Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Give us the playable races we need.

Sure elves and dwarves are a staple. And drow and tieflings are edgy. But it's long past time to give love to long ignored races. Give us playable goblins and kobolds!

Yes give us races we "need".... so none/any. You don't "need" a choice of protagonist or customization to play a game. I believe what you mean to say is "Give 'me' the playable races 'I want'"

Well aren't you a gem. To start with, Baldur's Gate 3 dosen't "need" any races? Last I checked a selection of races was a part of D&D for as long as I can remember, so even under your very restrictive (and incorrect) definition of need you can make a case that it needs a selection of races to be a D&D game.

Second, if you crack open Merriam-Webster's dictionary, definition 2a of a need is "a lack of something requisite, desirable, or useful." Sinve, while mostly joking, I would find the presence of kobolds and goblins desirable, I am perfectly comfortable with my declaring them a need. If you are going to be so boorish as to respond to a pretty obviously humorous post with quibbles over word choices, please do everyone the courtesy of making sure you know what words mean first.

Perhaps next time rather than try to provide some humor and/or get us some novel playable character choices I will reiterate some variation of the turn based/it dosen't feel like Baldur's Gate/why u make DOS3? arguments and you will feel more at home.

I whole heartedly agree. I would love to make a team of all kobolds!

I reject that definition. As much as I reject the definition of the word "literally" meaning "used for emphasis or to express strong feeling while not being literally true."

One can't say the meaning of the word "literal" is "figurative" just the same one can not say the meaning of the word "need" is also "want." This is a major devolution of language. Language is meant to promote understanding between individuals so using words that don't mean what they mean is an atrocious bastardization of language. The original dictionary did have a funny definition of the word fiddle, but that fortunately was humorous and didn't devalue language.

Kobolds are just cats for dragons.

Tell me it wouldn't be fun to play as a dragon's mouser.

I would argue against implementing too many esoteric playable races. Considering Larian apparently will place non-origin characters (race/class) on somewhat equal footing with origin characters in terms of unique storytelling, each new race would require that much more work beyond graphics and possible voice acting. Resources are finite and there are many better ways to spend them in my opinion.

honestly i want all the PHB races.
Give people the ability to play any archetype they want, without implementing a gorillion races.

You dont need 80 elf races, you can probably play an kind of elf character you want if you have "Elf" and "Drow" as races.

likewise, i dont neccesarily need lizardfolk if we got dragonborn.

So its about the breath of archetypes available rather than the actual number.

Gnomes and Halflings dont need to be both present.
but if theres no halforcs ill riot

First of all: We need both halflings and gnomes so that half orc barbariens have different ammunition for throwing

But I agree that having a few races that are well implemented into the game, like it comes up in dialogue or stuff you are doing, is better than having tons of races and the only difference are slightly different stats.

I would argue that since resources are indeed finite it is a shame to waste them by including voice acting in an rpg, since not only does it take up time and budget, but so drastically limits other options such as dialog choices and character creation choices. As well as that if you are going to limit yourself that way it would be better (and bolder) to include races no other games let you play as rather than the same old same old. Although depending on how far along they are it may be a moot point with resources already being spent. On the other hand the majority of issues discussed on forums like these are already probably decided so might as well make the pitch.

I don't neccesarily disagree that fewer races done well would be better. But even then it would be nice to see a developer skip one or two of the expected races for interesting ones. As in goblin and kobold interesting.

Since there are a vampire spawn character, why not DHAMPIR race?

I am not sure how well I remember the video.
Did he use a normal spell/potion for healing?

In 5E, are undead still damaged by healing and healed by negative energy ( now called necrotic, I guess)?

Dhampir are gonna be in the next pathfinder game.
i dont think they exist in dnd

the point of my last post was mostly: i get that some racial archetypes are important for people.
Some people just want to play an Elf.
Some people want to play an orc barbarian, some people want to play a lizard person
But you dont need to have a huge variety of races within one archetype.

if you realy want to play an Orc, you can just play a Halforc, make him the largest sze and very green (or ... brown if we go dnd orcs anyway)
If you realy want to play a Gnome, you can make a halfling very short.
if you want to play a Lizardfolk, you can play a Dragonborn with acid breath attack.
Want to play a Wild elf? make a dark skinned elf.
Want a sun dwarf? make a dark skinned dwarf.
want to be a hobgoblin? make a scrawny half orc.
want a moon elf? make a light skin drow or a bluish elf.
want to play a vampire? play a pale skinned human necromancer / rogue multiclass

Sure its not the full thing, but youll never be able to integrate all fantasy races.

But the important bit is that you got a broad enaugh selection so you can be MOST archetypes.
So im against having several races of the "same" thing.

Halflings and gnomes for example.
You also dont need more than elves and dark elves.
you dont need Halforcs AND orcs.

Instead, let me not just have humans, elves and dwarves (and 800 variants of those), but also Have Dragonborn, Halforc and Gith.
Hell, id love to see thri kreen if were going spelljammer...
Just give me DIFFERENt archetypes.

because i cannot make a Dragonborn out of a Dwarf.
and i cannot make a Tieflng out of an Elf.
So those races that can pad out one particular archetype that no other race can pad out are more important.

I dont want race "slots" to be wasted on races that require extra work (and since all of them seem to have handcrafted faces, thats ALL of em) but that could esaily be represented by another race.

On Pathfinder Kingmaker, you have a undead companion that heals from negative energy and is hurted by channel positive energy. And she is a inquisitor. Some mods like race unleashed adds dhampir as playable race and it work like she.

Note that there are already a vampire spawn in the game. So just copy some of his traits to a race would't be that hard.

i think vampire spawn is only his backstory.
it appears that hes an elf and that beeing infected by the mindflayer essentialy turns him back into an elf (beeing able to walk in the sun etc.)

I know PK and I know that in pathfinder Dhampiers are living people but they behave as undead in terms of damage/healing fom negative/positive energy.
The character from PK was an undead elf, Dhampiers will be a playable race in the next pathfinder game.

I wanted to ask if DnD 5E has the same rule as previous editions regarding harm and heal spells work reversed for undead.

I do not know how are they going to manage it in BG3, but in D&D5e necrotic damage also damages undead, constructs,... basically almost everything (for reasons unknown) so if you cannot use "inflict wounds" "harm" or "chill touch" to heal undead beings as in previous versions, pathfinder, etc...

Necrotic damage not only harms, but also the target's hit point maximum is reduced by an amount equal to the necrotic damage taken. The reduction lasts until the target finishes a long rest. It´s crazy IMHO.

To heal undead, I assume spells like regenerate, hero's feast and goodberries, and XGTA "Negative energy flood" would do the trick; and the usual vampiric touch, etc as always, maybe?

I have to re-check the gameplay, but the vampire spawn does not seem to have problems to heal himself the usual way.

PD: And yeah, undead or dhampir does not exist in DND as a playable race.

Yeah. Undead characters no longer need negative energy to heal. They can be healed via the same heal spells and potions as anyone else, in 5E.