The Kenku thing kind has me split. On the one hand, it's something quite different and somewhat unique. As a DM, I'd be happy for a player to give up and just talk normally if they didn't want to continue or even necessarily start. On the other, I can imagine that it would get very annoying if the player didn't handle it very well, and I'd reckon that the worst ones would be the most likely to persevere. I guess personally, it seemed quite gimmicky as well - and I probably won't be worse for missing it.
I love it! I know the concept of mimicking other people sounds cool, but it is a real pain in the posterior to keep it up IF you even try. Being a Crow Person can be made unique enough by tapping into other qualities. I was really surprised at how excited I was that they dropped that.
I'd like the mimicry ability to possibly be maintained. The ability to mimic, that is. The notion that Kenku can only communicate through mimicry leads to some real ham fisted interpretations by voice actors at WotC sponsored events, and if the pros make hash of it....
LOL Right?!
If I understand what was leaked correctly, the Mimicry Ability is still part of the race, they just dropped the "mandated" RP part.
In Nerd Immersions’s part two of the PC Race leaks, the Kenku was shown to indeed still have Mimicry but without the mandate to have to speak with it. They also gained a neat ability to gain advantage on any skill they are proficient with a number of times equal to their prof bonus. They can also be small size as well as medium now.
Many races can now be small or medium even Aasimar
The Kenku thing kind has me split. On the one hand, it's something quite different and somewhat unique. As a DM, I'd be happy for a player to give up and just talk normally if they didn't want to continue or even necessarily start. On the other, I can imagine that it would get very annoying if the player didn't handle it very well, and I'd reckon that the worst ones would be the most likely to persevere. I guess personally, it seemed quite gimmicky as well - and I probably won't be worse for missing it.
I love it! I know the concept of mimicking other people sounds cool, but it is a real pain in the posterior to keep it up IF you even try. Being a Crow Person can be made unique enough by tapping into other qualities. I was really surprised at how excited I was that they dropped that.
I'd like the mimicry ability to possibly be maintained. The ability to mimic, that is. The notion that Kenku can only communicate through mimicry leads to some real ham fisted interpretations by voice actors at WotC sponsored events, and if the pros make hash of it....
LOL Right?!
If I understand what was leaked correctly, the Mimicry Ability is still part of the race, they just dropped the "mandated" RP part.
In Nerd Immersions’s part two of the PC Race leaks, the Kenku was shown to indeed still have Mimicry but without the mandate to have to speak with it. They also gained a neat ability to gain advantage on any skill they are proficient with a number of times equal to their prof bonus. They can also be small size as well as medium now.
Not going to lie, Kenku are probably my least favorite Player Race in all of D&D. I absolutely hated how they were mandated to always use Mimicry in Volo's Guide to Monsters, and banned them from my table because of that.
I'm probably going to be lifting the ban because of this new version. I like the change to Kenku here. I'm still not super fond of them, but they're way better than they were before.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Many races can now be small or medium even Aasimar
You aren't wrong, though most make sense.
Aasimar
Genasi
Kenku
Yuan-ti
Tabaxi
Tortle
Changling
Harengon (though this is unchanged from Witchlight)
I do like the addition of having small as an option for the Planes Touched ones, but the others seem kind of odd to me. I don't dislike them, I just think it is a little weird. I would probably explain it away as "subraces" of turtle people, cat people and the like, if the need for lore for it ever really came up in my game world.
So is that a vote in the "WotC didn't think of their partner's digital updating policies so now some think as to how to resolve it is probably going on between legal dept. so everyone is happy" column?
It does seem to reflect a poor understanding of digital publication and tools, yes; none of this would be any sort of problem for paper books, because if someone produces a revised edition of a book, the only way of getting that revision is buying the new book.
Frankly, the problem WotC is struggling with is probably not the new versions of monsters as PCs, that's only something like 10% of the book, the problem is that a large number of the monster entries are duplicates with the same name as the original, so for digital sources for monsters, they have a couple of unappealing options
Treat them as errata, so someone who has the earlier books gets a large fraction of the book for free.
Allow resellers to version things, so you can get Alhoon (MotM) and Alhoon (VGM)
Deprecate prior books (probably not permitted by existing contracts and guaranteed to make everyone extremely angry)
Something else?
So #3, I'm not sure exactly what you mean by deprecate, but if you mean the new book's contents supersede prior books. But yes, #1 is actually the present practice, they don't really call it errata on DDB when a new book supersedes an old book, but when the new book is released there's an announcement in the support thread of the book's release as well as a list of spells, magic items, monsters that got retconned for everyone regardless of whether you bought the book.
I'm very much thinking WotC didn't think of this part of their market when coming up with a new book that is mechanically nothing but "updates" (giving a lot of their "whales" an opportunity to not bite since they'll see it all updated in their online resources). Between this and the overall slipping in into a box set and locking it up in there till some unspecified time it will be released solo has me thinking there's a product manager who is not all too comfortable if their marketing and biz intelligence are getting wind of easily avoided fan outrage (i.e. play fair with your digital partners, no boxed set mandating b.s.)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
So #3, I'm not sure exactly what you mean by deprecate, but if you mean the new book's contents supersede prior books.
I mean "it replaces the contents of the old books, but you don't get to keep the conflicting content". Which would be at best a PR trainwreck and decently likely to result in a lawsuit that would be more expensive than #1. And yes, some product manager really should have thought about that before they even started this project.
I'm 99% sure that in the minds of the powers that be at WotC HQ there was an unconscious distinction between errata ("this is wrong, we have to change it") and updates ("this needs to be better, we may want to change it"). Errata are easy to sell to the customers, as most of them will be seen as an improvement by the far greater majority. Updates are trickier, as many threads (this one included) have proven. Making a book out of updates was asking for trouble anyway, but doing it in the current mixed digital/analog publishing world guaranteed this wouldn't end with just a little bit of it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I'm 99% sure that in the minds of the powers that be at WotC HQ there was an unconscious distinction between errata ("this is wrong, we have to change it") and updates ("this needs to be better, we may want to change it"). Errata are easy to sell to the customers, as most of them will be seen as an improvement by the far greater majority.
Errata can't be sold at all -- they don't cost money. Wizards would prefer to make money off of MotM
Not going to lie, Kenku are probably my least favorite Player Race in all of D&D. I absolutely hated how they were mandated to always use Mimicry in Volo's Guide to Monsters, and banned them from my table because of that.
I'm probably going to be lifting the ban because of this new version. I like the change to Kenku here. I'm still not super fond of them, but they're way better than they were before.
A buddy of mine played a Kenku in a campaign. He was the most popular PC in the game in no small part due to Mimicry.
So #3, I'm not sure exactly what you mean by deprecate, but if you mean the new book's contents supersede prior books.
I mean "it replaces the contents of the old books, but you don't get to keep the conflicting content". Which would be at best a PR trainwreck and decently likely to result in a lawsuit that would be more expensive than #1. And yes, some product manager really should have thought about that before they even started this project.
DDB does updates as updates and not errata for monsters, magic items, spells etc. Go check the first post for any book release on Bugs and Support. Most recent ones are pinned to the top. That's precedent for what folks are concerned with. It's just never been on the scale of a whole book being updates. DDB when discussion such changes to owned content being brought in line with latest version are called updates. They only call it errata if it's reflective of an errata document. So like Pang I think there is a bit of kerfuffle over WotC producing a whole book of updates without thinking of the online market ramifications that they've imposed on their online partners.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I'm 99% sure that in the minds of the powers that be at WotC HQ there was an unconscious distinction between errata ("this is wrong, we have to change it") and updates ("this needs to be better, we may want to change it"). Errata are easy to sell to the customers, as most of them will be seen as an improvement by the far greater majority.
Errata can't be sold at all -- they don't cost money. Wizards would prefer to make money off of MotM
Strictly speaking errata are being sold - they're part of the product. That aside, I meant players typically at least don't mind errata and often approve of them; with updates the reactions tend to be very much mixed and per the usual the haters are much more vocal about their opinions.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I think I’ve figured it out. WotC’s MO seems to have been (and will likely continue as):
Throw 💩 at the wall internet, see how it goes.
Do the thing, see how that goes.
Fix it in a later publication, see how that goes.
Consolidate everything.
Rinse & repeat.
They’re counting on:
Being able to “fix it later” to overcome their mistakes.
Being able to consolidate stuff to compensate for the bloat.
Us “buying it anyway” to overcome their shotgun strategy.
Us having memories like goldfish to forget the 🐂💩.
A lot of us here like the changes. If you don't vote with your wallet.
First of all, why did you feel compelled to write that?
Second, I do. It was 5e that pulled me out of a 10 year boycott on all WorC products, and I haven’t spent a dime on WotC content since Tasha’s Midden.
Why did you feel compelled to write your complaint? Could it be because we're on a public forum and having a discussion? You said the changes are shit. I said a lot of people are happy with them.
No. My post wasn’t a “complaint,” it was commentary on their market testing strategies. As my comment was in regards to how WotC is releasing content and not about the content itself, your response was wholly unrelated to my comment. I said that WotC is throwing crap out there to see what people think. Whether or not you like that crap or not is irrelevant to my comment on their strategy as to how the crap is presented and product tested.
So #3, I'm not sure exactly what you mean by deprecate, but if you mean the new book's contents supersede prior books.
I mean "it replaces the contents of the old books, but you don't get to keep the conflicting content". Which would be at best a PR trainwreck and decently likely to result in a lawsuit that would be more expensive than #1. And yes, some product manager really should have thought about that before they even started this project.
DDB does updates as updates and not errata for monsters, magic items, spells etc. Go check the first post for any book release on Bugs and Support. Most recent ones are pinned to the top. That's precedent for what folks are concerned with. It's just never been on the scale of a whole book being updates. DDB when discussion such changes to owned content being brought in line with latest version are called updates. They only call it errata if it's reflective of an errata document. So like Pang I think there is a bit of kerfuffle over WotC producing a whole book of updates without thinking of the online market ramifications that they've imposed on their online partners.
A bunch of these changes are pretty substantial, so I really hope they treat them as variants rather than change the originals. There is precedent for this, after all, with different versions of Orcs or Dragonborn, etc.
So the various orcs off the "standard" Orc are setting specific Orcs. I haven't really wrapped my head around the Fizban's Dragonborn shift (have one Dragonborn that was using the UA rules and we shifted over to the Fizban's official version with no drama) but I do know that MMM is trying to represent things in a setting agnostic way (lore wise to represent how things would be found throughout the Multiverse).
I don't want to negate or invalidate your hopes (I like variety myself) but the drumbeat to the MMM roll out has seemed to be "this is the STANDARD" going forward.
I like the Fey goblinoids when the Hobgoblin was presented in UA ... but I also really like the "Klingon" interpretation I do through their representation in MToF. I even have my own game lore where when Fey and Prime Material Plane goblinoids meet up, it devolves into finger pointing over which are the lost the ones. Plus, with the whole Fey thing, what happens to Acheron (yeah, I know Orcs are supposed to be there too, but for me it's basically Klingon Goblinoid Valhalla, and it's brutally glorious Heavy Metal).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I think a big take away from this books it that there were indeed some significant changes made across the board. However, these races are completely compatible with the current rule set. This of course is the simplest part of the process of updating to the next version of D&D since the Races have very little impact on the way classes work. But this is very much a 3 to 3.5 level of change, at least for Races.
So #3, I'm not sure exactly what you mean by deprecate, but if you mean the new book's contents supersede prior books.
I mean "it replaces the contents of the old books, but you don't get to keep the conflicting content". Which would be at best a PR trainwreck and decently likely to result in a lawsuit that would be more expensive than #1. And yes, some product manager really should have thought about that before they even started this project.
DDB does updates as updates and not errata for monsters, magic items, spells etc. Go check the first post for any book release on Bugs and Support. Most recent ones are pinned to the top. That's precedent for what folks are concerned with. It's just never been on the scale of a whole book being updates. DDB when discussion such changes to owned content being brought in line with latest version are called updates. They only call it errata if it's reflective of an errata document. So like Pang I think there is a bit of kerfuffle over WotC producing a whole book of updates without thinking of the online market ramifications that they've imposed on their online partners.
A bunch of these changes are pretty substantial, so I really hope they treat them as variants rather than change the originals. There is precedent for this, after all, with different versions of Orcs or Dragonborn, etc.
So the various orcs off the "standard" Orc are setting specific Orcs. I haven't really wrapped my head around the Fizban's Dragonborn shift (have one Dragonborn that was using the UA rules and we shifted over to the Fizban's official version with no drama) but I do know that MMM is trying to represent things in a setting agnostic way (lore wise to represent how things would be found throughout the Multiverse).
I don't want to negate or invalidate your hopes (I like variety myself) but the drumbeat to the MMM roll out has seemed to be "this is the STANDARD" going forward.
I like the Fey goblinoids when the Hobgoblin was presented in UA ... but I also really like the "Klingon" interpretation I do through their representation in MToF. I even have my own game lore where when Fey and Prime Material Plane goblinoids meet up, it devolves into finger pointing over which are the lost the ones. Plus, with the whole Fey thing, what happens to Acheron (yeah, I know Orcs are supposed to be there too, but for me it's basically Klingon Goblinoid Valhalla, and it's brutally glorious Heavy Metal).
Those two views on goblinoids are actually compatible. Fey does not actually mean all cute little fairy folk.
Right but the flavor WotC is giving the Fey goblins takes away the militarism for a bordering on Hobbit like celebration of community and hospitality. I think they've dropped saving face for a different mechanism involving team spirit, and also help actions that a lot of folks thought were OP in the UA.
Basically, the Archeron comsologically oriented goblinoids got reskinned to be more like Henson's Labyrinth goblinoids. More muppeted than nerfed. I like them, but would prefer both and I think a lot of fun can be had by the tension between the two kind.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
But this is very much a 3 to 3.5 level of change, at least for Races.
Which in principle I'm fine with (I know others who complained loudly about 3.5). The difference is that there was no DDB equivalent back in 3rd edition.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
So the various orcs off the "standard" Orc are setting specific Orcs. I haven't really wrapped my head around the Fizban's Dragonborn shift (have one Dragonborn that was using the UA rules and we shifted over to the Fizban's official version with no drama) but I do know that MMM is trying to represent things in a setting agnostic way (lore wise to represent how things would be found throughout the Multiverse).
I don't want to negate or invalidate your hopes (I like variety myself) but the drumbeat to the MMM roll out has seemed to be "this is the STANDARD" going forward.
I like the Fey goblinoids when the Hobgoblin was presented in UA ... but I also really like the "Klingon" interpretation I do through their representation in MToF. I even have my own game lore where when Fey and Prime Material Plane goblinoids meet up, it devolves into finger pointing over which are the lost the ones. Plus, with the whole Fey thing, what happens to Acheron (yeah, I know Orcs are supposed to be there too, but for me it's basically Klingon Goblinoid Valhalla, and it's brutally glorious Heavy Metal).
But this is very much a 3 to 3.5 level of change, at least for Races.
Which in principle I'm fine with (I know others who complained loudly about 3.5). The difference is that there was no DDB equivalent back in 3rd edition.
Yeah, I don't know if WotC actually cares about this site though. It is very clear that this site was never really carefully considered from the beginning. Thus the issues this books is causing.
But this is very much a 3 to 3.5 level of change, at least for Races.
Which in principle I'm fine with (I know others who complained loudly about 3.5). The difference is that there was no DDB equivalent back in 3rd edition.
Yeah, I don't know if WotC actually cares about this site though. It is very clear that this site was never really carefully considered from the beginning. Thus the issues this books is causing.
It's a 3rd party site, so no reason to even consider it until someone came knocking for a licence. I do think WotC cares now, since DDB has been another visibility booster for years, but how much is a different question and some of the licence details were clearly not thought through sufficiently by either party back then (hindsight's 20/20, I don't think foreseeing everything was ever a real possibility regardless of effort). The onus here is very much on WotC though, they're the ones who decide on the publication model for D&D. This doesn't have to be an issue, but then it shouldn't have been an issue for a while now - the particulars for M³ and the bundle have been known for a long time - and arguably never had to be one in the first place.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Many races can now be small or medium even Aasimar
Awesome, thanks!
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Not going to lie, Kenku are probably my least favorite Player Race in all of D&D. I absolutely hated how they were mandated to always use Mimicry in Volo's Guide to Monsters, and banned them from my table because of that.
I'm probably going to be lifting the ban because of this new version. I like the change to Kenku here. I'm still not super fond of them, but they're way better than they were before.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
You aren't wrong, though most make sense.
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
Characters for Tenebris Sine Fine
RoughCoronet's Greater Wills
I do like the addition of having small as an option for the Planes Touched ones, but the others seem kind of odd to me. I don't dislike them, I just think it is a little weird. I would probably explain it away as "subraces" of turtle people, cat people and the like, if the need for lore for it ever really came up in my game world.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
So #3, I'm not sure exactly what you mean by deprecate, but if you mean the new book's contents supersede prior books. But yes, #1 is actually the present practice, they don't really call it errata on DDB when a new book supersedes an old book, but when the new book is released there's an announcement in the support thread of the book's release as well as a list of spells, magic items, monsters that got retconned for everyone regardless of whether you bought the book.
I'm very much thinking WotC didn't think of this part of their market when coming up with a new book that is mechanically nothing but "updates" (giving a lot of their "whales" an opportunity to not bite since they'll see it all updated in their online resources). Between this and the overall slipping in into a box set and locking it up in there till some unspecified time it will be released solo has me thinking there's a product manager who is not all too comfortable if their marketing and biz intelligence are getting wind of easily avoided fan outrage (i.e. play fair with your digital partners, no boxed set mandating b.s.)
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I mean "it replaces the contents of the old books, but you don't get to keep the conflicting content". Which would be at best a PR trainwreck and decently likely to result in a lawsuit that would be more expensive than #1. And yes, some product manager really should have thought about that before they even started this project.
I'm 99% sure that in the minds of the powers that be at WotC HQ there was an unconscious distinction between errata ("this is wrong, we have to change it") and updates ("this needs to be better, we may want to change it"). Errata are easy to sell to the customers, as most of them will be seen as an improvement by the far greater majority. Updates are trickier, as many threads (this one included) have proven. Making a book out of updates was asking for trouble anyway, but doing it in the current mixed digital/analog publishing world guaranteed this wouldn't end with just a little bit of it.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Errata can't be sold at all -- they don't cost money. Wizards would prefer to make money off of MotM
A buddy of mine played a Kenku in a campaign. He was the most popular PC in the game in no small part due to Mimicry.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
DDB does updates as updates and not errata for monsters, magic items, spells etc. Go check the first post for any book release on Bugs and Support. Most recent ones are pinned to the top. That's precedent for what folks are concerned with. It's just never been on the scale of a whole book being updates. DDB when discussion such changes to owned content being brought in line with latest version are called updates. They only call it errata if it's reflective of an errata document. So like Pang I think there is a bit of kerfuffle over WotC producing a whole book of updates without thinking of the online market ramifications that they've imposed on their online partners.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Strictly speaking errata are being sold - they're part of the product. That aside, I meant players typically at least don't mind errata and often approve of them; with updates the reactions tend to be very much mixed and per the usual the haters are much more vocal about their opinions.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
No. My post wasn’t a “complaint,” it was commentary on their market testing strategies. As my comment was in regards to how WotC is releasing content and not about the content itself, your response was wholly unrelated to my comment. I said that WotC is throwing crap out there to see what people think. Whether or not you like that crap or not is irrelevant to my comment on their strategy as to how the crap is presented and product tested.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
So the various orcs off the "standard" Orc are setting specific Orcs. I haven't really wrapped my head around the Fizban's Dragonborn shift (have one Dragonborn that was using the UA rules and we shifted over to the Fizban's official version with no drama) but I do know that MMM is trying to represent things in a setting agnostic way (lore wise to represent how things would be found throughout the Multiverse).
I don't want to negate or invalidate your hopes (I like variety myself) but the drumbeat to the MMM roll out has seemed to be "this is the STANDARD" going forward.
I like the Fey goblinoids when the Hobgoblin was presented in UA ... but I also really like the "Klingon" interpretation I do through their representation in MToF. I even have my own game lore where when Fey and Prime Material Plane goblinoids meet up, it devolves into finger pointing over which are the lost the ones. Plus, with the whole Fey thing, what happens to Acheron (yeah, I know Orcs are supposed to be there too, but for me it's basically Klingon Goblinoid Valhalla, and it's brutally glorious Heavy Metal).
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I think a big take away from this books it that there were indeed some significant changes made across the board. However, these races are completely compatible with the current rule set. This of course is the simplest part of the process of updating to the next version of D&D since the Races have very little impact on the way classes work. But this is very much a 3 to 3.5 level of change, at least for Races.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Right but the flavor WotC is giving the Fey goblins takes away the militarism for a bordering on Hobbit like celebration of community and hospitality. I think they've dropped saving face for a different mechanism involving team spirit, and also help actions that a lot of folks thought were OP in the UA.
Basically, the Archeron comsologically oriented goblinoids got reskinned to be more like Henson's Labyrinth goblinoids. More muppeted than nerfed. I like them, but would prefer both and I think a lot of fun can be had by the tension between the two kind.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Which in principle I'm fine with (I know others who complained loudly about 3.5). The difference is that there was no DDB equivalent back in 3rd edition.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I always made my Star Trek analogs like this:
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Yeah, I don't know if WotC actually cares about this site though. It is very clear that this site was never really carefully considered from the beginning. Thus the issues this books is causing.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
It's a 3rd party site, so no reason to even consider it until someone came knocking for a licence. I do think WotC cares now, since DDB has been another visibility booster for years, but how much is a different question and some of the licence details were clearly not thought through sufficiently by either party back then (hindsight's 20/20, I don't think foreseeing everything was ever a real possibility regardless of effort). The onus here is very much on WotC though, they're the ones who decide on the publication model for D&D. This doesn't have to be an issue, but then it shouldn't have been an issue for a while now - the particulars for M³ and the bundle have been known for a long time - and arguably never had to be one in the first place.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].