Race War Now!

Elves are manlets? I guess that depends on the setting. In some cases they're taller than humans.

Elves and dwarves are idiosyncratic in both their physical appearance, mindset and culture. I can't imagine a setting with one but not the other. It would feel imbalanced.

>chosing races for your campign setting based on attribute allocation rather than whether they fit the tone of the setting

This is what people mean when they say that D&D has become to gamist.

DnD elves are canonically manlets.

There is a big problem with the synonym races. Things like Dwarves and Gnomes had very little difference originally, and now they occupy this strange space that's quite uncertain of where they belong. I like the Pathfinder Gnome as they have a place, they're descended from the fey, in 5e there are Forest Gnomes which are like that, and I like Forest Gnomes, but it's Rock Gnomes which I don't get but they've become the more popular depiction of Gnomes as of late.

I actually like Halflings as they're this sort of meek pathetic people who are incredibly insular and comfy. The PCs are likely the outliers of Halfling society, who in their right mind would want to adventure? That's dangerous! Also their name just sounds small and pathetic, Halfling. Like they're not even whole. They've come to depend on humans so much I think they get taken advantage of in a weird not-child labour kind of way.

Tieflings, Dragonborn, Half-Orcs, and Half-Elves I think should be rather unique. I don't see them having communities of their own. Dragonborn the least as I don't like dragons being PCs.

Older editions of D&D have the average height of an Elf at 5 feet and Dwarves at or just under 4 feet. Admittedly though I believe that Dwarves and Elves like different alcoholic beverages.
I'm not sure why they would be combined. One makes a good wizard and one cannot be a spellcasting class (in editions before 3.0).
Modern Elves in 5e and what not generally have them in the exact same range of heights that Humans have (in 5e their random height starts 2 inches shorter and rolls the same dice).

I actually like a lot of monster-blooded races. Well, at least the distant-ancestor ones, rather than the "my dad was a dragon and my mother was a kitsune ones".

The ones they had in Eberron - Shifters and Changlings - are good examples. *Everyone* knows what werewolves are, and a lot of people will know what dopplegangers are, so players can wrap their heads around them without reading pages on pages of speshul lore. Yet they also don't allow for the potential abuse and derailment that being an actual lycanthrope or fetch would entail, nor do they completely define the character. Seems like a good deal?

> I would love for something like merfolk or rakshasas to be core races
i replaced half elves in my campaign with merfolk. i made my own custom fluff where they are a major race. they are cosmopolitan merchants/explorers/diplomancers. you might like them. i still need a decent name for them tho

>play dwarf female
>have to infiltrate a men's club
>walk up to bouncer
>bluff check
>tell DM I have beard
>auto-pass

over powered race desu

A dragonborn is to a dragon as a human is to a titan. In other words dragonborn are barely dragons and their fluff specifically says they live pretty much like humans, in large groups as people. So you can have an entire town of dragonborn peasant farmers and blacksmiths and tavern wenches, with the single human wizard or renowned fighter be the weird outsider for a change.

Tieflings are really varied depending on edition in that they can be a race, and thus you'll be able to find plenty of them, or a singular one off from some fucked up ancestry, in which case being an adventurer is pretty much their only job career with any hope of getting something nice.

Elves are very human in thought and shape, and thus would be very attractive to some people (like most of this fucking board), thus half elves wouldn't be as rare and thus really wouldn't be all that unique. And half orcs would probably be plentiful in regions with lots of crossover with orcs. Whether rape babies or muscle fetishes/pink skin fetish, there is going to be some crossing from both camps.

Really, your expectations of what races should be rare is built on some rather silly assumptions.

I loved eberron's shifters, and PF has them as skinwalkers, where they have a very large population from notAmerica in their setting. They even have a sidebar so you can make skinwalkers of other races like elves or gnomes or such.

That's awesome. Thanks user. I'm thinking of making them a major race in my campaign as well.

If Merfolk and Rakshasas were core races, you'd be begging for Tieflings and Dragonborn. You know it, I know it, the entire thread knows it.

What happens when orcs rape elves though? Is that how humans came about?

>A dragonborn is to a dragon as a human is to a titan. In other words dragonborn are barely dragons and their fluff specifically says they live pretty much like humans, in large groups as people. So you can have an entire town of dragonborn peasant farmers and blacksmiths and tavern wenches, with the single human wizard or renowned fighter be the weird outsider for a change.

That dilutes the majesty of dragons for me. Dragonborn SHOULDN'T have villages, and towns, there shouldn't be Dragonborn peasants, and Dragonborn bakers with Dragonborn farmers. It's in the name Dragon Born. They are born from Dragons. Those mythical, terrible, beings that are literally one half of the game's name. You plumb Dungeons, and you fight Dragons. Dragons should be this epic thing, having some not-dragon people in not-dragon villages dilutes that. I'm far more comfortable having Lizardfolk than Dragonborn.

Not in any edition or decent media

Do you also have the same reaction to Kobolds?

In all seriousness though, this is the issue that I have with half races. Why is it only humans who racemic and produce offspring. What happens when orcs fuck elves? What happens when dwarves fuck halflings?

I'm starting to think it's a Jewish conspiracy to dilute the human race with inferior genes...

>Tieflings are really varied depending on edition in that they can be a race, and thus you'll be able to find plenty of them, or a singular one off from some fucked up ancestry, in which case being an adventurer is pretty much their only job career with any hope of getting something nice.

Tieflings should be a one-off kind of being. Like the tiefling that is the result of some kind of bloodline curse from a fiend. "The seventh son of your seventh son shall be marked by wickedness in flesh." Some kind of baleful promise that comes to fruition. It can also be the result of some dark union, but I like the curse idea much better.

>Elves are very human in thought and shape, and thus would be very attractive to some people (like most of this fucking board), thus half elves wouldn't be as rare and thus really wouldn't be all that unique. And half orcs would probably be plentiful in regions with lots of crossover with orcs. Whether rape babies or muscle fetishes/pink skin fetish, there is going to be some crossing from both camps.

Aristocrats are also in human thought and shape, but you won't find an aristocratic daughter bearing the child of a peasant boy unless it's some kind of forbidden romance. Elves are aristocrats in nature. Their interactions with nature are very much like those of aristocrats and Disney princesses. When a baby elf is born, the birds of the forest add another note in their song. They command the forests to move so the glade they live in can see the beauty of the sunset as it falls past the horizon. Elf peasant is an oxymoron, they're always Knights, Lords, Ladies, Dukes, Princesses, Queens, and Kings. How could they love a commoner, even bear them a child. The forbidden sort of union is how.

I'm a fan of beast races and whatnot, but I wish they were further developed than "we took an animal and here you go"

The lizard-thing kobolds? Yes.

Although I've taken kobolds away from dragons and made them a kind of goblin. I like my goblins.

Just realized I didn't reply to the half-orc.

> And half orcs would probably be plentiful in regions with lots of crossover with orcs. Whether rape babies or muscle fetishes/pink skin fetish, there is going to be some crossing from both camps.

Considering I like my orcs a disgusting measly sort with boarish features, rape babies are going to be the kind of half-orcs that exist. That brings in a whole other argument of boundaries and the sort. A half-orcs existence in one of pain and tragedy, from conception to upbringing. Most are the pathetic and disgusting lot like the orcs, but it's the outliers that become PCs.

Personally, I agree. II think kobold's niche is being distantly dragon-descended peasants that rarely breed PCs.

Dragonlance's draconian bred as soldiers by evil magic and 3.5's adventurers that agree to become bound to dragons and receive some measure of their strength in exchange are much preferable to 5e dragonborn.

I got rid of the dwarves because I already had gnomes. And elves aren't a playable race in my homebrew. Now what?

Humans are all you need, child.

Based on that image, it seems that gnomes are the sexy midget race, as opposed to halflings being the hairy but not buff midget race.

Nothing. Elves and orcs are very much like a ring species with human in the middle. Elves can cross with humans, and orcs can cross with humans, but elves and orcs are too different.

>That dilutes the majesty of humans for me. Humans SHOULDN'T have villages, and towns, there shouldn't be human peasants, and human bakers with human farmers. It's in the name Huge Man. They are born from Giants.

I couldn't resist but its stupid and I know that

Like I said, you expectations are silly and weird. What about dragonborn really dilutes actual dragons? Nothing. Dragons are still giant as crazy powerful monsters who will kill entire villages and town on whim. They can be taken down only by a large army or a few adventures. It's just that now one of those adventures might be a slightly tall robust vaguely dragon head shaped dude who wants to kill that dragon for burning his family alive just like it killed your family.
It increase their visibility and makes them an even stronger influence in the game, Dragonborn expand the influence of dragons to even the races you can take.

>Like I said, you expectations are silly and weird. What about dragonborn really dilutes actual dragons? Nothing. Dragons are still giant as crazy powerful monsters who will kill entire villages and town on whim. They can be taken down only by a large army or a few adventures. It's just that now one of those adventures might be a slightly tall robust vaguely dragon head shaped dude who wants to kill that dragon for burning his family alive just like it killed your family.
>It increase their visibility and makes them an even stronger influence in the game, Dragonborn expand the influence of dragons to even the races you can take.

Everything, it makes "Dragon" closer to "Human." This should not be. The Dragon is an epic sort of creature, it is terrible. It is the Serpent, it is the Monster, it is Chaos, it is Satan. it is the beast that gnaws on the roots of the World-Tree. It should not be a vaguely humanoid shape with human desires and vendettas.

They've solidified into a dichotomy of nature versus industry, liberal culture versus rote traditionalism, of agility versus fortitude. A lot of their similarities come from commonly being held as the "old races," long lived with low birth rates, but their psychology and physiology are often both exaggerated from the human median in opposite directions.

And really mate, EVERYONE drinks a lot, especially in a fantasy setting.

Two weeks ago.

>It increase their visibility

Another point. This is bad. This is like seeing the monster in the horror film. Expectation and imagination will always do better than actually showing. Smaug was far more frightening when he was a lurking thing hidden in the gold, once he got out he was a blundering, smashing thing that moved like a chicken. The shadow always has a greater effect than the thing itself.

That picture just reminded me how much I love Hound Archons. Really wish they made it to 5e's monster manual.

Tieflings: Yeah I prefer the one off kind, but 4es version combines that "marked by wickedness in flesh" thing by making their race a sortof spreading curse. Any child conceived with another human always turns out a tiefling. And it was handed down by a demon turned god for allying with one of his subordinates who was trying to overthrow him.

Elves as aristocrats: I have never gotten this impression and their fluff really doesn't support that impression. They are more like robin hoods band of thieves mixed with modern ideas of druids, and honestly are very much like the scoia'tael of the Witcher series.

Half orcs: I like mine with more porcine features too, but that disgusting feature is something humans place on them since their features would be considered disgusting by humans. They are monstrous by many standards but that's because the dominant culture within their race is monstrous. Those who live among humans can be decent, some tribes are more decent than others, sometimes even being trade partners looking for things they need. The idea of an entire race being utterly evil just isn't a fun idea since it limits so many stories and ideas.

Ahhh, you've got the themes of dragons from Christian Myth, the worst set of myths possible for them. That would explain your hatred of dragonborn and the expectations for the race. To me, the dragon myth themes are pulled from across the world where they can be benevolent patrons of empires, animalistic monsters, personifications of the sin of greed, the protectors of a clan, the symbolic joiners of the spiritual and material, and other varieties. In some they can even be people, often taking human or humanoid form.

>elves and dwarves should combine into one

you are a fucking retard holy shit

>blatant tolkien ripoff

THIS ENTIRE GENRE IS DERIVATIVE OF TOLKIEN YOU STUPID FUCK

Despite popular opinion, I think dragonborn aren't all that bad an addition. Granted, I like to fluff them into something akin to dragonoids from Dark Souls, where they're technically still human but their physical form resembles a dragon's.

Only race I really dislike are gnomes, for personal reasons. Elves, dwarves, and halflings I'm okay with, but if that's all that's available I'd rather just play a human.

Calm down Virt

Honestly anytime I play a non-d&d system I'm inclined to agree.

>That would explain your hatred of dragonborn and the expectations for the race. To me, the dragon myth themes are pulled from across the world where they can be benevolent patrons of empires, animalistic monsters, personifications of the sin of greed, the protectors of a clan, the symbolic joiners of the spiritual and material, and other varieties.

In even all of those, their place is one of a great, majestic, epic and terrible being. It is a Dragon. It is a Dragon that protects this land. It is a Dragon that symbolizes the Empire. It is a Dragon that sits atop a great mountain and bestows it's wisdom to those who make the journey to it. Doesn't have the same impact if you say it's a Giant does all those things, now does it?

>In some they can even be people, often taking human or humanoid form.

>This I think is one of the more dumber things. It's good for a reveal, but I don't see how taking away the dragon-ness from a Dragon makes it interesting.

wtf is even the diffence between a gnome and a halfing? i have never understood why there are two "different" short races

Halflings are mundane or terrestrial.

Gnomes are fey.

Basically if you think of hobbits as a human midget then you would think of gnomes as an elf midget.

There are not necessarily any midget orcs but goblinoids fill the role sufficiently.
And I don't even know what a midget dwarf would need to be. It seems almost unacceptable.

>According to the original Dungeon Masters Guide in "Appendix N: Inspirational and Educational Reading", the "most immediate influences" were the works of Robert E. Howard, Edgar Rice Burroughs, A. Merritt, H. P. Lovecraft, Fritz Leiber, L. Sprague de Camp, Fletcher Pratt, Roger Zelazny, and Michael Moorcock.[10] Subsequently Gary Gygax listed the "major influences" as Robert E. Howard, L. Sprague de Camp, Fletcher Pratt, Fritz Leiber, Poul Anderson, A. Merritt, and H. P. Lovecraft, with "slightly lesser influence" from Roger Zelazny, Edgar Rice Burroughs, Michael Moorcock, Philip José Farmer, and others.[11]
From wikipedia.

And yes, Tolkien since his players and him liked the monsters and races.

One is hobbits, the simple farmers and such of the English countryside stolen wholesale from Tolkien but renamed due to legal issues. They can also be short thieves and romani expys.

The other is the fey tricksters of english folklore who embody the many small people who did magical deeds and such. They are tinkers and craftsmen and magical wonderworkers. Often bear unnatural looking hair and eye colors.

Read the fucking fluff in the books. Seriously how do so many of you fuckers keep arguing over these races and not know a goddamn thing about them?

one is a naturally gifted illusionist/alchemist
the other is a rogue.

D&D has always been a game first and a world-building device second

>dwarves are midget giants

Fuck off.
I would of agree with you till you mentioned scalies.

I would argue that it's equal parts game and storytelling device.

Lately though, the storytelling gets pushed aside in favour of mechanics.

>Doesn't have the same impact if you say it's a giant doing all those things, now does it?

I would disagree with you there, giants can have immense narrative power and presence if you treat them as being near-godlike in a similar vein to giants from celtic or norse myth

I believe that just because it's first and foremost a game does not mean it's storytelling potential is significantly weakened.

For example, just because you should mechanically have a race that gives a bonus to dexterity and a penalty to constitution doesn't mean it has to be an "elf", it could be humans from an isolated jungle tribe, or goblinoids bred for stealth, or whatever else you can think of

This is how I've always handled D&D personally, make the mechanics work, and then look at the mechanics and fill out the fluff to make it all make sense

I disagree. Mechanics should aid and facilitate the storytelling. Not the other way around. Building around mechanics stifles creativity.

I don't play RPGs for the mechanics, I play them to get together with some friends and partake in a shared story. I think it's a shame that people approach tabletop RPGs the same way you would a video game.

>I would disagree with you there, giants can have immense narrative power and presence if you treat them as being near-godlike in a similar vein to giants from celtic or norse myth

I just don't see Giants having that kind of impact. Giants are just big people, be they dumb, savage, noble, or enigmatic, they're still big people. A people of a bygone age, but still people. They can definitely hold a candle on their own don't get me wrong, but they just can't compare to dragons for me. The only thing they've got going for them is scale, a giant can stomp his way through a city and Harryhausen around the PCs to have a conversation, but they don't carry the weight of a dragon.

Building around a framework helps creativity greatly in my personal experience

To start building the fluff without mechanics in mind leaves me lost, like trying to write a short story without thinking of a theme first, or drawing a picture without a scene in mind to draw

Honestly I don't give a shit I just want my races to feel distinct. Something I hate about DnD is that at the end of the day all of the races feel interchangeable. A dwarf is a bit better than an elf if you want a high constitution but not that much better. By level 4 an elf could reach the maximum possible constitution if they rolled well. At the end of the day I feel like races are more for thematic purposes which is fine but kind of defeats the point of using different races instead of using all humans.

I mean look at 40k for comparison, although none of their RPGs are really built around playing as different races, the races themselves are extremely different in terms of capabilities. Comparing an Ogryn to a regular human, the Ogryn is much much stronger, much much stronger to kill, much clumsier, and literally retarded. Likewise Eldar are superhumanly fast. No matter how strong a human is, they will never outmuscle an Ogryn without augmentation. Likewise an unaugmented human can never hope to march an Eldar in terms of speed.

Using DnD's ability scores as the example I would like to see something more like.

Elves
>Dexterity is increased by 6 and is capped at 26 as opposed to 20
>Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma is increased by 3 and is capped at 22
>Other misc. benefits

Half-Orc
>Strength is increased by 6 and capped at 26
>Constitution is increased by 3 and is capped at 22
>Other misc. benefit

So if you wanted to play and Elf barbarian, you could, it wouldn't even be a bad build since now your AC is capped at 25 without magical items. However even the strongest elf will be hard pressed to match the average orc or half orc in terms of strength, so if you want to swing an axe really fucking hard the half-orc is probably a better choice for your race.

I like how elder scrolls did races. Ten races, more or less evenly distributed amongst three broader racial categories: humans, elves, and beastfolk.

Tieflings are for edgelords, but you want literal "decadent demon nobles" Rakshasas?
Also there might be inherent technical difficulty with having one aquatic race, unless your party was planning to carry around a handcart full of water anyway.

Anyway, my game has humans, elves and a 'small race' that's pretty similar to Genomes in FFIX, which I may or may not cut out at the end.

Come to think of it, they kind of are.

>Elves as aristocrats: I have never gotten this impression and their fluff really doesn't support that impression.
It's kind of a meme, really.

You don't have dwarves in your setting? What happened? Did the elves kill them all?

I'm actually stewing with an idea that dwarves come hand in hand with giants, like maggots in their flesh or lice. Hill Dwarfs come from Hill Giants and are more folksy like the ones from Snow White. Stout Halflings have ties to them by blood. Mountain Dwarves come from Frost and Fire Giants both. They're the more hardcore dwarfy motherfuckers. Dwarves are around where giants are or have been.

>It's kind of a meme, really

It has precedent. Norse kings were considered to have elf in their blood or reincarnated into elfs. Dunsany had an even princess and kingdom. Elf knights are sung about in child ballads. Elves being inherently noble and aristocratic is not a new meme, this one has been going for a long time.

>hob- I mean, halflings
Halflings haven't really been blatant hobbit knockoffs for three and a half editions. Modern halflings are a crossbreed between hobbits and kender.

That's like saying D&D elves aren't like Tolkien's elves.

They're essentially the same fucking thing user.

D&D elves are more Poul Anderson than Tolkien.

>wanting furrys

roll to kill youself

I agree with you on half elves and gnomes. Half orcs or dragonborn should be chopped too. Aasimars are Cool.

Whycome biology cross-breeding with elfhumans and orchumans?

Explain empirical support argument with real organisms

Furry and Beastman are two different things.

Critical failure.
On one hand, failure even at killing himself. On the other, he will now yiff eternal.

wat?

I think he's asking why orcs can breed with humans, elves can breed with humans, but there is no cross breeding between orcs and elves.

Horses can be bred with donkeys to bear mules. They have the same number of chromosomes, but they're incompatible to a degree, and therefore are sterile. To have children that can breed would imply more compatibility, that the difference between humans, orcs, and elves is the same difference between whites, blacks, and elves that can all breed with each other.

I refuse to allow anything but classical races as PCs.

No stupid fucking Dragonborn.

If so, he should have looked up ring species, like I said they were in my post.

Here's the first paragraph of the wiki page:
>In biology, a ring species is a connected series of neighbouring populations, each of which can interbreed with closely sited related populations, but for which there exist at least two "end" populations in the series, which are too distantly related to interbreed, though there is a potential gene flow between each "linked" population. Such non-breeding, though genetically connected, "end" populations may co-exist in the same region thus closing a "ring".

A breeds with B and B breeds with C but A and C cannot breed. Its an interesting bit of biology.

And since this is fantasy in a magical world and neither orcs or elves exist, they can follow bits of pseudoscientific or even mythological explanations of speciation or relatedness.

Wow, holy shit. You learn something new every day.

Actually, last 3.5 game I ran a couple of months ago. The dwarf is pretty good about remembering stonecutting and now and then I'll have the elf roll for secret passages. It actually works quite well if you sometimes wait a bit to have him take a second to consider that that wall back there was a bit off. It keeps them from immediately searching the room because the elf got a roll no one else did.

As a player, I could never help but meta-game whenever I was asked to make a roll. My first DM had us give him a card with our spot, search, and listens and would roll behind the screen without telling us anything unless we succeeded.

Dragonborn are dumb as shit, kolbods are enemies. I honestly don't get people's obsession with them. They're just lizard goblins that are slaves to/worship dragons. Sure they like traps and inventions you know who else likes that, gnomes. Kolbods are the gnomes of the evil races, therefore double gas.

Some mules are fertile.
Also, consider dogs, wolves, and coyotes.

I really liked the gria race and its always what I imagined a draconic race to be like, maybe some scales on the face, but going full scaly just makes them look like lizard people

Personally I prefer adjusting existing races over making new ones.

Maybe have dwarves be more cold adapted. Give them paunch guts and bits of fur on them. Give them hard, leathery hands and dull claws to dig.

tl;dr: start the campaign with basic races only, then open up options later as they are introduced into the campaign

Tieflings and dragonborn are usually straight out, and I hate gnomes and would rather have just halflings than gnomes AND halflings so they are usually out too. Let's be honest, gnomes are just gay fucking versions of hobbits for people who want to be quirky wizards.

Then half-elves are fine, whatever, another tall race with slightly different stats but you can play the inbetweener angle or the dealbroker angle.

Half-orcs are a bit trickier, since orcs are usually mostly Evil and largely hated. They should have some social ramifications but it then becomes a bit weird when the party's patron is a dwarf and half the party goes half-orc. Then again, I like some of the FR orc lore with the Obould dynasty, which can serve as inspiration for more peaceful orcs.

And that's all of the core races. But I should say that this only applies to the BEGINNING of a campaign. If all beastmen and rare races are open to choose in the beginning, then the party will look like a crazy fucking circus. It's better to start out kind of limited and lowkey. But if the campaign has gone on for a while, and has featured, say, lizardmen or aarakocra, and some players' characters have retired/died, then sure, stat up a fucking lizardman party member. You're probably at a high enough level where you see more magic and weird shit and balance has gone out the window anyway.

Stonecunning: last session, the dwarf of the party examined a stone sarcophagus

> but it's Rock Gnomes which I don't get but they've become the more popular depiction of Gnomes as of late.
Because steampunk faggots have a hardon for tinkering. "Can I fluff my magic as alchemical concoctions! Can I fluff my magic as clockwork machinery!" No, fuck you, basic bitch.

>>half-elves - for those indecisive people who can't choose between a human and an elf
Half elf is more to pander to those that want to be special snowflakes without looking ridiculous etc. Many fantasy heroes are half-elves, as the half races necessarily come into conflict as a result and these two heritages don't clash violently like with half-orcs.

To answer, I dislike half-races as mechanically different races plus the fact they usually have the shitty trope of being better than both parents and yet not taking over the world or being more wide-spread in population.
Halflings are cool, their size brings something new at least and culturally they're ok.
Gnomes I can't figure out what exist for, they are basically just to halflings what elves are to humans in a way except elves are only included because it's so common. Gnomes are usually only used for the invention/crazy alchemist etc. type thing, which is easy to do with a culture of any other race.
Tieflings can be cool, I hate the red sexy tieflings but black / random table tieflings are decent. Still fits a template more than a race though as they should exist as all races.
Dragonborn usually have interesting origins/cultural backgrounds as a race, though like any beastmen some people will be triggered and think it's pandering to furries and scalies. Dragons are such a big thing in D&D that if it makes sense and I can come up with cool fluff I will include them, but they're not core at all. Pic related, only decided to include them a few weeks back but I think it works.

Generally I need a reason to include a race, a unique seeling point if you will. Halflings are Small, elves wear masks as they have a bad case of sameface, dwarves are very different than actual dwarves but they are genetically driven to fuck and fight which I think has interesting effects, etc.

>Those who live among humans can be decent, some tribes are more decent than others
This is my problem, if half-orcs can be good and not just rape-babies, that means orcs can also be good, which again means why have only half-orcs and not fullblooded orcs as a race? Half-races should be an add-on if you need more mechanical diversity without wanting more actual races, otherwise I don't get them. Also what some user said about having not just human half-races.

I'm using classic races, although I've tried to make sure each of them have enough defining traits as one or more cultures. It's a vaguely stone age/tribal setting. If my players want to play something else and can justify it well enough for the setting, I'll usually allow it.
>Humans are the most sedentary race, they're also shifting towards bronze-age tech faster than the other races.
>Orcs are nomads with affinity for big dinosaur mounts.
>Orcs and human populations often intermingle, since they live in the same area, and humans can use orc muscle, and orcs like human tech. Half-orcs are frequents, and are about as likely to be love children than the usual alternative.
>Centaurs also live in the same area and are purely nomads. Their herds are tightly-knit and rather xenophobic.
>Dwarves are the ancient precursors who died out, leaving plenty of mysterious dungeons full of traps for adventurers to explore. You could theorically find very rare remnants of that race in some other civilization, if a player wanted to play Last of Their Kind.
>Halflings live to the far North and ride polar bears. They're diminutive but extremely resilient, and routinely hunt things that are far too big for them (whales for example).
>Gnomes live in the most temperate area, and have a pact of mutual protection with elemental and fey creatures. Which is not necessarily a good thing for everybody else, since they're all very xenophobic, and they keep the best land to themselves. They're mostly druids.
>Elves live in tropical forests, in treetop villages from which they rarely descend. They're very good at maneuvering in the canopy, and mostly keep to themselves.
>Amphibians are salamander and frog-men who live in the jungle's swamps. They're rather civil because they brew extremely potent poison, and nobody but them could live where they do anyway.

The problem is that it's not stated, it can be used as justification in some settings of course and I can see it with elves and dwarves as they are both different from humans, diverging in each their direction, but this isn't necessarily the case in the game. And even with ring species, for humans to be able to bear half-orcs, -elves, -halflings, -gnomes, whatever, that seems very hard to justify with anything except magic. In many settings other half-breeds are possible too, there just aren't mechanics for it.

>A breeds with B and B breeds with C but A and C cannot breed. Its an interesting bit of biology.
A god did it. Elf god hates orc god. Indifferent towards humanity.

>>Elves live in tropical forests, in treetop villages from which they rarely descend. They're very good at maneuvering in the canopy, and mostly keep to themselves.
So they eat fruits, bird meat and leaves? Seems like it would be difficult unless they grow vegetables and roots in gardens up in the trees, though I vegetarian elves are fairly common and I can see that working.

How exactly are rape-baby half-orcs as common as normal children if orcs get along with humans and the other way around and they're not filthy savages but just nomads?

>I'd get rid of halflings (blatant tolkien ripoff) and have half-orcs as the anti-hero/tough guy race.
Nah, man. gotta have my orcs.

You're missing the point, it's easy to justify with
>Magic!
but the idea here was to find some more realistic justification, a biological reason to not have other half-breeds. Which works as long as there are only half-human half-orcs/dwarves and half-human half-elves, but not if humans can breed with 3+ other races and produce offspring but not any of those can breed with each other. I think, maybe ring species can have 3+ ends but it gets more and more far-fetched.

Gobbos can be small, green, mischievous, stabby dwarves. And own banks.

Honestly, I think there's just a glut of races. Sure, they're different from one another, but on the surface what you have is too many of essentially the same niche.

Humans are slotted as the default race.
Dwarves are slotted as a "classic" short race.
Elves are slotted as the "classic" fey race.
Half-orcs are the race for people who want to play heroic monsters.

Then we have gnomes and halflings for people who want to be short but also cute and quirky, drow also occupying the reformed evil race slot, dragonborn for people who want to be buff kobolds, tieflings for people who want to play a demonic race that's misunderstood and good, Aasimar for angels, Firbolg for something, Kenku for birds, Lizardfolk for more scalies, Tabaxi because you'd prefer to be playing elder scrolls: Elsweyr right now, Tritons because you have a crush on Ariel's dad, Half-Elves because you want to get away with being better than elves and humans at once, goliaths because you're into wrestling, Genasi because you like Avatar, Orcs and Goblins because you know they should have been core from the start, and the list goes on and on.

At most, there should be Dwarves (Short, Tough), Elves (Fey), Humans (Default), and then I nominate FULL Orcs as the monster race (using Half-Orc stats, if you want) and then one sneaky race from either Halflings or Goblins. If you want more options, just add some sub-race variants. It's ridiculous.

Full blooded orcs are often allowed as player races in some settings. They are actually statted for playing in PF and its campaign setting, 3.5 in eberron, FR, and possibly another, 2e AD&D has multiple versions including one that is basically peaceful farmers.

Really, its Veeky Forums and its know nothing grognards who post here who bring up these shitty race arguments. There are a ton of interesting races to play and often multiple takes on various races from the many books put out by each edition.

>bear half-orcs, -elves, -halflings, -gnomes, whatever, that seems very hard to justify with anything except magic
Do you understand just how much magic pervades the usual D&D setting? A lot. Elves themselves are magical by their very nature. Dragons are super intellectual, multi ton creatures who can fly and breathe fire and lightning and cast spells by just willing it. There are literal gods who literally walk the world. The four elements are what make up reality and not the periodic table.

Of course magic is involved in who can breed with who and shit. But my explanation was for the weird little autists who infest this board and don't understand anything but purely scientific ideas of inheritance and genetics. There are more ways to justifying a detail in a setting than can be found in the very limited world of science, like using a bastardized form of the pseudoscientific Morphegenic Field Theory as an explanation.

Why must there be a realistic (aka Earth) reason? Why can't crossbreeding in a magical fantasy world literally be the purview of the respective fertility gods of each pantheon being ok with it? There aren't any half dwarves because the Dwarven fertility goddess just really doesn't like any other fertility gods.