting attribute, IMO they’re generally more useful than their values would indicate).
Still, it’s interesting to go through, and I’m looking forward to see what’s to come!
@@hkfifty871 I agree with the walking speed, not a big deal for a Wizard, but anything that needs to close distances has trouble.
Even so, Intelligence and Charisma saves are rare but when they *do* happen they are often very save-or-suck.
I'd say the gnomes lose their stock value once you get to the races with *functional* Magic Resistance, Satyr and Yaun-Ti Pureblood (not the Monsters of the Multiverse versions that don't even protect against a lot of newer "spell-like actions" monsters).
That Kobold has been telling you terrible lies about Gnomes again, hasn’t he? 😂
Kobold's are best used as hard labor and a tasty snack, not a advisors. (Taste like chicken) Do not argue with your food.
@@zhoupact8567 He does have some bad advice sometimes. He massively over values pass without trace and locate object.
He only hates on Gnomes as a meme tbf
Also Pass Without Trace being bonkers depends on your party, if it’s not full of optimisers it’s less elite, whereas other spells like Web are consistently elite.
Being Gnome is suboptimal.
@@ATMOSK1234 i'm sorry, +10 is not enough for You?
I’d like to add that while Lucky is already valuable as it is it can be much much better then anything else on this tier list: patreon supporters often roll that 1 followed by a 20 on their most important rolls!
Yeah, this sounds about right. Thou I am a little surprised the High Elf and Half-elf didn't place better.
Kind of gives you an idea of how much power creep there has been over the years.
A non trivial amount of the half elf's power was in where it's Ability scores were. Since that's being ignored post Tasha's, not nearly as good.
Early on it was higher value on flexible ASI and flexbile skills, but that's gone away as of tasha.
And aye, the more standard innate spellcasting left the high elves in the dust, one cantrip doesn't cut it against cantrip, first and 2nd level.
I could be wrong but I think the half-elf variant rules were in the SCAG.
The reason so many people rate half elfs so high is the flexible ASI's, but most of all the racial feats and since it doesn't look like Chris takes those into consideration. They are ending up lower on the tier list.
I think one issue is that he posted a +2 ASI being equal to two +1s. That isn't true. Since characters are often focused on two to three abilities only, a +2, +1, +1 is much better than the base human's 6 +1s, and the hill dwarf's +2 +2 is EVEN BETTER. Since that is essentially only going to be three to four +1s at best and then some wasted +1s in even scores. If you are standard arraying, the base human is going to leave you with a 13, an 11, and a 9. I doubt very much that you are going to be burning ASIs in bumping your lowest scores to even numbers (even the 13 is your 4th highest score, so bumping it seems limited at best unless you are playing the maddest of builds). It gets a bit better with point buy, since you can give yourself all odd scores, but even then, you are assuming a character that doesn't want any dump stats at all.
Im loving your new "why take the chance" patreon plugs.
I may have been guilty ofskip through that part in the past, but you've got me hooked now! Lol
They're funny if nothing else which increases the quality of the video even for non patreon viewers! It's been critical role's formula forever.
There's very little that is a Wisdom, Int or Cha save that isn't a spell or magical effect. I think the Gnome Cunning is way, way too strong of a feature to justify just giving it willy nilly to a race. And it gets better the longer the game goes, since Wisdom saves are much more prevalent in the late game and much more deadly as well. And it gets even better when you consider the fact that a single feat makes it from a very strong to an outright broken feature (Resilient: Wisdom). It basically makes it impossible to fail all but the absolute highest of wisdom saves, since, if we follow convention, DCs don't escalate all that quickly until you get to 20+ CR monsters. I would personally rate Gnome Cunning at more than 25 points. Probably around 40.
so still D tier just not the bottom of D tier.
The feature is pretty good, maybe good enough to justify making a gnome barbarian.
Dragon Fear Auras come to mind immediately.
The right question to ask is: if Gnome Cunning was available as a feat, how often would you take it? IMO, very often, which makes it worth roughly what a feat is worth.
@@garyco766 Resilient Wisdom also gives a +1 though, and Cha saves and Int saves are both pretty rare. I think it's worth a lot more than 25 points (closer to 50), but it's not worth a full feat unless it was a half feat.
@@garyco766 *A* feat is nowhere near as valuable as *any* feat
I really like how you have done this. Really easy to see where your thoughts came from. Easy to disagree and recalculate.
I have a theory for why Half-Elf seems like it's a great race on gut reactions. Specifically, I think it was much more powerful prior to Tasha's. That extra point is far less useful and being customizable isn't the asset it used to be before the change.
Chris also doesn't add points for racial feat access, which for a lot of people is a big reason to take an elf variant. (elven accuracy) Even some of the other PHB races get access to sometimes decent racial feats. (dragon fear, dwarven fortitude or infernal constitution)
I access to racial feats would give more points and depending on the decency of those feats, you'd see a clearer picture in line with most peoples gut feeling.
@jugglejunk Firstly, I do agree that quantifying racial feats would make the rankings a little better, but I personally think it's quite marginal.
You have to wait until 4th level and you expend a half feat option in most cases, which means you give up things like fey touched or telekinesis at that level as well. So now you have to rank the value of elven accuracy in this case against the other powerful half feats and assign a score. Useful for sure, but I don't think it's as huge a viability boost, especially compared to other elves that can take that feat.
Another reason half elf might be undervalued is I still think he is undervaluing +4 races. Feats are worth 125 points. ASI improvements are very comparable to feats. And while I agree feats should be worth more than ASI improvements I find it very weird that a feat is 125 points, but somehow half an ASI is only 20 being worth less than 1/6 of a feat.
Gnome Cunning works against all magic not just spells. You mentioned only spells. That should push the Rock Gnome out of last place, right?
That's true, one case where the old version is actually better.
@Treantmonk's Temple the new version (from the UA) is waaaay better, it's just straight advantage on mental saves whether the effect is magic or not. No more arguments with the DM over whether a Gibbering Mouther babbling or a Sea Hag's true form are magical effects or not, gnomes get advantage on all of it!
@@PsyrenXY UA is the problem there. Until it is officially published it means nothing.
@@PsyrenXY Technically, "magical" is defined. It needs to say "magical" or "magic" in the description.
Yes it is a terrible definition, but it is somewhere in the sage advice compendium
I would have given Tiefling just slightly higher. I think Hellish Rebuke (2nd level) is a great addition as a reaction; you’re only using it when shield or absorb elements wouldn’t have helped you, so it’s basically free extra damage on your enemy 1/day with minimal action economy cost. Feels better than 5 points!
2d10 per long rest isn't a great feature, it's pretty good at pevel 3, but after it's too little, and also fire damage, if you could use your spells it'd be pretty good, otherwise 5-8 points max seems fair
@@leonardoconde8930its 3d10 because the ability specifically says its cast at 2nd level
The better feature, not even mentioned, is access to Flames of Phlegothos, which can be very good on a caster.
@@garyco766 I think infernal constitution is a better racial feat for tieflings.
The problem is that it works off of Charisma and you are only going to see charisma used some of the time.
"I think it's great. If you don't, that's your opinion - and you're wrong" made me laugh out loud
Not sure I see how Stonecunning, which I've always thought of as the ribbonyist feature of all the ribbony features out there, gets more than 1 point. You'd really be three times happier to get a highly situational bonus on history checks than you would be to get longbow proficiency?
My dwarvophobic quibbles asside, tho, great video--can't wait to watch the rest
I definitely think the first round here highlights what you mentioned in the intro to this series, that even the worst mechanical races are still useful for the right characters. I think that's a cool thing about the original PHB races, that even the races with weaker features mostly have something unique about them, and honestly the more races that come out, the more I start to feel like some of the new ones are just new combinations of old features, like having a natural weapon, some kind of bonus teleport, or innate spells. Watching this I feel like you could absolutely use just the PHB races and still have a solid game, with all the race options being pretty simple to play, which is a great trait for the base game to have.
Replied to the wrong comment.
Ok, but have you considered that half elves and tieflings are hot?
Fire genasi are hot.
@@TreantmonksTemple I am afraid he was not talking about body temperature.
@@muai I was. Mine.
Every race is hot if you're horni en
This is a really good vid and i love this rating system. I think it's worth pointing out though that its a general rating that is fully disconnected from possible builds. Some builds need specific races that are usually considered weak but optimal for that build.
I actually found the opposite. A lot of the ratings he gives features are biased by his use in individual builds, and I think he should be considering the generality more. In fact, I think certain races should be getting bonuses for their ability to be useful across all builds. For instance, the half-elf should get a significant bonus because every single feature is adaptable to any build you want.
Also, I agree on Halfling Lucky being 50 points. As one who rolls so many 1s he's actually still gotten a 1 a few times for his Halfling despite having to roll it twice in a row, I can tell you that this feature is a lifesaver.
I would argue having Darkvision is just as valuable as +5 or -5 movement speed...like think about how much Darkvision comes up, I think they should both be 10 points...if you still think having +5 or -5 movement speed is still worth a lot, then 15 points feels right...20 points feels like it is a bit much.
Darkvision is something you can easily work around not having, whether through a feat, darkvision spell, light cantrip, or hooking a lantern to your belt.
Keep in mind darkvision only lets you barely see in complete darkness, and you don't get advantage against creatures without darkvision only negated disadvantage. You also have disadvantage on perception checks made with darkvision.
In a more stealth orientated party not having darkvision is a major drawback, but otherwise it's not worth that much.
Been following your guides since the old WOTC boards. Thank you for all the optimizing!
The relative weakness of feats available at 1st Level in a year or so (assuming current OneDnD-UA becomes law) is going to drop that free EXTRA feat worth 125 to something more in line with the other races, I imagine. It won't leapfrog Human to S-Tier automatically.
Mostly agree with the point system, although I think weapon and armor proficiencies should be given more points, especially post-Tasha's, since they can enable major build options for non-martial classes. Otherwise, I think most skills should be as valued as much as a utility cantrip; skills are always undervalued imo, they are an integral part of the exploration pillar of the game. There is no scenario where I'd rather have Artificer's Lore (5 points) over Perception proficiency (4 points).
Also access to Elven Accuracy should worth some points. One of the strongest and most used half-feats in the game.
My recommendation is you determine how much you think it's worth then add that amount to each race that counts as an elf in this series for new rankings based on your evaluation.
@TreantmonksTemple The High Elf also can be a very good boon to Rogues, Clerics, and any Intelligence based caster with that free cantrip of your choice. Hell it contributed to a lot of the damage of your Phantom Steed build, and Elven Accuracy helps even more.
On Eldritch Knights and classes that get only one attack like Clerics, Booming Blade is always a good choice for free.
@@jcdenton2187 Yup. The SCAG cantrips make a big difference to something like a Rogue. It is one of those that when its applicable its worth a lot lot more, but when not its merely OK.
@@jcdenton2187 Started the campaign pre-Tasha's, so that was a factor, but part of why I chose an elf for my artificer was to get a ton of downtime crafting done via the Trance feature elves get, and since it was the High Elf that got the INT boost, that was the elf variety that made sense- the extra magic definitely helped sort out the question of which cantrips to take early on, especially when I was the lone magic-user for a while.
I thought the same thing when I was watching the video. Access to a powerful racial feat really accounts for so much. I wish all the other races had a feat that made me want to play them like EA. Otherwise, I'm 100% on-board with the rankings.
So what number is appropriate? 20? 15? 10? I'm not really sure, but it seems like more than a stat bump point-wise and it's extra accuracy in a bounded system. That has to count for something. On the other hand, it's a drain on your finite ASI resource, and isn't going to make sense in every build.
I love the video. I feel like NOT having Darkvision *feels* like having a 25 feet movement speed. -20 points for no Darkvision!
(Counterpoint - Tasha's Custom Lineage puts darkvision = to a proficiency, so there's that.)
Gotta say that for Drow, the Sunlight Sensitivity penalty is quite variable based on class and campaign. I took a Drow sorcerer to level 11 through many dungeon crawl adventures, and Sunlight Sensitivity came up exactly once, so I just cast an AoE spell instead of Fire Bolt . YMMV, obviously, but it's not always the albatross you make it out to be.
I'm about to start a campaign as a drow sorcerer, any advice? 😅
@@ignaciogasconha9309 Be sure to have a blend of spells that are both "to hit" and Save-based. That's the quick, easy workaround. Other than, lean into it RP-wise. ;)
To be honest I’m not surprised by the **SPOILER**’s lowest ranking. I’ve always felt they were fairly bad. That’s why I’m so excited about the UA version, more than any other species so far!
Yea, not really surprised. THey never get played.
I use a lot of half elves when I build a character just because I like elven accuracy and I like to make feat hungry characters so the extra ability point over normal elves can make a difference.
So I don’t disagree with your rank but some people may put access to certain feats as a major factor in their own ranks.
I just don't understand how weapon training with a martial weapon, which with Tasha's is now any weapon in that same class, is only worth 1 point. I've seen you choose a specific race for a build because it needed that weapon training, which it couldn't otherwise get without multiclassing or a feat. That has got to be worth more than 1 point. Particularly since you given one point for tool proficiency, and tool proficiency can be gained by any PC using Downtime Rules in the DMG. The DMG ranks it the same as a Language Proficiency, which I note you give 0 points for. Weapon Proficiency? Not so much, you can't just gain it any time with the Downtime Rules. They're clearly not ranked the same.
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing on these. I'd take weapon and armor proficiencies over Stonecunning any day. I realize it doesn't help a ton on a class who already had the proficiencies, but Tasha's at least gives you something you can do with those rather than wasting them. And if you're on a class that doesn't, it saves you the multiclassing or feat, like you mentioned.
I’d say maybe the first martial weapon proficiency could be worth more points, what with customise your origin, with subsequent weapon proficiencies not really providing anything of value.
The low value makes sense to me. Classes that rely on weapons typically already have the weapon proficiencies that are useful to them, and those they don't rely on weapons are usually just getting +1 damage on an inefficient last option.
Playing devil's advocate here.
- 4/13 base classes get access to all martial weapons (Barbarian, Fighter, Paladin, Ranger)
- Some classes get selective martial weapon proficiency which covers both Str and Dex weapons/builds, as well as certain subclasses grant martial weapon prof:
- Bard: Base Class (hand crossbows, longswords, rapiers, shorts words), Valor (all martial weapons), Swords (scimitar),
- Cleric: Death, Tempest, Twilight, War (all martial weapons)
- Druid: Base Class (Scimitar)
- Monk: Base Class (Shortsword), Kensei (any 2 weapons)
- Rogue: Base Class (hand crossbows, longswords, rapiers, shortswords)
- Warlock: Base Class (any melee weapon if you have Pact of the Blade), Improved Pact Weapon Invocation (shortbow, longbow, light crossbow, or heavy crossbow)
- Wizard: Bladesinger (a single one-handed weapon)
So, as you can see, a lot of classes + subclasses get some form of martial weapon proficiency. Especially the ones that explicitly support weapon use in combat with their mechanics. The one's who tend not to get any form of weapon proficiency have playstyles that push them towards exclusively spellcasting, or have limitations such as Monk's dedicated weapons/rogues sneak attack.
TLDR:
Basically, if your class/subclass leans towards using any weapons, it probably already offers you several proficiency options.
Meaning an extra martial weapon proficiency from your race is a dead feature if:
- You're a Barb/Pal/Fighter/Ranger/Warlock (Pact of Blade)
- OR it's fairly redundant if you chose any of the subclasses listed above, as weapons in 5e are pretty much only different due to their damage die and like 3 feats. This would make much more of a difference if 5e weapons had similar unique abilities like the upcoming playtest.
- OR the martial weapons you can utilize are restricted by class features (Monk, Rogue)
- OR you have a completely different combat playstyle that doesn't utilize weapons (Spellcaster, Wildshape, etc).
This pretty much only leaves you absolutely needing a martial weapon proficiency when you don't have one for more niche builds, or to raise your weapon damage by like a damage die. Not the vast majority of characters/builds require this, meaning you'd be in the minority.
Compare this to an extra tool proficiency, which can be used by ANY class/character and can be chosen to enhance skill checks or provide another service/role that your class may otherwise not be able to perform.
Do you value the tool proficiency that'll always have a use (albeit minor one) for any character as less? Or do you value the martial weapon proficiency that'll be a dead feature for the majority of character builds as more?
Great start to the series! I also think it's pretty clear Tasha's and Monsters of the Multiverse signposted WOTC's current direction, and the PC options in the 2024 PHB will be brought into line with those later works.
Shouldn't half elves be split by ancestry? Half-wood elves are just S tier, all that listed + 35 feet movement...
I agree.
You have to forgo skill versatility for 5 feet of movement. That only nets 10 more points based on the criteria he's using, so it would still be C tier.
@@MaximanLP I dunno, I feel it's all just too subjective pro pretend the point system actually has any real math in it. Also, a lot of those abilities change in real relevance depending on class/subclass, etc. Frankly the openly subjective tier list sounds more pragmatic in the end of the day.
@@Tentacl I can see your perspective, but he noted in the preview video that it was just his best attempt at "objectively" rating the races. You can weight things differently/assign different values based on different playstyles or settings to make your own tier list. Just think of it as a template that he applied based on his experience. I mean, I personally value the two +2 stat bonuses and medium armor more than he does, so I would put mountain dwarf a lot higher.
What I've ranked here is the half-elf in the PHB (which does not differentiate half-wood elves and half-anything else elves). However, if you would like to know the point total for the variants from SCAG, you can work it out really easily. Losing skill versatility is -10 points, then add the replacement feature values (which are all covered in this video) to get the new point total.
I’ve always dismissed halfling offhand due to no dark vision. I have since rethought my life decisions based on this video and will be playing a Mastiff mounted halfling. Much respect for your data driven approach.
Yeah, I agree with other people that Gnome Cunning is a bit more powerful than you put here. Having said that, I do find Gnomes a bit dull, their active abilities almost never come up, and their strongest ability is both passive, which means you can't build around it or use it in cool ways, and also unclear on what exactly is magic. So I'm definitely in favour of Gnome redesigns!
I like seeing the point values, makes it super easy to figure out where my own homebrew versions would sit on this scale. Currently running a mini campaign for 2 dnd newcomers where I decided to give the standard 30 foot speed for both players (a forest gnome and a mountain dwarf). Also gave the forest gnome a slight buff in that she is able to talk to ALL beasts, but may have disadvantage on Charisma (Persuasion, Intimidation) rolls with beasts larger than her
Every Treantmonk video these days is laugh out loud funny (in the right way) and the content as always is so insightful. Hats off
Hey treantmonk, what about the optional rule for half elfs to change their skill versatility for an elf trait, the rule is from sword coast but i have yet to see a dm that didn't allow me to use it.
I bet there will be a “sourcebook rankings” video later, but it’ll be fairly easy to break down. 10 points for the skills could become 8 points for a Cantrip from a half High Elf, technically a bit worse. Not sure I fully agree with the result, since I think I’d rather have a Cantrip than two skills on many characters, but so it goes, and it’s still pretty close. Half-drow gains the most, with 34 points for their magic without sunlight sensitivity, should be enough to move from C to B tier. Half Wood Elf would be 20 points instead of 10, but still C tier within these rankings.
I didn't cover them, but determining a new point total is something you can do yourself quite easily. The Half-Elf variants don't get skill versatility, so that's -10, then every replacement has a point amount I've covered in this video, which you can add to get the new point total.
I really like the new feel of the intro. The levity and up-tempo theme song are positive changes! Keep it up
Human is probably should be higher due to its ability to ensure multi passing but that context is lost in a pure number estimate. I do think you were too hard on magic resistance and skills. And I think the lack of racial feat acknowledgment hurt elves. And it feels wrong that you double count dwarves resilience. Is it that many times better than any of the elf features? Its interesting to see how you rank them though. It shows both perspective and personal biases which I really like. I'm really looking forward to this series.
I don't know if anyone has told you this but I really love the Patron shout out bits.
Feel like Dwarven Armor Prof (light & medium) is being underrated by a good amount.
I think you're undervaluing racial cantrips.
Even ignoring how they match against non-spell features, I find racial cantrips are consistently much more impactful than once per day 1st level spells.
booming blade or green flame blade are great if your class both uses martial weapons and doesn't get access to those cantrips. Fighters and clerics certainly enjoy the option, even if you go EK and eventually get access to them it's still very nice to have.
Looking forward to an S tier ranking video!
Should Elves get some kind of bonus for having access to Elven Accuracy?
Seeing Sesame Street old school muppets fainting already made this one of my fav videos! Soaking all this up before I make guides for BG3 of which PHB races are the options to choose! TY Chris!
I think extra points should be added for races with race specific feats. Surely the ability to take elven accuracy for example is worth something. Much more than a ribbon feature I would imagine. Same fore bountiful luck on the halflings, the option to take that feat gives them some value even if you want to debate how much it is worth.
Cool video. Hopefully the new players handbook fixes things like not choosing your casting stat for spells, where you put your ability scores and the ability to use your own spell slots for all these racial spells.
Hill Dwarf: to get +1 hp per level, you actually need 2 ability score points (to boost your Con), so shouldn’t that be bumped up a bit?
I don't think so. 2 ability score points gets you +1 con saves too.
@@TreantmonksTemple Fair point!
And more healing with hit dice
With 1 ability score increase (+2), the equivalent is the tough feat, which increases HP by 2 per level.
@@killerm5 not equivalent by a long shot
On Lucky "If you don't , that's your opinion, and your wrong" LOL love it
Sunlight sensitivity almost never comes up in our game. Rarely had combats in direct sunlight for some reason over the 10 years we've played 5e. I personally would have assigned a lesser penalty for that flaw.
I think this would be very table/campaign dependent. I would say that probably half of my table's combats happen in enough direct sunlight to screw someone with sunlight sensitivity. But it would vary a lot. If you don't fight in the sun, then the old kobold is insane and I don't know why everyone isn't playing it.
I almost feel it needs to be ranked twice depending on campaign. If its under dark or cavern crawls its good if its open battlefields its bad
Could you explain how Feat is so valuable in your books? Maybe I misunderstood something about your scoring video, in which case, sorry for the pointless comment. If I got it correctly, with 125 points you get Resistance against all types of damage except force and Radiant (and physical ones). Or 25 optional skills (basically you could give a race proficiency with every skill and tool). Or 40 base movement, swim and climb speed, telepathy, trance, darkvision 120 feet and +1 to all abilities (+1 to all i presume).
If this ranking is based purely on combat, I might understand the scoring more, but still.. 40 base movement, resistance to necrotic, poison and fire and +6 to ability scores vs feat. I understand that a feat can be used to customize a character in many ways, but do you really think it's that valuable?
125 points if you deliberately intend to completely break the game with your build, when combined with all the other delicious Cheese on the 5E plate. - Maybe 75 points, or somewhat more, otherwise.
I feel like the ability scores as a total isn't representative of the actual benefits you'd feel in game. The way I would have scored them is something along these lines:
+2 = 30 pt
2*+2 = 50 pt
+1 = 10 pt
2*+1 = 20pt
Every +1 higher gives a bonus lower by two, so
6*+1 = 40 pt
Or even every +1 after the first 2 just flat out +4 so
6*+1 = 36 pt
You'd might want to scale those numbers down (I wouldn't personally), but I feel like these ratios show the benefits of a half elf over normal human for example.
I know I know about the disclaimer XD But.
I feel like many racial options benefitted a lot by having split features. For example, the gnomes have 1 big feature which is worth in this rating as +25 points for all magical saving throws vs magic, where the dwarves got 10 points for saving throws vs poison, and the elves got 10 points for saving throws vs being charmed.
If the gnomes had 10 features, each an advantage vs a specific magical condition or effect, like charmed, frightened, etc. They would get 100 points. I'm not saying its worth 100 points.
Just a thought, but if there was a feat that game advantage vs all mental magical saving throw, I would consider it, while a feat to gain poison resist + advantage, I probably would not.
Quickly, in the spells, you have frightened, charmed, paralysed, incapacitated, blinded, stunned, deafened, unconscious, petrified, (cursed, slowed, confused)
thoroughly agree. it's hard to beat vhuman, but stout halfling, wood elf, and mountain dwarf definitely have their classes/subclasses. a Wood Elf Scout w/ Elven Accuracy and Wood Elf Magic feats is bonkers.
I'm not sure if you're just in a good mood or what, but you've been funnier than usual lately. Glad to see it.
I had a thought:
It might be worth making a second tier list based only on the score of the highest-ranked feature, minus the points subtracted for the features with negative points. This is because people rarely make builds based on _all_ the features, instead only taking the relevant one into account and the negative features. The other features might as well not exist at that point, if only for the influence on the choice of race.
The only real surprise for me is mountain dwarf and high Elf but that all makes sense on a mathematical level that they'd just rank that low.
I guess I'm spoiled a little since my playgroup has adopted the one dnd character creation - the 1st level feat and lineage spells are definitely an improvement.
Halflings: i always ask the DM to exchange Luvky for Bountiful Luck. Rerolling my friends' rolls is amazing, it happens more often, and it really brings home the idea "OH THAT'S WHY we brought a 3 ft tall, 35 lbs halfling with us!"
It reminds me of DCC rpg Lucky Charm ability :)
This is the kind of thing I was looking for when they announced Custom Lineage. A point based system for you to build your own race/species/lineage using a pool of attributes.
What about Race specific feats that raise many builds to optimal levels? Half-elf and Elf can pick Elven accuracy, which are a part of optimizing a lot of builds.
There are better versions of those races in other books. Like the season eladrin.
You're asking about a different topic entirely. The video is about the ship and you're asking about the ballista.
@@nickm9102 I don't know about that. It seems like access to racial feats should be considered along with everything else. If this was a separate feature listed with the base race description I am sure that this would increase the score of races that have access to optimal feats. I don't see how you separate the two issues because a tier list of racial options should include that as just another racial option. (Same for Gnome, Dragonborn, Half-Orc, etc. feats with the score varying depending on the strength of those feats from zero on up.)
@@mattf5935 the issue is that you are address something that doesn't apply to a single Race the majority of the time Drow high magic is one of the few that only applies to full Drow. The big part is how often are the racial feats taken? Elven Accuracy, ok but flames of Phlegethos or infernal constitution? Looking up the spelling I gut saw fade away and I bought Xanathar's on release.
I highly value the half elf stat spread because it lets you get 16/16/14 on point buy without dumping a stat. Though I recognize dump stats dont matter much from an optimization standpoint - I just think it's nice to have.
Dear treantmonk,
You are doing an amazing job!
I think though that your factors for a race miss a foundamental parameter: the specific racial feat access that a specific race grants es elven accuracy or similar
So glad you are doing this. I have been wanting this since custom lineage changes came out.
Okay question on the half-elf (and I'll admit, I'm pretty biased, as most characters I make are half-elves): shouldn't the half-elf get more points on its ability score bonuses as you get far more freedom with the ability scores than normal? Sure with Tasha's everyone gets +2 and +1 or three +1s, but the fact that if you're in Adventurer's League and let's say you don't take the Tasha's book you can get wide versatility with your ability score bumps is not nothing. And being able to have more ability scores that are better helps with passing saving throws, if not also with skills and combat rolls (which also give bonuses at other levels).
I'm fine with the ranking as it is, I suppose, but it just feels like we're undercutting that this is one of the few races that can build strong stats for three stats, which some classes really need
Really well done and I really like the point system you created for analysis. It also makes it easy to see where our valuations would differ.
For example, I think darkvision is underrated at 10 points, especially compared to the -20 penalty to movement. I would give it a +20 value. I also agree with the other comments I've seen about access to racial feats, but I can see how that would create the need to evaluate a whole other set of data, but those do have a large impact for some races (Elves).
My biggest critique though is on the valuations of proficiencies. My tables are possibly more RP and downtime focused than many, but generally speaking I think you have undervalued these. I think the problem is one of diminishing returns: your first tool/weapon/skill proficiency is going to have much more impact than the following ones. I would suggest something along the lines of 5 points for the first in each category, 2 for the second, and one for each additional. It wouldn't make a massive difference, but I think it would cause some shuffling in the ranks.
Half-orc is higher up than I expected.
Are you sure about weapon proficiency giving only 1 point per weapon?
Because with Tasha, we can swap weapons within category for another one, so those Dwarves, Elves or Drow, they all can access weapons like Whip, Pole-arm, Heavy XBow, Hand XBow, Longbow or Warhammer with classes like Rogue, Trickery Cleric, Monk and this can be almost game-changing for them (gaining ability to attack melee with reach, gain second attack (PAM, XBE), gain d10 attack that works with Crusher - Monk with Warhammer,…).
Why didn’t you diversify Martial and Simple weapons? Why didn’t you give more points for the first proficiency and then less for any additional one (because value of 4 is much less than 4x one weapon)?
I'm fine with 1 per point. Weapon Proficiency from lineage is typically bad. Either you're a class that needs weapons, and it'll almost always give you access to the proficiency you need, or you tend to be from a class that doesn't really need to use weapons, so proficiency doesn't matter.
Cases where you can actually take advantage of a weapon proficiency that isn't from your class are rare. Basically just Monks as far as I figure, and even then, using a d8 versatile d10 weapon isn't that much better than using a d6 versatile d8 versatile weapon.
@@thebitterfig9903 In monk’s case, it is 8.775 instead of 7.725, but 2-3 times per round, so the difference is cca 14%!
Then there is Rogue that with heavy XBow also gains more than 1 flat dmg.
In case with whip, Rogue can now attack with melee from 10 ft away, so he can either hide or dash instead of disengage BA.
All Clerics without Martial Weapon prof (at least 8 of them if I can remember correctly) can profit from this (and some of them gets lvl 8 ability that boosts weapons attacks). Either Heavy Xbow or Greataxe mean 1 flat dmg bonus over classic choices, but when you have DEX Cleric, it means 1d8 instead of 1d4! Or you have the same dmg as dagger, but with reach - Whip.
And with Clerics and weapons like Greatsword, Maul, Pole-Arms, Pike,… profits are much bigger than you think! Or dual-wielding DEX based Cleric - 2x d6 vs d4 or even 2xd8 vs d4 with Fual Wielder feat.
Just check how many subclasses have only simple weapon proficiency and you will see.
Even though I really think that Darkvision (which is really painful not to have), extra Weapon and Armor proficiencies, and extra ability scores should be worth more, I don't think it'd move the needle all that much from what you're showing. I watch a lot of the optimization videos and see Variant Human picked all the time for that free feat, but I've yet to be in a 5E campaign that actually took Variant Human. I guess the Crossbow Expert, Sharpshooter, Great Weapon Master, or whatever feat choice is THAT important at 1st level just doesn't make the vanilla human worth taking over just about every other race to any of the groups I play with. We definitely wouldn't put 125 points on that for us. But to each their own. I know a lot of people swear by it.
Yeah I guess this is a group thing. When I play we have to more or less have a no human/custom lineage stipulation or everyone would just play that.
Curious! I think I am yet to see a group without at least 1 Variant Human.
I mean, from an optimising perspective, feats are super important, and almost always better than a straight ASI. One extra feat is powerful, but you get it earlier than everyone else. PAM, GWM, CBE, SS for martials and even things like War Caster or Alert for casters at level 1. I find it tails off at higher levels, when everyone else has nearly as many feats and you've raised your primary ability score to 20 anyway. Treatmonk tends to optimise for levels 1-10, and so I'd agree at these ranges that the free feat is worth a lot.
An inconsistency in how these are scored that results in the standard human not getting enough points. Variant human scores -20 for a +2 ability score becoming +1. Half elf shows getting single added +1 score to be worth 20pt.
So a std human has an additional plus one in three scores which would be worth 60, and -20 for having a +2 downgrade. So for the scoring to be consistent a standard humans array is worth forty.
I'm not in the same field with some features values, for example, Darkvision is way more valuable from my point of view because being so common made not having it a big liability for many groups, and humans should be more penalized for not having it.
As a relatively new DM, I was considering asking my players to dial back on the non-PHB races. Seeing this ranking is making me wonder how reasonable that request might have been.
A big part of the difference between the gut instinct chart and the scored chart is also likely the fact that when you create builds the value of a race has to do with their comparative advantage in a specific playstyle/niche. Some of the lower scorers may fit builds more often so they rank higher by "gut" because they are in fact more valuable than a higher scoring race that does not often fit a desired build or play style due to being too general, having features that don't synergize, etc
I think poison resistance should count as worse than other damage resistances as it’s rare to be hit by (from what I’ve seen) and is by far the worst damage type as there are easily the most enemies resistant to it and it’s not even close. Great video though, I’m excited to see more
First, I really like this system. I think the points for a proficiency is kinda showing. I feel getting to choose or getting a an always good one (like perception) is really strong - something you'll be rolling every session, often multiple times. But something like a weapon prof, or some of these other things.. But that's must me!
I think for half elf it is worth giving some extra points to the fact that it was one of the first races and still has a slight edge even after tashas in the ability score option. Ya get Cha 2 and 1 in 2 other abilities. That is pretty potent especially for any of the Cha based classes.
I can't believe you forgot to add the +100000 points to gnomes for being silly little guys
Fact: They only get those points if they wear the silly little hat.
For your next video, will you add the races on top of these from PHB or will it be a separate graphic for each video on this series?
You will get graphics in each video for everything put together.
Why did Minor Illusion get marked down for not being able to choose ability score? As far as I know, casting ability score has never come into to play when I've used Minor Illusion. I would have thought the number of points off, if any, would very much depend on which cantrip.
Enemies can determine if something is an illusion, based off a dc set by the casting score. Warlock gnome with -8 int has mediocre minor illusion spell save dc. Same style of ability from later books lets you say "i want charisma as my dc," which is just superior.
Quick addition: I'd rule passive insight, but it miiiiight be investigation as written.
@@ParaisoFlower yeah, maybe it's important for some players with some DMs... I just don't remember any of my DMs ever challenging illusions that way 🤷♀
@@notallwhowanderarelost4797 That's both the joy and detriment of the game. Any build or advice you find online is only as relevant as your table. DM likes bonus action potions and doesn't enforce spellcasting/free-hand mechanics? W00t. DM makes you count arrows and item weight, and includes exactly zero magic items in a campaign? Not so w00t, but also valid.
Definitely think darkvision is undervalued, but maybe it’s cuz I’m on roll20 a bit more and my dm enforces vision.
I tend to agree. If your DM is strict on darkvision and properly applies disadvantage on Perception (including -5 passive Perception) in dim light, then not having darkvision is a nightmare. You effectively cannot use Stealth at all in dark environments because you have to constantly give away your position with a light source, and everything with darkvision has a chance to surprise you.
I think it's undervalued because it's common. But try playing as the lone character without darkvision in a party and see how important it is.
@@zerokid2007 I'd argue outside of stealth darkvision is only needed on one character per group, redundant sources of darkvision doesn't add much especially without perception proficiency.
Mostly here to say that I liked how you ranked Hill Dwarf toughness as though they had a full +1 stat. The HP is about half of what you kid get from a +2 in Constitution, the HP but not the saving throw increase. I’ve often heard folks say how great the Mountain Dwarf is while completely ignoring Hill, and that just feels wrong. Consider a character who already has medium armor, and now the value would be effectively the same. Hill might actually be better, since the toughness allows you to go over the 20 cap. A rare circumstance, but still.
Really liking the series so far. I think it’s fascinating and a great example of how a tier list works better to begin a conversation, rather than the conclusion of discussion.
I think feat access should factor in somewhat. As an elf you don't automatically get elven accuracy, but the possibility of getting it is definitely a reason to play them. And not all racial feats are created equal.
I think one thing missing from the methodology, if I’m not mistaken, is the presence of race prerequisites in feats. Elves should probably have a score bump due to the ability to take Elven Accuracy.
I think what is so interesting about this is the distinct ways in which people values things and how certain classes or ways of playing can completely mitigate the negative factors of some of the classes. I would much rather have 2 skill proficiencies than poison resistance. Those skills are likely to come up every other session, while poison resistance is much less common. Lower speed is huge, but if you are playing ranged or have teleportation it is effectively a non issue. This isn't to disagree with anything, just interesting to note how some bad races can be saved.
When you view races in a vacuum they tend to seem worse, cause a lot of class features can easily fix these issues, if a halfling is too slow you can go rogue and cunning action to outrun people, if a dwarf is too slow you can go barbarian and enjoy the movement speed bonus negating your penalty.
Thank you for all the work you do!
Seeing the half-elf so low really caught me offguard. The extra +1 on an ability helps out a lot on some builds. I am curious to see where the rest of the races end up. The tierlist could be a good opportunity to re-evaluate several races I have overlooked.
This is exactly why you cannot assign default values to each ability without differentiating the class you pair it up with. Results in half of races defined "unuseable" by you.
He specifically said that none of the races are unusable, and that almost any build can be powerful using any of the races. Its just a general power level, not specifically looking at combo's with specific features which would be far beyond the scope of something like this. Imagine looking at every different synergy and interaction for all the 70 something races with every single class and subclass, that would be insane.
This is more about overall power not specific synergies.
Also no race is unusable, just subpar in a general sense.
Treantmonk in his guides often points out that you can make a character using suboptimal options and still have a good character and a fun time.
@@luka2784 Ok I didnt catch that he said something like that, but what would be the point of having this tier list, if all the synergies and interactions have such a crutial part in race's performance.
@@michalgabriel9647 I guess that in a large number of race/ class/ subclass options, their wont be a particular interaction. While their their are some instances where a particular interaction will make a race a lot better than it would otherwise be, this tier list would give you an indication of roughly how much power a race will bring to a build. A lot of racial features are quite generic and don't combo much, eg skill proficiencies, boost to saving thows, ect, and being able to evaluate those against each other is useful. With very specific features eg minitours hammering horns, its clearly going to be more useful on particular builds, but might still have some value on a lot of character that don't specialise in it, and so I guess would be rated around that.
Its kind of like how the assassin rouge is a pretty bad subclass by itself, but can be very powerful in a gloomstalker nova build. Its still fair to rank assassin quite badly, but just have a stipulation that it has potential.
So Minor Illusion with INT gets 8 points and ANY Wizard cantrip with INT gets also 8 points?
Where is versatility factor reflected? We can take Booming Blade (so INT doesn’t matter) on Rogue or Mobile Trickery Cleric, Firebolt on Psy Warrior to cover range or even that Minor Illusion if we want to and you give these abilities the same bonus?
It doesn’t seem fair!
2:42 This brings me immeasurable joy
Halflings bailed out by their darn luck again! XD
You deserve all your Patreon supporters. I stink for at least not giving some "One-time Thanks."
I know it’s mostly a ribbon feature, but races with a particularly long life Spand I think you should have some point value associated with it, because there are effects that can magically age characters to death, most of the time it’s just role-play applications not mechanical, but worth considering.
This aligns really well with my passive perception of things; I always tend to lean towards Variant Humans; the free feat is too good to pass up.
I suspect part of why the gnome is so bad is that, pre-Tasha's, +2 INT was kind of a unique thing for a race to have, and potentially a powerful one, with Wizards generally seen as being the most powerful class by higher levels.
I think the one parameter that is potentially worth considering for ranking races are race-specific Feats. Sure, Variant Human and Custom Lineage get a "free" Feat, but they can never take Feats like Bountiful Luck (Halflings), Elven Accuracy (Elves), or Dragon Fear (Dragonborn).
I can't explain the feeling of eventually hearing wood elf last of the elves listed. I would have been happy with a C and accepted a D, but a B tier!
I feel that a low ranking on such a popular rac like the half elf is an indication that there is a flaw somewhere. If I had to take a stab at it, it’s the freedom of choice. I think being able to choose the ability score increases is more valuable than not being able to. For example I do not agree that the variant human should have a -20 because they only have a total +2. I think the fact that you can choose makes it more valuable or at the least a more desirable race to pic than others that don’t give you a choice. Too a lesser degree, the same would apply to skills. Skills you can choose should be more valuable than skills that are picked for you. These choices are what make the half elf so popular in my opinion.
I've got an upcoming campaign with two phb races... and a dhampir... I've tried to rank their abilities myself to try and balance them all out, so I'm very curious if my ranking will be similar to yours! Great series so far :)
Im satisfied where wood elf ended up they fit into that rouge/ranger niche really well and excel there and there dece everywhere else.
the 25 ft speed always makes me re-think if i REALLY want to play this kind of character. The slowness feels like a penalty. In this case, i can understand about boosting those slow characters up to 30 ft speed in the 2024 5e/OneD&D rules.
I think many folks rate flexibility in racial options highly (more highly than you are here) because flexibility unlocks or completes so many effective or interesting builds.
For example, High Elf being able to choose ANY Wizard cantrip is strictly better than Forest Gnome receiving Minor Illusion (which is a very strong cantrip), since choosing a cantrip opens up lots of build options. For example, an Int-based Booming Blade has no real downsides from being Int-based and unlocks tons of effective blade-cantrip builds.
Similarly, Half Elf receiving a +1 to two separate ability scores on top of its +2 is uniquely valuable in getting point-buy starting ability scores to 16s, which is a critical threshold.
A few things that I find interesting is how few points you assign to darkvision. I would rate it at 25 or 30 points on your scale. It is particularly noticeable when you have a party with only one player without darkvision who needs to pull out a torch or use a spell slot.
I also would push additional stat points higher, 1 stat point is a half an asi and 2 a full asi. Comparing vhuman to half elf, there is a large score difference when the total "asi" level is the same. I think it is a little stronger for the vhuman because they will get access to a feat earlier than the half elf, but by the time they are level 4 the difference is much smaller, with the difference in stats/feats just being that the vhuman could pick 2 feats or the half elf could have 2 asi worth of stats extra.
For different stat allocation than the standard +2+1, such as +1+1+1, +2+2, +2+1+1 could also be seen as being slightly inequal and could have a range of points similar to how different kind of resistances are evaluated slightly differently.
I wonder if these will be talking points when you go to evaluate your rankings at the end.
I do also think that many of these races were balanced partially around how well their stats synergized when initially printed, and that letting the stats be assigned freely exasperated the difference in racial features. I.e. str+con is very good combo for a melee fighter, or having int+cha tends to only have one of the stats be in the players focus and the other is about as useful as a ribbon feature.
With dwarves ans small races (halflings, gnomes and some others), you can take the feat "Squat nimbleness" from Xanathar, it gives you +1 strenght/dexterity, +5" speed, proficiency in athletics/acrobatics and advantage on checks you make to escape from being grappled.
Not too bad.
I think I would put lucky at 40 and movement speed penalty at -12. I think lack of dark vision should be a penalty more than dark vision should be a boon, it is relatively rare to not have it across the races and stands out. Also I think extra armor proficiency is WAY more impactful than a weapon proficiency, also the extra ability score post Tashas is much more impactful as well than given credit for. I also think a feat is massively impactful, but not quite as much as you did. Generally I think the order with my numbers wouldn't change things much, but there would be a few shifts back toward your gut feeling ranking I suspect.
So about the Monsters of the Multiverse races, will the shifter "subraces" be counted separately or will all of them be bundled into one?
And about the shifter, I think Wildhunt is kinda underrated. The obvious perk with the "creatures can't gain advantage vs you" would be something like a Barbarian's Reckless Attack, where you would have advantage, but now the enemy won't (unless they're further than 30 ft. away). An application I found out for myself recently is going prone to give ranged attacks disadvantage vs you, but attacks made within 5 ft. of you will lose out on the advantage they'd normally get. It's pretty niche, but I think the interaction's pretty cool.
Which makes picking up the athlete feat ''worth while''?, maybe it's at least the cheapest way to work with prone, cause drunken monk ... eh eww.
Are racial feats not being taken into account? Wood elf magic is a very powerful feat and imo makes the wood elf a more powerful racial option.
Also are you going to talk about the half elf variants later or are you not accounting for them because the +5 speed variant should help them out according to your method.