Race/Class combinations you wouldn't play

[Astofel]

I'll most likely never play an orc wizard (or an orc anything, tbh, that race is pretty weak and the flavour can be accomplished by using a half-orc), or kobold barbarians (I know dex barbs exist, but I don't really like them). I'll also avoid playing small-sized archers, because longbows and heavy crossbows can't be used by them without disadvantage. At least for melee smalls I usually have the option to use a shield or a versatile weapon instead of the heavy two-handers, archer smalls are forced into using a shortbow or light/hand crossbow with no compensation.

[Lyracian]

I mostly play Elves, Dwarves and the occasional Human; also 1/2 Elves in 5th Edition. As they were never in the older editions I played doubt I would ever play Dragonborn, tiefling or any of the monster races other than Goblins. I like Goblins and have played them in other games.

There are some classes I would only play with the XGtE sub classes such as Warlock and Ranger. I am unlikely to ever play a Sorcerer because I prefer Bards and Wizards.

My Fifth Ed characters at the moment are
High Elf Arcane Trickster
High Elf Wizard (with Cleric Dip)
Half Elf Bard (with Cleric Dip)

Halfling Barbarian: At this point, you're trying to be ironic. The Gnome provides a lot more and accomplishes the same thing.

Amusingly that is one of the few I want to play; mostly because I read the Iron Chef
https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/com..._the_lil_chef/

On the flipside, though, I've seen many White Knight Paladins, orphan Sorcerers, edgelord Warlocks than I care to count.

Being the White Knight is the draw of the paladin. All that holier than thou posturing.

Any race without dakvision + rogue. I like my rogues to have darkvision (without depending on items, which can be lost).

This one I can get behind Rogues need to see in the dark if they want to go off scouting.

[Arkhios]

Does it count that I wouldn't play a Gnome? With any class?

[Wizard_Lizard]

human/fighter.
too bland.

[Deleted]

Elf and really anything. I've never really liked elves in any edition of D&D except for 4e, and even then I never really touched them all that much (there is some awesome builds in 4e that elves can pull off!).

I will play a halfling barbarian, I will play a half-orc light cleric, and I will play mountain dwarf sorcerer... Elves just don't do anything for me.

If I want the fluff, I'll pick up Gnome as they fill the same sort of fey-ish creature... And Gnomes are about 10x more awesome mechanically.

I think Elves are overshadowed by pretty much every other race.

[Imbalance]

Can't rule out anything until I've tried it, so my list would only be combinations that I wouldn't play again, with the only real reason being that I dislike repetition. Right now, there are two on that list, both of which are technically still active:
Human cleric
Human fighter

So...yeah. These were intended to be starter characters to learn the system, and there are half a dozen decidedly more exotic builds waiting in the wings for the fighter to die, including a loxodon monk, a centaur warlock, and a duergar wizard (if not mystic).

[2D8HP]

...Are they any race/class combinations that you find yourself not really able to play, either for thematic, mechanical, or personal preference reasons?

I have only played Elves, Half-Elves, Half-Orcs, Barbarians, Fighters, Rangers, and Rogues in 5e.

For 1e I played a Half-Orc Cleric/Fighter for a bit, but otherwise my class/race selections were (IIRC) much the same as my 5e selections.

I have some desire to play an Oath of Ancients Paladins 'cause the Tenets look fun, but otherwise my PC's are mostly "A guy with a bow, sword, and some skills" and I don't stretch much beyond that.

I applaud all those upthread who choose not to Play a Human Fighter 'cause "too bland" as that leaves a space for me.

[MrStabby]

I need something with a bit of mystical fantasy mojo. Escapism doesn't really work for me when I play a character that is human and pretty much bound by the laws of physics as we know them.

Monk is fine, but barbarian, fighter and rogue are probably not. Especially if they don't come with cool racial abilities.

This isn't to say I could never play them, but I would never play them single classed. Maybe eldritch knight or arcane trickster but without much enthusiasm.


For races, I am happy with most apart from Lizardfolk. Having claws doesn't appeal to me much.

[Vulsutyr]

I don’t play Dragonborn. I wish there was a Half-dragon playable race, but nope, just Dragonborn.

I won’t play any pairing designed to be “ironic,” whether that is an Orc Wizard or a Gnome Barbarian. Any gimmicky characters are out. But I would play those pairings if I had a good idea for it and a decent mechanical ability.

[XmonkTad]

I'm in agreement with not liking warforged. They're too cheesey feeling. I'd avoid playing them with any class.

Deep Gnome Abjuration Wizard: A race/class combo that is being picked solely to exploit a loophole in Arcane Ward. Sure, I could probably come up with a good backstory, but in the end, it's just there to mask that the character is a walking exploit.

Boo! It's not a loophole, it's working as intended. And a gnome wizard is pretty classic, so no idea why you'd think it's just a mask.

[Mercurias]

I'd play most anything, really. The key to me is finding a way to enjoy it.

I would play the heck out of a Warforged Druid, for example. Give it at least partial wooden parts, a backstory of awakening damaged in a battlefield and being found by, say, the Circle of Swords, and a character arc based around accepting its place outside of the great cycle even while revering it (Or even wanting to become a living being a la Bicentennial Man), and bam. Fun character right there.

[Phoenix042]

The main combos that I don't like are the ones like those you listed; the presumed "intended" combos that don't actually work as well together.

Goblin rogues are a great example of something I'd probably never play.

[Deleted]

I don’t play Dragonborn. I wish there was a Half-dragon playable race, but nope, just Dragonborn.

I won’t play any pairing designed to be “ironic,” whether that is an Orc Wizard or a Gnome Barbarian. Any gimmicky characters are out. But I would play those pairings if I had a good idea for it and a decent mechanical ability.

My group(s) like to think that Aasimars, Dragonborn, Half-Elves, Half-Orcs, and Tieflings (might be missing one or two other races) should just be human subraces.


Also... Gnome Barbarians would probably be a follower of Baervan Wildwanderer (deity of forests, nature, and travel), Flandal Steelskin (deity of mining, smithing, and fitness), Segojan Earthcaller (earth and nature deity), or Urdlen (greed and blood deity). And it works well to have the "weird cousins" of a typical Gnomish village/tribe/whatever be a nomadic tribe that consist of a few barbarians at the least.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._gnome_deities

D&D has a lot of lore and pretty much any combo isn't going to solely fall under "ironic"... Especially when you have crazy halfling barbarian cannibal lore.

[Finback]

*sets up folding table and chair*
*unfurls banner for the front of the table*
"Halflings are only good for narrative elements, but terrible for a racial option - change my mind"

(I seriously cannot ever get motivated to play one. I just can't see anything they bring to the table as being all that useful, when there are so many other races that could do things better - Halfling rogue? I'll take a gnome instead. Halfling fighter? I'd take a kobold for the pack tactics. Halfling wizard? Elves/tieflings/gnomes superior, furfoots inferior)

[Zevox]

I don't think there's a specific race + class combination that sticks out to me as an instant "no," but there are races and a couple of classes that I'm much less likely to play than others, if I'd ever do so.

Race-wise, Half-Orcs and Dwarves are the big two from among the PHB races. I'm just not a fan of anything to do with those races, and would basically have to play a very atypical one in order to enjoy them. Drow aren't too far behind, mostly for the sunlight sensitivity issue, though I'd play one if I had an idea for a build that worked in such a way that it minimized or eliminated that as an issue. From Xanathar's, Goliaths, Orcs, and Bugbears lack appeal for me for similar reasons to Half-Orcs and Dwarves. I don't have any idea what I'd do with a Firbolg. And a Triton feels like something that would only be appealing in a campaign specifically focused on the seas. And for the Elemental Evil races... no, I think I would use any of those, though Svirfneblin would be the least likely, just because I'd probably prefer one of the other Gnome subraces if I played a Gnome.

Class-wise, the classes that get no magic at all tend not to appeal to me so much, and I'd certainly play the subclasses that do get spells over the ones that don't if I did play one of them (so EK Fighter, Shadow or 4 Elements Monk, etc). Besides that, there's the Bard, which I'd like to play, but always run up against a wall trying to think of how I'd roleplay one - I've just never had any good ideas for that, or at least none I felt I could actually pull off.

[Tanarii]

Besides that, there's the Bard, which I'd like to play, but always run up against a wall trying to think of how I'd roleplay one - I've just never had any good ideas for that, or at least none I felt I could actually pull off.

Lore Bard - Celtic diplomatic & lore master
Valor bard - Norse skald
Glamour Bard - fey beguiled
Sword Bard - bravo, or circus performer
Whispers Bard - grand vizier

[8wGremlin]

I tend not to play elves (any variety), or assimar i find them boring good two shoes.

Class wise, Wizards I also find boring.

[Wizard_Lizard]

I have only played Elves, Half-Elves, Half-Orcs, Barbarians, Fighters, Rangers, and Rogues in 5e.

For 1e I played a Half-Orc Cleric/Fighter for a bit, but otherwise my class/race selections were (IIRC) much the same as my 5e selections.

I have some desire to play an Oath of Ancients Paladins 'cause the Tenets look fun, but otherwise my PC's are mostly "A guy with a bow, sword, and some skills" and I don't stretch much beyond that.

I applaud all those upthread who choose not to Play a Human Fighter 'cause "too bland" as that leaves a space for me.

If everyone refuses to play human fighter, because it is boring... ....then human fighter will become a new cool original idea! sometime in the future

[ZorroGames]

If everyone refuses to play human fighter, because it is boring... ....then human fighter will become a new cool original idea! sometime in the future

Do not forget this forum is vastly optimizer weighted in those who post versus character/role-play posters. Or seems to be. That may affect the lack of Human character love.

Though, a Standard Human might well work for 5th to 7th player who can contribute many ways if not usually super showy.

Hmmm...

[Tanarii]

Class wise, Wizards I also find boring.

When I first started playing D&D with a mix of AD&D 1e and BECMI, I was all about Magic-users.

Somehow 3e killed it for me, which is weird because that's the edition that made them not fairly useless at the lowest levels. Now I'd much rather play a melee, a Fighter/Wizard, or a Gish. (EK is my favorite 5e subclass by far.)

Do not forget this forum is vastly optimizer weighted in those who post versus character/role-play posters. Or seems to be. That may affect the lack of Human character love.

That's back to front. Optimization favors Humans .. not the other way around.

New players almost always pick Humans, or occasionally Elves or Dwarves, because they are familiar. 2nd characters are generally non-human if their first was human. After that, I've found the majority of players have a preference for non-humans. The only thing that keeps humans competitive is they're more powerful. Otherwise (ie with standard humans) you end up with about 1/4 of your characters human, the rest non-human. That's fine, that's pretty much the reincarnate numbers, which IMO give you an idea of how WotC thinks racial distribution pans out. But many DMs don't like a party of 4-5 with a single Human in it, it feels wrong to them.

There's a reason WotC makes humans more powerful than non-humans as a general rule, at least once you add in optional rules for experienced players, and has done so for several editions. As Gygax found out as far back as 1e, if you don't put some kind of limits on non-humans, or give humans a solid boost above non-humans, most players will decide to play a non-human.

[PhoenixPhyre]

For me, the answer is "none of them." I generally dislike gnomes, but that's independent of class. I don't particularly care about optimization, so I'll do whatever strikes my fancy.

[Snowbluff]

That's back to front. Optimization favors Humans .. not the other way around.

New players almost always pick Humans, or occasionally Elves or Dwarves, because they are familiar.

Speaking of dwarves, you can play the game as a Hill Dwarf with a 16 in con at level 1 and +1 hp/level, or you can play a human with a 16 in con and the tough feat for +2 hp/level.

This is why Volo's shouldn't count as your plus one in AL. Humans are too strong.

[Deleted]

*sets up folding table and chair*
*unfurls banner for the front of the table*
"Halflings are only good for narrative elements, but terrible for a racial option - change my mind"

(I seriously cannot ever get motivated to play one. I just can't see anything they bring to the table as being all that useful, when there are so many other races that could do things better - Halfling rogue? I'll take a gnome instead. Halfling fighter? I'd take a kobold for the pack tactics. Halfling wizard? Elves/tieflings/gnomes superior, furfoots inferior)

Halfling Barbarian (Wolf) 3/Rogue 2 means that as a bonus action you can disengage and go through bigger creature's spaces (cause halfling) and then use the "climb onto bigger creature action" to attach yourself to an enemy. You now are giving your allies advantage when you rage, your rogue levels gives you expertise for climbing onto said bigger creature and staying there. Your wolf rage is great for giving allies advantage against the target.

I don't care for halflings, but they have some goooood synergy with some classes.

The ability to move through bigger creature's spaces is amaaaazingly underrated.

Light Cleric/Sorcerer/Wizard Halfling shooting off burning hands from out from under your allies means that you don't have to hit your allies.

Lucky is awesome for not auto-missing on a 1. Even for saving throws, it's soooo nice to not roll a 1.

I hate halflings for their fluff, but mechanically they're nice.

[Klaus Teufel]

Deep Gnome Abjuration Wizard: A race/class combo that is being picked solely to exploit a loophole in Arcane Ward. Sure, I could probably come up with a good backstory, but in the end, it's just there to mask that the character is a walking exploit.

Aasimar Warlock. The celestial being born of a pure good entity just made a demonic pact with Hell.

There are fallen Aasimar.

Mask my ass! A creative player has their character come to the same conclusion as them, and is exploiting the **** out of it because they found it works :P

Boo! It's not a loophole, it's working as intended. And a gnome wizard is pretty classic, so no idea why you'd think it's just a mask.

Please enlighten this noob: What is the loophole that Deep Gnome Abjurers can exploit?

On topic: Monk Tortles*. Any other combination I'm open to, if I get an appropriate inspiration.


*especially adolescent ones.

[DrKerosene]

On that note, anything Warforged. I am neither interested in "beep boop I'm a robot" nor "beep boop I'm a robot who wants to feel love."

How about a Warforged Bard who mourns someone like a dog misses their master, and is just trying to find out if they have a soul and can go to the same afterlife?

*sets up folding table and chair*
*unfurls banner for the front of the table*
"Halflings are only good for narrative elements, but terrible for a racial option - change my mind.

Well, my wife has been tapped as a Player in an up-coming Dragon Heist game. The DM has said that he is going to make Natural 1’s a bigger deal. My wife figured a Halfling Divination Wizard is going to be a good hedge against house-rule empowered death. If I get to play too, I’m considering a Halfling Bard with the Bountiful Luck feat to double down on aiding allies. If you have a better idea that doesn’t require other Players to do anything, I’m open to ideas.


Edit: On a bet, dare, or to set an example for new players, I’d be willing to play anything, but that assumes I’d get to be a player instead of a DM. I’m disinclined to play the more mundane monstrous races from Volo’s due to the mechanical options being unappealing, and I’m more interested in the stronger full-casters classes, so I’d be really unlikely to pick a Hobgoblin Monk over a Firbolg Druid.

[Klaus Teufel]

Well, my wife has been tapped as a Player in an up-coming Dragon Heist game. The DM has said that he is going to make Natural 1’s a bigger deal. My wife figured a Halfling Divination Wizard is going to be a good hedge against house-rule empowered death. If I get to play too, I’m considering a Halfling Bard with the Bountiful Luck feat to double down on aiding allies. If you have a better idea that doesn’t require other Players to do anything, I’m open to ideas.

What is it some DM's have with critical fails?

[jaappleton]

*sets up folding table and chair*
*unfurls banner for the front of the table*
"Halflings are only good for narrative elements, but terrible for a racial option - change my mind"

(I seriously cannot ever get motivated to play one. I just can't see anything they bring to the table as being all that useful, when there are so many other races that could do things better - Halfling rogue? I'll take a gnome instead. Halfling fighter? I'd take a kobold for the pack tactics. Halfling wizard? Elves/tieflings/gnomes superior, furfoots inferior)

I've had this idea for a 'Fateweaver', basically a Halfling Diviner with the Lucky feat and that Halfling racial trait that extends the racial Lucky ability to allies.

Manipulate the numbers. You've foreseen it.

[Man_Over_Game]

*sets up folding table and chair*
*unfurls banner for the front of the table*
"Halflings are only good for narrative elements, but terrible for a racial option - change my mind"

(I seriously cannot ever get motivated to play one. I just can't see anything they bring to the table as being all that useful, when there are so many other races that could do things better - Halfling rogue? I'll take a gnome instead. Halfling fighter? I'd take a kobold for the pack tactics. Halfling wizard? Elves/tieflings/gnomes superior, furfoots inferior)

Moving through an enemy's space can have good tactical value, especially if you have a Disengage effect or some reason for enemies to chase you (Ancestral Guardian).

Some DMs like to use Critical Fails. In the case where critical fails are not relevant, Lucky does a good job of ensuring success when you have a small chance of failure. For example, a Halfling with Expertise might only have a 20% chance to fail, where Lucky turns that into about a 16% chance to fail, making your chance of success about 25% more likely.

Being able to Hide behind an ally is useful for a Rogue with no cover.

Dexterity + Constitution is probably one of the most ideal stat combos that people would want. Not to mention the fact that you get resistance to one of the most common damage types in the game, as well as Advantage against one of the most debilitating conditions.


Halflings are probably one of the most consistent and versatile Races. They don't have many cool gimmicks, like the Dragonborn, but they have their place.

Personally, though, I use them for this:

DM: "I use Critical Fails".
Me: "Uh, not against me, you don't".

[Cynthaer]

I find it interesting that so many people list Half-Orc Wizard specifically, and that it's generally assumed that such a character would necessarily be a joke.

My favorite AL character is a Half-Orc Wizard, played perfectly straight. She's an intelligent investigator, specializes in divination, and I'm maxing Int on her just like any other Wizard. She also plays into her racial features by often going into melee and swinging a Shadow Blade with her 16 Str.

I know that "races" in D&D muddle genetics and culture together into one big set of features, but I see no reason that a Half-Orc must be played as a dumb brute.

[Man_Over_Game]

I find it interesting that so many people list Half-Orc Wizard specifically, and that it's generally assumed that such a character would necessarily be a joke.

My favorite AL character is a Half-Orc Wizard, played perfectly straight. She's an intelligent investigator, specializes in divination, and I'm maxing Int on her just like any other Wizard. She also plays into her racial features by often going into melee and swinging a Shadow Blade with her 16 Str.

I know that "races" in D&D muddle genetics and culture together into one big set of features, but I see no reason that a Half-Orc must be played as a dumb brute.

I really like the idea of a Half-Orc Wizard, using his undying feature with something like Overchannel in the Evocation School. Or just relying on the undying feature to counter the Wizard's natural squishiness. It's a really good combination of abilities.

My gripe is when people do it for irony's sake at the expense of the party. +2 to Strength isn't a problem, but 12 to Intelligence is.