D&D General Race Has No Mechanics. What do you play?

[CreamCloud0]

DM: here is a thing to interact with.
PC: I would like to interact in the following way.
DM: I'm listening.
PC: (insert lengthy overly complicated Rube Goldberg/Scooby Doo plan here)
DM: That sounds pretty funny/creative and possibly something we will laugh about and a story to retell for years to come. And most importantly since it doesn't affect things in any long lasting or dramatic way i say, kudos to you fellow gamer.

So in short my answer to this line of thought is...The DM decides if mechanics are needed. Now obviously the rules lawyers and min maxers are going to adamantly explain how I am wrong...and that's ok. D&D is a big tent and there is room for all.

I could go into this thought process in more depth but its 7:15am and I could use some coffee.

i'm not quite sure how this is meant to relate to or distinguish anything between the differences of narrative or mechanics, perhaps some clarification after your coffee?

 

[CreamCloud0]

i think fundamentally, if anything in the game is affected by your choice of it then it's a mechanic, if your choice of species ever influences events in game then species IS a mechanic, it doesn't matter how much you strip away from it or if it's impact is codified as a written ability or not then it's still a kind of mechanic, the racist barkeep changed their behaviour based on your species? well then your species affected the gamestate, it had a non-zero impact on play.

narrative mechanics are still mechanics

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

i think fundamentally, if anything in the game is affected by your choice of it then it's a mechanic, if your choice of species ever influences events in game then species IS a mechanic, it doesn't matter how much you strip away from it or if it's impact is codified as a written ability or not then it's still a kind of mechanic, the racist barkeep changed their behaviour based on your species? well then your species affected the gamestate, it had a non-zero impact on play.

narrative mechanics are still mechanics

Call it a mechanic if you want but that's not what I'd call it. I added this line in my last post.

(I think)to boil it down to a couple lines: mechanics only come into play when the assumptions of the narrative are being challenged. In the act of challenging the outcome of the story, sometimes the mechanics reinforce narrative assumptions. (IE: elves are smart and, therefore, get +2 INT)

In FATE, there are narrative mechanics. Actual game mechanics that influence and reinforce the fiction but that's not what I'm talking about here.

 

[KYRON45]

i'm not quite sure how this is meant to relate to or distinguish anything between the differences of narrative or mechanics, perhaps some clarification after your coffee?

The narrative is having a conversation and telling a story. Have you ever heard the expression "don't let the truth get in the way of telling a good story"? That's narrative.

Mechanics are rolling for an outcome and using modifiers. You can't send people to Mars just by talking about it....you need a whole lot of mechanics.

Narrative = words
Mechanics = numbers

THIS thread is simply asking if race/species gave you NO numbers; which one would you pick?
Everything else is just people talking about other things.

Have a great day!!!

 

[Reynard]

i think fundamentally, if anything in the game is affected by your choice of it then it's a mechanic, if your choice of species ever influences events in game then species IS a mechanic, it doesn't matter how much you strip away from it or if it's impact is codified as a written ability or not then it's still a kind of mechanic, the racist barkeep changed their behaviour based on your species? well then your species affected the gamestate, it had a non-zero impact on play.

narrative mechanics are still mechanics

Okay. But you still don't get a +2 con or darkvision. What do you play?

 

[HaroldTheHobbit]

Well, don't bother telling me... tell @HaroldTheHobbit about these products that are what they were looking for. They're the one you should be passing on your knowledge to because they're the one who actually would appreciate it.

I don’t see the use of ancestry books when players can have whatever skin and background they want?

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

Okay. But you still don't get a +2 con or darkvision. What do you play?

I probably answered this a couple times but it was tongue and cheek. My actual answer is "whatever race is most interesting based on the in-world fiction."

In a campaign where there is no racial tensions and every race is equally ubiquitous, I'd just play a human - because no race will be more interesting than another. That's rather boring. BUT

In a campaign world where one race has enslaved the others, I'd play the most despised race and join the underground to bring down the oppressors. Or I'd play the ruling race who is sympathetic to the slaves and secretly try to help them.

Despite not getting a +2 in a stat, the fiction presents different, interesting choices and challenges for either choice.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I don’t see the use of ancestry books when players can have whatever skin and background they want?

Don't ask me... ask @Micah Sweet . They are the one who suggested that ancestry material was already on DMs Guild (which presumably included what you wanted, otherwise why even bother bringing it up?) You both should be speaking with each other on this, I have nothing to do with it.

 

[Corinnguard]

I'm super bad at spelling those bird-people. I take responsibility for starting that part of the conversation.

Aarakocra (Pathfinder Race) - D&D Wiki

www.dandwiki.com

This is someone's PF1 take on the Aarakocra. If I was playing one in 5e, I would want my Aarakocra character to look like this fella. And I probably would convert this fella's racial traits to 5e because they're way better than what 5e has for the Aarakocra.

As for spelling their name, I think everyone would call them Eaglefolk. No need to mangle their real name.

 

[KYRON45]

Aarakocra (Pathfinder Race) - D&D Wiki

www.dandwiki.com

This is someone's PF1 take on the Aarakocra. If I was playing one in 5e, I would want my Aarakocra character to look like this fella. And I probably would convert this fella's racial traits to 5e because they're way better than what 5e has for the Aarakocra.

As for spelling their name, I think everyone would call them Eaglefolk. No need to mangle their real name.

I think i would allow them to look like whatever kind of bird the player wanted. How awesome would one of those giant harpy eagles in your party be?!?!?

I'm actually not a fan of the "Walking petting zoo party" as a friend calls it.
Game your own game my friends....game your own game.