Introduction

I don't like builds and metas in games, both tabletop and computer. When I look at guides on D&D 5e character building, and these damned tierlists. When I see coloured text about making your characters stronger my blood boils. I also dislike biological determinism - which is a thing that sadly still remains in a lot of fantasy works (I am not saying that anyone who uses Race As Class is a biological determinist, just that it feels kind of iffy putting a whole species of people in as a class). And yet I like differences among the various species that a character may have. I've wrestled with this for a while, and I made a way to reconcile these opposing currents - pseudo-classes.

Pseudo-class

(Note: my pseudo-classes are intended for GLOG. While GLOG classes are mostly easily adaptable to other OSR systems, it may sometimes lead to weird stuff.)
Pseudo-classes are a thing which works as a sidegrade to the character. They provide benefits that usually aren't just higher stats, or bonuses, instead permitting whole new methods of interaction with the surrounding world. They also cost you by causing disadvantages outside of a simple penalty to your stats. They are what fantasy "races" (species is a better term, I don't get why people use race) ought to be. They should not synergize with your actual classes (except in the sense that a draconic fire mage is safer in their work, or a dwarven miner may sense the underground ores - those are fine, as long as they don't force you to choose a certain species if you want to play "right" as a certain class) - that leads to a meta of character builds and to unnerving implications.

Story-time

I was GMing 5e at the time, and my players were looking to hire a wizard for a little project of theirs. I asked them for what exactly they are looking, and they said "a gnome". I asked why. "Because gnomes are always better at wizardry than other races, cause they are more intelligent". I get that these players were not racists in real life, but in many fantasy worlds racism is just a biological fact. And that's messed up.

Death of Character Diversity caused by Meta

(Not the company, the character build meta)
When playing a game that has strong synergies between many aspects of character building, when was the last time you saw an "un-optimal" character? You can't remember? Why's that? At least partially, because when you set off to play as a certain type of a character, you want to do your job well. This means that most players will be incentivized to avoid picking "un-optimal races", because they do not want to be dead weight in their team. This means that really, in all of the "character options" that 5e offers, most are not real.

My Solution

Offer people who want to play as non-humans trade-offs. Not the kinds that make them into better members of their classes - the kinds that make their gameplay actually different. My Elves are slightly better at everything - but must avoid cold iron and anti-magic and are bound by fairy-tale rules. My Draconids may walk through fire, but if it gets even slightly cold need a fire to keep functioning. And so on and so forth. No Pseudo-class should be "just a part of my build". They are made to be something that partially defines who (and what) the character is. When was the last time you saw someone's D&D race cause them issues? When was the last time an elf could not get into a forge because of all the iron, or a dwarf stayed behind because of the short legs? Please, give your classes weaknesses - they are what makes characters interesting.