Halflings with a 20 STR - heck, even an 18 - just seems ridiculous.
I want you to think very carefully about this statement. Seriously. Think about what you just said.
What makes a halfling with a STR of 18 or 20 more or less "ridiculous" than the existence of halflings?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The heavy property in weapons seems to me more about the size of the weapons than the weight I think, when you look at the weights given to them. Longbow is only 2 lb and classified as heavy.
Lance isn't heavy, but glaive, greatsword and halberd are despite being the same weight. A great club is heavier than a greataxe yet greataxe has the heavy property and great club does not.
So I think it's not so much that a halfling isn't strong enough to lift them so much as their smaller body size makes them unwieldy and awkward to use.
If it was about strength, I'd think heavy weapons would just have a STR requirement the way heavy armor does for all races regardless of size. That heavy only penalizes you if you're small, I think the size of the weapon in relation to body size is the real thing being applied.
The heavy property in weapons seems to me more about the size of the weapons than the weight I think, when you look at the weights given to them. Longbow is only 2 lb and classified as heavy.
Lance isn't heavy, but glaive, greatsword and halberd are despite being the same weight. A great club is heavier than a greataxe yet greataxe has the heavy property and great club does not.
So I think it's not so much that a halfling isn't strong enough to lift them so much as their smaller body size makes them unwieldy and awkward to use.
If it was about strength, I'd think heavy weapons would just have a STR requirement the way heavy armor does for all races regardless of size. That heavy only penalizes you if you're small, I think the size of the weapon in relation to body size is the real thing being applied.
Agreed, another misnomer. Perhaps large, unwieldy or cumbersome would have been a better choice of words.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
The heavy property in weapons seems to me more about the size of the weapons than the weight I think, when you look at the weights given to them. Longbow is only 2 lb and classified as heavy.
Lance isn't heavy, but glaive, greatsword and halberd are despite being the same weight. A great club is heavier than a greataxe yet greataxe has the heavy property and great club does not.
So I think it's not so much that a halfling isn't strong enough to lift them so much as their smaller body size makes them unwieldy and awkward to use.
If it was about strength, I'd think heavy weapons would just have a STR requirement the way heavy armor does for all races regardless of size. That heavy only penalizes you if you're small, I think the size of the weapon in relation to body size is the real thing being applied.
Agreed, another misnomer. Perhaps large, unwieldy or cumbersome would have been a better choice of words.
More I was just stating there is "penalties" with small races playing STR based classes in the form of weapon availability, grapple options, speed, etc...
Overall they will not be the "best" barbarian as they can't make use of all the Barb features to the "optimal" extent.
I am personally really exited for this new edition/whatever it is. I was beginning to get a bit bored of 5e, to be honest, and a revamp/redo/new edition/whatever the hell it is sound great! I’d like to see some more monster stuff; more lore, tables for stuff like lairs, encounter groups, motivations etc, more stat blocks (not an overload like the 4e MM1, just a few different ones. Or perhaps some like extra traits that can be applied to a basic stat block or something like that). I’d also like a DMG that actually explains how to DM (though all the tables and stuff in the current one are great), better encounter and monster-building rules, and a revamp of the classes and races (better balance, namely).
That’s about it. I am incredibly excited, especially since I won’t need to throw out all my current stuff. I honestly could not be happier.
EDIT: Correct me if I’ve got something wrong (I probably have), btw.
I am personally really exited for this new edition/whatever it is. I was beginning to get a bit bored of 5e, to be honest, and a revamp/redo/new edition/whatever the hell it is sound great! I’d like to see some more monster stuff; more lore, tables for stuff like lairs, encounter groups, motivations etc, more stat blocks (not an overload like the 4e MM1, just a few different ones. Or perhaps some like extra traits that can be applied to a basic stat block or something like that). I’d also like a DMG that actually explains how to DM (though all the tables and stuff in the current one are great), better encounter and monster-building rules, and a revamp of the classes and races (better balance, namely).
That’s about it. I am incredibly excited, especially since I won’t need to throw out all my current stuff. I honestly could not be happier.
EDIT: Correct me if I’ve got something wrong (I probably have), btw.
I am too.
I will say this:
I am both excited for and dreading 5.5E and the direction WotC is going in. Here's why.
Excited For:
Diversity. WotC has had this big issue with diversity for so long, and I feel like with all the optional features and lineages that WotC is finally accepting facts.
Content. New stuff is thrilling, and it means I get more of what I want.
Dreading:
Balance and Mechanics. WotC has thrown balance out the door, as evidenced by my much-beloved Twilight Cleric in my much-beloved TCoE. Also, the new monster stat blocks ruin spells such as counterspell and features such as the Arcana Domain's Spellbreaker feature... This is in addition to the supposedly "diversity" of removing age, and size. While the average sizes were BAD, the roll-able size tables and Medium/Small stuff was good, even enabling several halfling and gnome features as well as within species diversity! And on the Age note, a fruit fly does not live as long as a human, else we would be stumbling constantly over three week old children and humankind would be extinct. Needless to say, science is not racist, it is merely life.
Content. WotC is now making 5+ books per year. When XGtE came out, there was 3 only. Next year, there will be at least 6 new books. With all this content, there will be more mistakes like the monster spells, more worthless recycling like MP: MotM, and just plain content overload. As someone who has the ability to buy 2/3 books per year if I get lucky, this is spiraling downhill for me really fast.
Lore. Let's go about this quietly... THE FEYWILD IS NOT A PLAYGROUND, YOU IDIOTS! It is a HIGHLY DANGEROUS REALM that WARPS TIME and KILLS INNOCENTS, it's just bad luck it has fairies. And let's not forget your racist "de-racist" drow mistakes, where you further belittled people who get tattoos or have skin conditions, WotC! Not to mention the DM-power sapping First World nonsense. Good gods...
Ism. We have newfound diversity. Yay. Look, non-evil drow (they were there before, Eilistrae was at least, but that aside) and non-racist lineages. But what. The. Apocalypse. Is. The. Two. Good. Powerful. Beings. In. WBtW (for example). Mean? Mr. Witch and Mr. Light are both decidedly male. The hags (for no useful known reasons) follow the typical female trope. Most of the NPCs, besides Ellywick (arguably a stinker, more on her later), if they have power, are male. Sure, Tasha's there, presented both as a hag and good, so she contradicts herself. MALE TRUMPS FEMALE, yet again. And what about Ellywick? Coolest gnome in a long time from WotC, but the "Best Bard in the Multiverse" title discourages any other bard in any campaign from being outstanding, because Ellywick makes them suck. Not cool for character diversity, WotC, not cool. I also won't mention the new hyper-racist drow lore (I've done a post somewhere else on that, where they're making a smaller and arguably more evil group of drow and calling them a different sub-sub species) or the Fey dumbing down (again, above) or anything else as this section is over length already.
I really love what WotC has done in fixing things, but there comes a point where too much is too much and fixing becomes rewriting and forcing isms down our throats. Just chuck out 5E already! Because you so clearly are already making a new edition, WotC. And not one I'm all that happy with.
For all my ranting, I will still enjoy 5.5E, just maybe not as much anymore.
And what about Ellywick? Coolest gnome in a long time from WotC, but the "Best Bard in the Multiverse" title discourages any other bard in any campaign from being outstanding, because Ellywick makes them suck. Not cool for character diversity, WotC, not cool
Erm... Somebody has to be the greatest. That doesn't make anyone else suck, it just gives them something to aim for. Being magically made the best bard in the multiverse made her just that at that specific point in time - and a moment later the title was up for grabs for anyone who wanted to come for it and had the chops. She's the best, but only until someone takes away her proverbial belt.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
There's a gross corporatisation of allyship that tends to warp the means to justify the ends. Regardless of even when it's well intentioned, like I believe it is with WotC, it still becomes performative rather than effective which only actually ends up hurting the very rationales, and people, they claim to be supporting. I appreciate that they're trying but really think they need to consult with actual experts in these issues as opposed to popular opinion, personal feelings and zeitgeist rhetoric. It kinds reminds me of Dr. Ibram X. Kendi's work in Be Antiracist, where he talks about how intention in law is essentially irrelevant when the actual result is a net harm.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."
Content. WotC is now making 5+ books per year. When XGtE came out, there was 3 only. Next year, there will be at least 6 new books. With all this content, there will be more mistakes like the monster spells, more worthless recycling like MP: MotM, and just plain content overload. As someone who has the ability to buy 2/3 books per year if I get lucky, this is spiraling downhill for me really fast.
I'm not sure I get you. Skipping the part about some being filler.content (I have no comment either way o that), you seem to imply that them releasing 6 books a year is a bad thing when you can only buy 2/3 of them. I'm not sure I follow. All the extra books mean is that you get a choice, you can pick the 2/3 best books (for you) and not feel pressured to buy rubbish ones (because otherwise you'd have to buy them just to have fresh content to use, but now you will always have fresh content). I'm not sure why this is a bad thing, so long as they avoid filler books just so they can get books onto the market. You don't have to have every book in your collection.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
And what about Ellywick? Coolest gnome in a long time from WotC, but the "Best Bard in the Multiverse" title discourages any other bard in any campaign from being outstanding, because Ellywick makes them suck. Not cool for character diversity, WotC, not cool
Erm... Somebody has to be the greatest. That doesn't make anyone else suck, it just gives them something to aim for. Being magically made the best bard in the multiverse made her just that at that specific point in time - and a moment later the title was up for grabs for anyone who wanted to come for it and had the chops. She's the best, but only until someone takes away her proverbial belt.
DM: Introduce yourself to the party
Me: I am not the greatest bard in the world, no. I am just a tribute. Couldn't create the greatest bard in the world, no, no, this is a tribute, oh
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Content. WotC is now making 5+ books per year. When XGtE came out, there was 3 only. Next year, there will be at least 6 new books. With all this content, there will be more mistakes like the monster spells, more worthless recycling like MP: MotM, and just plain content overload. As someone who has the ability to buy 2/3 books per year if I get lucky, this is spiraling downhill for me really fast.
I'm not sure I get you. Skipping the part about some being filler.content (I have no comment either way o that), you seem to imply that them releasing 6 books a year is a bad thing when you can only buy 2/3 of them. I'm not sure I follow. All the extra books mean is that you get a choice, you can pick the 2/3 best books (for you) and not feel pressured to buy rubbish ones (because otherwise you'd have to buy them just to have fresh content to use, but now you will always have fresh content). I'm not sure why this is a bad thing, so long as they avoid filler books just so they can get books onto the market. You don't have to have every book in your collection.
I mean I don’t buy the campaign books and I only buy settings books that I think will interest me. I run homebrew campaigns so only need the PHB and Monster manual anything else is a good bonus.
Something else I will say to all those who complain about Tasha’s and xanthers etc rules. As a DM it is up to you what rules you decide to use.
I know DMs who ignore initiative rules, they either role initiative once at the start of a session, or one party just go in seating order for initiative rolling a dice at the start of each combat to see which seat is position 1. I know DMs who ban certain spells, classes, sub classes and races. I know DMs who assume all characters just sleep in armour, DMs who ignore all spell components (including things like diamonds etc).
If your playing RAW the first rule is change the rules as you want.
Wizards will release a series of books leading up to whatever the next major release is, let’s call it 5.5 and guess what if you don’t like the changes then don’t apply it, run DND as is now, or apply your own homebrew rules as you do or ignore what you want. I really can’t see the point in people getting irate over something that is coming in several years time that I imagine the designers are having design discussions about how to start let alone having a sense of the end result. The odds are all the guesses we are making are wrong.
Ok, so just finished reading about the upcoming changes at this article https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2021/10/dd-wotc-unveils-new-rules-for-monsters-and-player-races.html and I can get over, and even support getting rid of purely cultural identifiers such as alignment and languages. But when did age and size become an issue? So now I might be part of a group with a seven foot tall 800 year old halfling? This feels ridiculous. Also, I guess charm and hold person spells are going to be nerfed since many creatures are going to be reclassified into another type.
Also, I guess charm and hold person spells are going to be nerfed since many creatures are going to be reclassified into another type.
We'll see. Nothing prohibits changing those spells accordingly. That said, nerfing those by excluding a bunch of critters might be a net positive in my opinion.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
[X] Person spells are supposed to be less powerful than [X] Monster spells. The fact that you could do what you needed to do with a "Person" spell instead of a "Monster" spell ninety-nine times out of a hundred always felt weird.
And anything that cuts back on Counterspell cheese is also a worthwhile endeavor, I'd say. Little is more disheartening to a DM than trying to portray a dangerous spellcaster villain while four of your PCs all squirm in their seats waiting for their chance to bellow "COUNTERSPELL!"
Ok, so just finished reading about the upcoming changes at this article https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2021/10/dd-wotc-unveils-new-rules-for-monsters-and-player-races.html and I can get over, and even support getting rid of purely cultural identifiers such as alignment and languages. But when did age and size become an issue? So now I might be part of a group with a seven foot tall 800 year old halfling? This feels ridiculous. Also, I guess charm and hold person spells are going to be nerfed since many creatures are going to be reclassified into another type.
Hello MayhemIsEverywhere,
You can encounter that now. In almost every group I have been in there has been at least one person who wanted to be a specific race, but wanted to be in some way exceptional. A gray Eladrin who was cursed to be divorced from the seasons, a dwarf as tall as a man (it was funny to me that this was mentioned in the article you linked), a half-orc whose parent was an orgillon, making them nearly as large as one, and many others. I do not quite see the issue here. If the DM is okay with it and gives it a green light, is there really a problem?
Having a 20 STR and being unable to use heavy weapons just highlights the ridiculousness.
They are strong small creature and have limitations based on their size.
It's exactly what you claim to want
I want you to think very carefully about this statement. Seriously. Think about what you just said.
What makes a halfling with a STR of 18 or 20 more or less "ridiculous" than the existence of halflings?
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The heavy property in weapons seems to me more about the size of the weapons than the weight I think, when you look at the weights given to them. Longbow is only 2 lb and classified as heavy.
Lance isn't heavy, but glaive, greatsword and halberd are despite being the same weight. A great club is heavier than a greataxe yet greataxe has the heavy property and great club does not.
So I think it's not so much that a halfling isn't strong enough to lift them so much as their smaller body size makes them unwieldy and awkward to use.
If it was about strength, I'd think heavy weapons would just have a STR requirement the way heavy armor does for all races regardless of size. That heavy only penalizes you if you're small, I think the size of the weapon in relation to body size is the real thing being applied.
Agreed, another misnomer. Perhaps large, unwieldy or cumbersome would have been a better choice of words.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
More I was just stating there is "penalties" with small races playing STR based classes in the form of weapon availability, grapple options, speed, etc...
Overall they will not be the "best" barbarian as they can't make use of all the Barb features to the "optimal" extent.
I am too.
So that's why my iPhone feels heavier!
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."
― Oscar Wilde.
I will say this:
I am both excited for and dreading 5.5E and the direction WotC is going in. Here's why.
Excited For:
Dreading:
I really love what WotC has done in fixing things, but there comes a point where too much is too much and fixing becomes rewriting and forcing isms down our throats. Just chuck out 5E already! Because you so clearly are already making a new edition, WotC. And not one I'm all that happy with.
For all my ranting, I will still enjoy 5.5E, just maybe not as much anymore.
Edit: Insults are directed at Noman. Hello, Noman! My eye still hurts.
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
Erm... Somebody has to be the greatest. That doesn't make anyone else suck, it just gives them something to aim for. Being magically made the best bard in the multiverse made her just that at that specific point in time - and a moment later the title was up for grabs for anyone who wanted to come for it and had the chops. She's the best, but only until someone takes away her proverbial belt.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I really hope MMotM has more beasts in it. >:3
No new beasts, just Volos and Mordenkainens, as far as we know. Heavily altered.
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
There's a gross corporatisation of allyship that tends to warp the means to justify the ends. Regardless of even when it's well intentioned, like I believe it is with WotC, it still becomes performative rather than effective which only actually ends up hurting the very rationales, and people, they claim to be supporting. I appreciate that they're trying but really think they need to consult with actual experts in these issues as opposed to popular opinion, personal feelings and zeitgeist rhetoric. It kinds reminds me of Dr. Ibram X. Kendi's work in Be Antiracist, where he talks about how intention in law is essentially irrelevant when the actual result is a net harm.
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."
― Oscar Wilde.
I'm not sure I get you. Skipping the part about some being filler.content (I have no comment either way o that), you seem to imply that them releasing 6 books a year is a bad thing when you can only buy 2/3 of them. I'm not sure I follow. All the extra books mean is that you get a choice, you can pick the 2/3 best books (for you) and not feel pressured to buy rubbish ones (because otherwise you'd have to buy them just to have fresh content to use, but now you will always have fresh content). I'm not sure why this is a bad thing, so long as they avoid filler books just so they can get books onto the market. You don't have to have every book in your collection.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
DM: Introduce yourself to the party
Me: I am not the greatest bard in the world, no. I am just a tribute. Couldn't create the greatest bard in the world, no, no, this is a tribute, oh
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I mean I don’t buy the campaign books and I only buy settings books that I think will interest me. I run homebrew campaigns so only need the PHB and Monster manual anything else is a good bonus.
Something else I will say to all those who complain about Tasha’s and xanthers etc rules. As a DM it is up to you what rules you decide to use.
I know DMs who ignore initiative rules, they either role initiative once at the start of a session, or one party just go in seating order for initiative rolling a dice at the start of each combat to see which seat is position 1. I know DMs who ban certain spells, classes, sub classes and races. I know DMs who assume all characters just sleep in armour, DMs who ignore all spell components (including things like diamonds etc).
If your playing RAW the first rule is change the rules as you want.
Wizards will release a series of books leading up to whatever the next major release is, let’s call it 5.5 and guess what if you don’t like the changes then don’t apply it, run DND as is now, or apply your own homebrew rules as you do or ignore what you want. I really can’t see the point in people getting irate over something that is coming in several years time that I imagine the designers are having design discussions about how to start let alone having a sense of the end result. The odds are all the guesses we are making are wrong.
Ok, so just finished reading about the upcoming changes at this article https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2021/10/dd-wotc-unveils-new-rules-for-monsters-and-player-races.html and I can get over, and even support getting rid of purely cultural identifiers such as alignment and languages. But when did age and size become an issue? So now I might be part of a group with a seven foot tall 800 year old halfling? This feels ridiculous. Also, I guess charm and hold person spells are going to be nerfed since many creatures are going to be reclassified into another type.
We'll see. Nothing prohibits changing those spells accordingly. That said, nerfing those by excluding a bunch of critters might be a net positive in my opinion.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
[X] Person spells are supposed to be less powerful than [X] Monster spells. The fact that you could do what you needed to do with a "Person" spell instead of a "Monster" spell ninety-nine times out of a hundred always felt weird.
And anything that cuts back on Counterspell cheese is also a worthwhile endeavor, I'd say. Little is more disheartening to a DM than trying to portray a dangerous spellcaster villain while four of your PCs all squirm in their seats waiting for their chance to bellow "COUNTERSPELL!"
Please do not contact or message me.
Hello MayhemIsEverywhere,
You can encounter that now. In almost every group I have been in there has been at least one person who wanted to be a specific race, but wanted to be in some way exceptional. A gray Eladrin who was cursed to be divorced from the seasons, a dwarf as tall as a man (it was funny to me that this was mentioned in the article you linked), a half-orc whose parent was an orgillon, making them nearly as large as one, and many others. I do not quite see the issue here. If the DM is okay with it and gives it a green light, is there really a problem?
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing