@JeremyECrawford Why aren't all races designed around having sub-races?
— Phelar (@Phelar) May 21, 2018
Story almost always leads our rules design. For example, if a race doesn't have subraces as part of its story, we don't create them when doing the rules design. #DnD https://t.co/dUY7fStJ5X
— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) May 22, 2018
Elves have so many options because of their story, which we delve into in "Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes."
But shouldn’t some races have that in their story? Why are there a million options for Elves (for example), but ALL Goliaths are the same when there are different types of giants? If the goliath story connected them to the different types of giants, the rules design would reflect that fact.
— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) May 22, 2018
Are there any races you wish did have sub-races? 🙂 If I were designing dragonborn from scratch, I'd connect them more closely to the different types of D&D dragons.
— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) May 22, 2018
I feel this is a crutch, since so many of us tell our own stories with D&D, not yours. And some of those stories have room for different kinds of goliaths, or half-orcs (what’s the other half?), or lizardfolk, et cetera. For us, it feels limiting, not like a story device. D&D's rules will never capture all the glorious variations possible in a home game. In the rules, we model the most likely things, based on the game's legacy and fan feedback, and then encourage you to customize. If enough feedback calls for more options, we listen.
— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) May 22, 2018