They are running out of options for 'bad guys'. Don't want to be judgey.
Campaign books are chock full of "bad guys" of all varieties, including most of the core races.
Yes, there does seem a turn away from sentient humanoids from monsters to antagonists, and the antagonism can come in a number of ways incorporating the traditional "good guys" into the potential pool too.
I do wonder if the game is on a trajectory to demark all living sentient entities within the prime material plane as lacking inherent goodness or evil (so after the humanoids, we free up the Dragons moral compass for example) and leave "essential" alignment traits to the outer planes (though lore could lay Draconic nature outside the prime material and into the outer planes, so it could be interesting world building discussion). Outer planar beings _are_ law, chaos, good and evil (or "neutrality"), and they work to influence their ideal upon the intelligences of the Prime Material for some Great Game whose goals are never entirely clear to the mere mortal.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I do wonder if the game is on a trajectory to demark all living sentient entities within the prime material plane as lacking inherent goodness or evil (so after the humanoids, we free up the Dragons moral compass for example) and leave "essential" alignment traits to the outer planes (though lore could lay Draconic nature outside the prime material and into the outer planes, so it could be interesting world building discussion). Outer planar beings _are_ law, chaos, good and evil (or "neutrality"), and they work to influence their ideal upon the intelligences of the Prime Material for some Great Game whose goals are never entirely clear to the mere mortal.
Probably.
And even with the outer planar beings, when there's an ideological shift in the being, they actually transform from a, say, celestial angel into a devil (re: New Archdevil of the First Layer), or whatever. So its not like even the Outer Planes would be that restricted. You're a devil because you're Lawful Evil. You're not Lawful Evil because you're a devil.
In my view, neither angel nor devil are humanoid, and both lack freewill.
The devil is evil because it is an ethical echo of humans whose behavior is evil predatory actions. The angel is good because it is an ethical echo of humans whose behavior is good compassionate actions.
When a good angel becomes an evil devil, it is because good humans started doing evil. Oppositely, when an evil devil becomes a good angel, it is because evil humans started doing good.
Likewise, angels and devils can retain their original stats while humans shift their alignment, so that there are angels that do evil, and devils that do good.
It all depends on the ethical behavior of freewill humanoids.
The same applies to the gnoll. There can be good gnoll, who are still fiends that lack freewill.
When a gnoll becomes a freewill humanoid, I view it more as the beast hyena origin being natural and occasionally disconnecting the gnoll from the demonic origin, thus creating a possibility of freewill.
I feel that the difference between the cannibalistic habits of different races vs the Gnoll is that while a Thri-Kreen or a Lizardfolk or some other race may have customs that say that cannibalism is a normal and even expected practice in their society, they are not driven by an insatiable, all consuming desire to kill and devour any and all sentient species they see. They can choose to reject those cannibalistic customs. Gnolls however can’t as cannibalizing other races seems to be intrinsic to their very being and existence. Gnolls are even said to attack and cannibalize themselves if there are no other sentient victims to consume. They are practically mindless outside of that drive to kill and consume others, very much like how demons are often portrayed (and considering their demonic origins that makes sense).
Of course, this is only pertaining to the Gnolls of the Forgotten Realms. In Eberron, the Gnolls are more like the Orcs of the Forgotten realm, savage and primal in culture and operate on instinct, but they are still capable of free will and breaking away from those cultural stigmas.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
I do wonder if the game is on a trajectory to demark all living sentient entities within the prime material plane as lacking inherent goodness or evil (so after the humanoids, we free up the Dragons moral compass for example) and leave "essential" alignment traits to the outer planes (though lore could lay Draconic nature outside the prime material and into the outer planes, so it could be interesting world building discussion). Outer planar beings _are_ law, chaos, good and evil (or "neutrality"), and they work to influence their ideal upon the intelligences of the Prime Material for some Great Game whose goals are never entirely clear to the mere mortal.
Probably.
And even with the outer planar beings, when there's an ideological shift in the being, they actually transform from a, say, celestial angel into a devil (re: New Archdevil of the First Layer), or whatever. So its not like even the Outer Planes would be that restricted. You're a devil because you're Lawful Evil. You're not Lawful Evil because you're a devil.
Right, transformation from one type of a being does happen, but I'd say they're exceptional and definitely not as fluid as the moral/political/idealogical space being granted humanoids and perhaps other prime material sentients. In my view, and this is only based on the structure of the cosmology, the oft cited Angels can become devils (through acts of defiant volition) or devils can become angels in an act of redemption (interestingly, you need a factor outside of volition to attain that) to me is like a water elemental becoming an earth elemental, etc. I think the essentialism being rightfully reduced in the prime material does need to adhere to the Outer Planes, and maybe with greater attendance to abstraction.
In the 90s, I think, there was a I think French role playing game translated into English about Angels and Devils. Found it: In Nomine was it's English translation, literally "in the name" from the Latin. Angel and Diabolocial characters, or maybe the really powerful entities had a vitue or vice word as their name, and you were literally the incarnation of that name. Actually names weren't limited to morally valued words. You could have an Angel of Cities and a Demon of Cities, and they may not necessarily be completely hostile to each other. Forgot about those rules, it was quite a well received game back in the day, I think I may look at it to spruce up my cosmology lore on the "why is this even here?" note.
There is no way, no way at all, if one actually reads the source documentation, especially Volo's, that Gnoll's can be construed as anything but a Chaotic Evil marauder. They are not, nor ever shall be, anything but a monster. And please don't say "but Eberron....".
Eberron is some weird steampunk offshoot of D&D. That is why much of it is completely incompatible with true D&D. Artificers don't work in a classic D&D setting. Neither does "but these monsters are actually nice in Eberron, therefore that must be the case in true D&D".
Stop gatekeeping. Nothing is "true D&D". Nothing. It doesn't exist. There is absolutely no such thing as "true D&D".
There is official D&D, which is anything WotC says is official. However, something being homebrew doesn't make it not "true D&D".
There is also correct/incorrect D&D. Correct D&D is if everyone at the table is having fun because of the game. Incorrect D&D is if players at the table aren't having fun because of the game.
There is no "true/pure/perfect D&D", and to suggest that there is is gatekeeping. To suggest that an official and popular world isn't "true D&D" because it isn't a rip-off of Tolkein is gatekeeping. STOP GATEKEEPING, Vince. Stop it. I don't know why you feel the need to gatekeep, but you seem to really like it. Stop. It doesn't help anyone. It doesn't help you, it doesn't help the designers, it doesn't help your table, it doesn't help us, and it doesn't help the discussion. Stop it.
Eberron is "true D&D" just as much as Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, or Greyhawk. It's official D&D, and is a very popular setting. Just because it is different doesn't mean that is it wrong. I understand that it's a natural human response to assume that new/different equals wrong/bad, but that is untrue and detrimental to the hobby and community.
Eberron and Exandria both have Gnolls as typical humanoid races that are intended to be playable in the settings. Why they didn't make stats for a Gnoll race is unknown to me, but Gnolls are intended to be playable in at least those two worlds.
Volo's only applies to the Forgotten Realms. Not Eberron, where Yeenoghu doesn't even exist. Not in Exandria, where orcs, goblinoids, drow, and gnolls can break free from their fiendish heritage and be just as good as elves or halflings.
Eberron and Exandria are true D&D, and gnolls are valid character options in those two settings. They should be an official player race.
If you want to keep them evil, keep doing that in your games. However, more options in different settings won't ruin the game for you.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
There is no way, no way at all, if one actually reads the source documentation, especially Volo's, that Gnoll's can be construed as anything but a Chaotic Evil marauder. They are not, nor ever shall be, anything but a monster. And please don't say "but Eberron....".
Eberron is some weird steampunk offshoot of D&D. That is why much of it is completely incompatible with true D&D. Artificers don't work in a classic D&D setting. Neither does "but these monsters are actually nice in Eberron, therefore that must be the case in true D&D".
Stop gatekeeping. Nothing is "true D&D". Nothing. It doesn't exist. There is absolutely no such thing as "true D&D".
There is official D&D, which is anything WotC says is official. However, something being homebrew doesn't make it not "true D&D".
There is also correct/incorrect D&D. Correct D&D is if everyone at the table is having fun because of the game. Incorrect D&D is if players at the table aren't having fun because of the game.
There is no "true/pure/perfect D&D", and to suggest that there is is gatekeeping. To suggest that an official and popular world isn't "true D&D" because it isn't a rip-off of Tolkein is gatekeeping. STOP GATEKEEPING, Vince. Stop it. I don't know why you feel the need to gatekeep, but you seem to really like it. Stop. It doesn't help anyone. It doesn't help you, it doesn't help the designers, it doesn't help your table, it doesn't help us, and it doesn't help the discussion. Stop it.
Eberron is "true D&D" just as much as Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, or Greyhawk. It's official D&D, and is a very popular setting. Just because it is different doesn't mean that is it wrong. I understand that it's a natural human response to assume that new/different equals wrong/bad, but that is untrue and detrimental to the hobby and community.
Eberron and Exandria both have Gnolls as typical humanoid races that are intended to be playable in the settings. Why they didn't make stats for a Gnoll race is unknown to me, but Gnolls are intended to be playable in at least those two worlds.
Volo's only applies to the Forgotten Realms. Not Eberron, where Yeenoghu doesn't even exist. Not in Exandria, where orcs, goblinoids, drow, and gnolls can break free from their fiendish heritage and be just as good as elves or halflings.
Eberron and Exandria are true D&D, and gnolls are valid character options in those two settings. They should be an official player race.
If you want to keep them evil, keep doing that in your games. However, more options in different settings won't ruin the game for you.
Oh, there is indeed true, classic D&D. You can shout all you want that the facts are not what they are. We are living in a world where people do indeed "choose their facts". But to say Gnoll's are a playable species, that can go against their entire culture, and instinct, and become LG Life Clerics, well, might as well say the earth is flat, if we are going to conflate the real world and a fantasy game, but a game with hard and fast rules nonetheless.
There is no way, no way at all, if one actually reads the source documentation, especially Volo's, that Gnoll's can be construed as anything but a Chaotic Evil marauder. They are not, nor ever shall be, anything but a monster. And please don't say "but Eberron....".
Eberron is some weird steampunk offshoot of D&D. That is why much of it is completely incompatible with true D&D. Artificers don't work in a classic D&D setting. Neither does "but these monsters are actually nice in Eberron, therefore that must be the case in true D&D".
Stop gatekeeping. Nothing is "true D&D". Nothing. It doesn't exist. There is absolutely no such thing as "true D&D".
There is official D&D, which is anything WotC says is official. However, something being homebrew doesn't make it not "true D&D".
There is also correct/incorrect D&D. Correct D&D is if everyone at the table is having fun because of the game. Incorrect D&D is if players at the table aren't having fun because of the game.
There is no "true/pure/perfect D&D", and to suggest that there is is gatekeeping. To suggest that an official and popular world isn't "true D&D" because it isn't a rip-off of Tolkein is gatekeeping. STOP GATEKEEPING, Vince. Stop it. I don't know why you feel the need to gatekeep, but you seem to really like it. Stop. It doesn't help anyone. It doesn't help you, it doesn't help the designers, it doesn't help your table, it doesn't help us, and it doesn't help the discussion. Stop it.
Eberron is "true D&D" just as much as Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, or Greyhawk. It's official D&D, and is a very popular setting. Just because it is different doesn't mean that is it wrong. I understand that it's a natural human response to assume that new/different equals wrong/bad, but that is untrue and detrimental to the hobby and community.
Eberron and Exandria both have Gnolls as typical humanoid races that are intended to be playable in the settings. Why they didn't make stats for a Gnoll race is unknown to me, but Gnolls are intended to be playable in at least those two worlds.
Volo's only applies to the Forgotten Realms. Not Eberron, where Yeenoghu doesn't even exist. Not in Exandria, where orcs, goblinoids, drow, and gnolls can break free from their fiendish heritage and be just as good as elves or halflings.
Eberron and Exandria are true D&D, and gnolls are valid character options in those two settings. They should be an official player race.
If you want to keep them evil, keep doing that in your games. However, more options in different settings won't ruin the game for you.
Oh, there is indeed true, classic D&D. You can shout all you want that the facts are not what they are. We are living in a world where people do indeed "choose their facts". But to say Gnoll's are a playable species, that can go against their entire culture, and instinct, and become LG Life Clerics, well, might as well say the earth is flat, if we are going to conflate the real world and a fantasy game, but a game with hard and fast rules nonetheless.
No there is not. There is no correct way to play D&D if everyone is having fun. STOP SAYING OTHERWISE. There is no "True D&D" or "Wrong D&D" based on setting or playstyle.
THE RACIAL RULES AND LORE VARY DEPENDENT ON SETTING
Drow are almost all evil in the Forgotten Realms, but not in Exandria. To preach that the Monster Manual's, Volo's, and/or Mordenkainen's lore applies to Eberron or Wildemount is completely incorrect. A main rule of 5e is that "specific beats general". A specific world's lore beats the general lore of VGtM/MToF/MM.
And, no, it is not like saying the earth is flat, because D&D is literally imaginary. As long as you can imagine a world that makes a fun campaign at your table, that is D&D for you. Theros is literally a flat world. To say that any campaigns taking place in Theros is "not D&D" is gatekeeping and false.
Stop gatekeeping and stop with the personal attacks. Throughout both this post and my previous post in this thread, I have not personally attacked you. It is uncalled for and against site rules. Stop it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Custom Lineage is a terrible mechanic. It's essentially a homebrew straightjacket. Just look at existing races and create something in line with those.
Oh I wasn't advocating for it. My first choice would be reskinning an orc, leonin, or lizardman. Second would be homebrew, and custom lineage a distant 3rd. Just point out the irony that there is an official, codified, sanctioned method to create a playable gnoll in the book accused of making gnolls less likely to be playable.
On a side note, I saw a thread on Twitter about Navajo words for various animals. Rather than taking loan words (e.g. obviously there is no historical word for hyena in Navajo), the Navajo language coins words using its own linguistics. The Navajo word for hyena throws some serious shade. From Wiktionary:
łééchąąʼí - From łį́į́ʼ (“pet”) + chąąʼ (“sh*t”) + -í (nominalizer); literally, "sh*t pet" (pet that eats excrement) (see Wiktionary for un-censored version, though I think you can guess what sh*t means...)
This is awesome. I'm always trying to plunder mythological creatures from wherever I can, and it bugs me to no end that so many of the Native American sites refer to the legendary 'Eagle' or 'Lizard.' Dammit, I came here for cool names for those things!
But to say Gnoll's are a playable species, that can go against their entire culture, and instinct, and become LG Life Clerics, well, might as well say the earth is flat, if we are going to conflate the real world and a fantasy game, but a game with hard and fast rules nonetheless.
Oh, there is indeed true, classic D&D. You can shout all you want that the facts are not what they are. We are living in a world where people do indeed "choose their facts". But to say Gnoll's are a playable species, that can go against their entire culture, and instinct, and become LG Life Clerics, well, might as well say the earth is flat, if we are going to conflate the real world and a fantasy game, but a game with hard and fast rules nonetheless.
D&D is a dinosaur, and the oldest editions couldn't survive in today's roleplaying environment. I have amazing memories of D&D in the previous millenium, but you couldn't pay me to play those editions again. The only value they have today is nostalgia. Try to release anything similar to AD&D or an even older edition today without the D&D brand on it and you'll be a laughing stock. If that were true D&D - it isn't, but if it were - then D&D would be dead and buried. Now that is a fact.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Well, not a fan of it myself, but the OGR is very much a thing, artwork and all. Maybe not the marketshare 5e claims; but the marketshare 5e has that sticks with the hobby, there's a not inconsiderable number that go the OGR retro route.
Anyway, so, someone thought the art in Tasha's presented Gnolls in a way that discouraged the Gnolls' prospects for D&D's ongoing reevaluation of "monstrous" humanoids that could lead them to being on increasing list of player race options in 5e. Some agree with that, some see plenty of potential for Gnolls in 5e. One poster has invoked the arguably gatekeeping, definitely narrow, interpretation of the Gnolls' place in "true D&D." I gotta say all caps challenges to that post and claims of personal attacks I just don't see evident in this thread isn't keeping that view in the marginal position it actually occupies in this thread until it got elevated by call outs. Just saying, there's productive conversation going on here, that I'm enjoying, I can say my perspective has even been broadened, but some rhetoric is escalating in a way that makes me worry if this thread will be available to continue tomorrow.
So if we were to PC race Gnoll, +2 STR +1DEX. Darkvision, natural weapon bite. And "rampage" just like the MM a bonus action of a bonus bite attack within a half movement radius from an enemy it brought to 0 hp? Seems like a fair race to play not really problematic in terms of the mainline races, actually maybe even a little conservative.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I mean, accusing people of shouting and "choosing their facts" when they weren't doing either to begin with is pretty rude.
I seem to remember reading somewhere about gnolls being able to eat without having to worry about food spoilage, but for the life of me I can't seem to find that little tidbit. Am I misremembering?
Meh. There's (gnomish) cities built on steampunk themes in the Forgotten Realms. Arguably, the entire Outer Plane of Mechanus along with Primus and the modruns are based on steampunk. Steampunk has been part of D&D for a long time now. One could say... its "true D&D."
But to say Gnoll's are a playable species, that can go against their entire culture, and instinct, and become LG Life Clerics, well,
Well, pretty much every other fiendish-touched has done it, so why not? Drow, tieflings and orcs have been for quite the while. One could almost say that its "true D&D" for monstrous races to break away from their cultures and instincts to become Goodly people.
I mean, accusing people of shouting and "choosing their facts" when they weren't doing either to begin with is pretty rude.
And in the course of this thread, that post was marginal in terms of the volume already written on the matter. There's no need to elevate it onto a stage and pull focus from the thread by engaging in the theatrics of all caps and bolded call outs.
I seem to remember reading somewhere about gnolls being able to eat without having to worry about food spoilage, but for the life of me I can't seem to find that little tidbit. Am I misremembering?
Yeah, I've heard that too; but like way back in lore. Can't remember where though, and I'm thinking maybe it was usenet. The claim is funny because, while it's not accurate among varieties, hyenas are often associated with carrion eaters, basically flightless vultures, probably because people conflate hyenas and jackals, and even the latter is a bit of false association.
Okay, have we finished that argument? Done with the gatekeeping discussion? If so, here's my viewpoint on this thread.
I don't think the art in Tasha's is enough to go off of in this case. Without WotC commenting on this, there just isn't enough evidence to back this up, especially due to the fact that Gnolls aren't demonic in Eberron or Exandria. Sure, maybe they're basically humanoids possessed by demonic spirits in the Forgotten Realms, but that doesn't have any jurisdiction over the world of Eberron or Exandria.
The best way to do gnolls is to make a new race, not trying to shove the race into the Custom Lineage from Tasha's. That system is meant to provide races for character that don't fit any others, not to prevent all possible future races from coming out. That would be insane, and is in no way the direction WotC will be going.
A Gnoll race would almost definitely get a bite attack, possibly proficiency in some weapons/armor (shields, spears, longbows, flails), darkvision, powerful build, and possibly Rampage (I would limit it to once a short rest like Hungry Jaws). They could even get Cunning Artisan, fitting their tribal nature.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Okay, have we finished that argument? Done with the gatekeeping discussion? If so, here's my viewpoint on this thread.
I don't think the art in Tasha's is enough to go off of in this case. Without WotC commenting on this, there just isn't enough evidence to back this up, especially due to the fact that Gnolls aren't demonic in Eberron or Exandria. Sure, maybe they're basically humanoids possessed by demonic spirits in the Forgotten Realms, but that doesn't have any jurisdiction over the world of Eberron or Exandria.
The best way to do gnolls is to make a new race, not trying to shove the race into the Custom Lineage from Tasha's. That system is meant to provide races for character that don't fit any others, not to prevent all possible future races from coming out. That would be insane, and is in no way the direction WotC will be going.
A Gnoll race would almost definitely get a bite attack, possibly proficiency in some weapons/armor (shields, spears, longbows, flails), darkvision, powerful build, and possibly Rampage (I would limit it to once a short rest like Hungry Jaws). They could even get Cunning Artisan, fitting their tribal nature.
[REDACTED] I will qualify my statement. If some DM is operating in the Eberron or Exandria settings, guess they can say "yeah, Gnoll's can be lawful good clerics of Life". But much of Eberron is utterly incompatible with the base of 5e, which is the vast majority of the lore and rules. I have never looked at Exandria, so can't comment on it. There is classic 5e. There is there is all the wild divergent works like Eberron that are published to make cash for WOTC. It is 5.5e. Tasha's is 5.6 e, or 6e. But don't suggest that Gnolls as a playable species, or anything but CE, can be played in the classic 5e setting.
There is no way, no way at all, if one actually reads the source documentation, especially Volo's, that Gnoll's can be construed as anything but a Chaotic Evil marauder. They are not, nor ever shall be, anything but a monster. And please don't say "but Eberron....".
Eberron is some weird steampunk offshoot of D&D. That is why much of it is completely incompatible with true D&D. Artificers don't work in a classic D&D setting. Neither does "but these monsters are actually nice in Eberron, therefore that must be the case in true D&D".
Stop gatekeeping. Nothing is "true D&D". Nothing. It doesn't exist. There is absolutely no such thing as "true D&D".
There is official D&D, which is anything WotC says is official. However, something being homebrew doesn't make it not "true D&D".
There is also correct/incorrect D&D. Correct D&D is if everyone at the table is having fun because of the game. Incorrect D&D is if players at the table aren't having fun because of the game.
There is no "true/pure/perfect D&D", and to suggest that there is is gatekeeping. To suggest that an official and popular world isn't "true D&D" because it isn't a rip-off of Tolkein is gatekeeping. STOP GATEKEEPING, Vince. Stop it. I don't know why you feel the need to gatekeep, but you seem to really like it. Stop. It doesn't help anyone. It doesn't help you, it doesn't help the designers, it doesn't help your table, it doesn't help us, and it doesn't help the discussion. Stop it.
Eberron is "true D&D" just as much as Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, or Greyhawk. It's official D&D, and is a very popular setting. Just because it is different doesn't mean that is it wrong. I understand that it's a natural human response to assume that new/different equals wrong/bad, but that is untrue and detrimental to the hobby and community.
Eberron and Exandria both have Gnolls as typical humanoid races that are intended to be playable in the settings. Why they didn't make stats for a Gnoll race is unknown to me, but Gnolls are intended to be playable in at least those two worlds.
Volo's only applies to the Forgotten Realms. Not Eberron, where Yeenoghu doesn't even exist. Not in Exandria, where orcs, goblinoids, drow, and gnolls can break free from their fiendish heritage and be just as good as elves or halflings.
Eberron and Exandria are true D&D, and gnolls are valid character options in those two settings. They should be an official player race.
If you want to keep them evil, keep doing that in your games. However, more options in different settings won't ruin the game for you.
Oh, there is indeed true, classic D&D. You can shout all you want that the facts are not what they are. We are living in a world where people do indeed "choose their facts". But to say Gnoll's are a playable species, that can go against their entire culture, and instinct, and become LG Life Clerics, well, might as well say the earth is flat, if we are going to conflate the real world and a fantasy game, but a game with hard and fast rules nonetheless.
My horse poopy meter was reading full so I came to see what had caused it and low and behold I found this.
Gnolls were playable as a PC race going all the way back to 1e. If you find the 1e supplement The Orcs of Thar, there are rules in there for making a Gnoll PCs, and also Goblins, Orcs, Hobgoblins, Kobolds, Ogres, Bugbears, and Trolls as well.
much of Eberron is utterly incompatible with the base of 5e, which is the vast majority of the lore and rules.
Eberron is an official WotC setting. It isn't incompatible with 5E, it simply has it's own specific lore like every setting does. WotC is working on 3 classic settings for 5E, those will all have their own lore that'll be equally different from each other's. The FR's races differ from Greyhawk's, which in turn differ from Dragonlance's, which are not the same as Dark Sun's, and so on.
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.
Yes, there does seem a turn away from sentient humanoids from monsters to antagonists, and the antagonism can come in a number of ways incorporating the traditional "good guys" into the potential pool too.
I do wonder if the game is on a trajectory to demark all living sentient entities within the prime material plane as lacking inherent goodness or evil (so after the humanoids, we free up the Dragons moral compass for example) and leave "essential" alignment traits to the outer planes (though lore could lay Draconic nature outside the prime material and into the outer planes, so it could be interesting world building discussion). Outer planar beings _are_ law, chaos, good and evil (or "neutrality"), and they work to influence their ideal upon the intelligences of the Prime Material for some Great Game whose goals are never entirely clear to the mere mortal.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Probably.
And even with the outer planar beings, when there's an ideological shift in the being, they actually transform from a, say, celestial angel into a devil (re: New Archdevil of the First Layer), or whatever. So its not like even the Outer Planes would be that restricted. You're a devil because you're Lawful Evil. You're not Lawful Evil because you're a devil.
In my view, neither angel nor devil are humanoid, and both lack freewill.
The devil is evil because it is an ethical echo of humans whose behavior is evil predatory actions. The angel is good because it is an ethical echo of humans whose behavior is good compassionate actions.
When a good angel becomes an evil devil, it is because good humans started doing evil. Oppositely, when an evil devil becomes a good angel, it is because evil humans started doing good.
Likewise, angels and devils can retain their original stats while humans shift their alignment, so that there are angels that do evil, and devils that do good.
It all depends on the ethical behavior of freewill humanoids.
The same applies to the gnoll. There can be good gnoll, who are still fiends that lack freewill.
When a gnoll becomes a freewill humanoid, I view it more as the beast hyena origin being natural and occasionally disconnecting the gnoll from the demonic origin, thus creating a possibility of freewill.
he / him
I feel that the difference between the cannibalistic habits of different races vs the Gnoll is that while a Thri-Kreen or a Lizardfolk or some other race may have customs that say that cannibalism is a normal and even expected practice in their society, they are not driven by an insatiable, all consuming desire to kill and devour any and all sentient species they see. They can choose to reject those cannibalistic customs. Gnolls however can’t as cannibalizing other races seems to be intrinsic to their very being and existence. Gnolls are even said to attack and cannibalize themselves if there are no other sentient victims to consume. They are practically mindless outside of that drive to kill and consume others, very much like how demons are often portrayed (and considering their demonic origins that makes sense).
Of course, this is only pertaining to the Gnolls of the Forgotten Realms. In Eberron, the Gnolls are more like the Orcs of the Forgotten realm, savage and primal in culture and operate on instinct, but they are still capable of free will and breaking away from those cultural stigmas.
"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
Right, transformation from one type of a being does happen, but I'd say they're exceptional and definitely not as fluid as the moral/political/idealogical space being granted humanoids and perhaps other prime material sentients. In my view, and this is only based on the structure of the cosmology, the oft cited Angels can become devils (through acts of defiant volition) or devils can become angels in an act of redemption (interestingly, you need a factor outside of volition to attain that) to me is like a water elemental becoming an earth elemental, etc. I think the essentialism being rightfully reduced in the prime material does need to adhere to the Outer Planes, and maybe with greater attendance to abstraction.
In the 90s, I think, there was a I think French role playing game translated into English about Angels and Devils. Found it: In Nomine was it's English translation, literally "in the name" from the Latin. Angel and Diabolocial characters, or maybe the really powerful entities had a vitue or vice word as their name, and you were literally the incarnation of that name. Actually names weren't limited to morally valued words. You could have an Angel of Cities and a Demon of Cities, and they may not necessarily be completely hostile to each other. Forgot about those rules, it was quite a well received game back in the day, I think I may look at it to spruce up my cosmology lore on the "why is this even here?" note.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Stop gatekeeping. Nothing is "true D&D". Nothing. It doesn't exist. There is absolutely no such thing as "true D&D".
There is official D&D, which is anything WotC says is official. However, something being homebrew doesn't make it not "true D&D".
There is also correct/incorrect D&D. Correct D&D is if everyone at the table is having fun because of the game. Incorrect D&D is if players at the table aren't having fun because of the game.
There is no "true/pure/perfect D&D", and to suggest that there is is gatekeeping. To suggest that an official and popular world isn't "true D&D" because it isn't a rip-off of Tolkein is gatekeeping. STOP GATEKEEPING, Vince. Stop it. I don't know why you feel the need to gatekeep, but you seem to really like it. Stop. It doesn't help anyone. It doesn't help you, it doesn't help the designers, it doesn't help your table, it doesn't help us, and it doesn't help the discussion. Stop it.
Eberron is "true D&D" just as much as Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, or Greyhawk. It's official D&D, and is a very popular setting. Just because it is different doesn't mean that is it wrong. I understand that it's a natural human response to assume that new/different equals wrong/bad, but that is untrue and detrimental to the hobby and community.
Eberron and Exandria both have Gnolls as typical humanoid races that are intended to be playable in the settings. Why they didn't make stats for a Gnoll race is unknown to me, but Gnolls are intended to be playable in at least those two worlds.
Volo's only applies to the Forgotten Realms. Not Eberron, where Yeenoghu doesn't even exist. Not in Exandria, where orcs, goblinoids, drow, and gnolls can break free from their fiendish heritage and be just as good as elves or halflings.
Eberron and Exandria are true D&D, and gnolls are valid character options in those two settings. They should be an official player race.
If you want to keep them evil, keep doing that in your games. However, more options in different settings won't ruin the game for you.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Oh, there is indeed true, classic D&D. You can shout all you want that the facts are not what they are. We are living in a world where people do indeed "choose their facts". But to say Gnoll's are a playable species, that can go against their entire culture, and instinct, and become LG Life Clerics, well, might as well say the earth is flat, if we are going to conflate the real world and a fantasy game, but a game with hard and fast rules nonetheless.
But in D&D the world can be flat....
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
No there is not. There is no correct way to play D&D if everyone is having fun. STOP SAYING OTHERWISE. There is no "True D&D" or "Wrong D&D" based on setting or playstyle.
THE RACIAL RULES AND LORE VARY DEPENDENT ON SETTING
Drow are almost all evil in the Forgotten Realms, but not in Exandria. To preach that the Monster Manual's, Volo's, and/or Mordenkainen's lore applies to Eberron or Wildemount is completely incorrect. A main rule of 5e is that "specific beats general". A specific world's lore beats the general lore of VGtM/MToF/MM.
And, no, it is not like saying the earth is flat, because D&D is literally imaginary. As long as you can imagine a world that makes a fun campaign at your table, that is D&D for you. Theros is literally a flat world. To say that any campaigns taking place in Theros is "not D&D" is gatekeeping and false.
Stop gatekeeping and stop with the personal attacks. Throughout both this post and my previous post in this thread, I have not personally attacked you. It is uncalled for and against site rules. Stop it.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Oh I wasn't advocating for it. My first choice would be reskinning an orc, leonin, or lizardman. Second would be homebrew, and custom lineage a distant 3rd. Just point out the irony that there is an official, codified, sanctioned method to create a playable gnoll in the book accused of making gnolls less likely to be playable.
This is awesome. I'm always trying to plunder mythological creatures from wherever I can, and it bugs me to no end that so many of the Native American sites refer to the legendary 'Eagle' or 'Lizard.' Dammit, I came here for cool names for those things!
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MySpeciesDothProtestTooMuch
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
D&D is a dinosaur, and the oldest editions couldn't survive in today's roleplaying environment. I have amazing memories of D&D in the previous millenium, but you couldn't pay me to play those editions again. The only value they have today is nostalgia. Try to release anything similar to AD&D or an even older edition today without the D&D brand on it and you'll be a laughing stock. If that were true D&D - it isn't, but if it were - then D&D would be dead and buried. Now that is a fact.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Well, not a fan of it myself, but the OGR is very much a thing, artwork and all. Maybe not the marketshare 5e claims; but the marketshare 5e has that sticks with the hobby, there's a not inconsiderable number that go the OGR retro route.
Anyway, so, someone thought the art in Tasha's presented Gnolls in a way that discouraged the Gnolls' prospects for D&D's ongoing reevaluation of "monstrous" humanoids that could lead them to being on increasing list of player race options in 5e. Some agree with that, some see plenty of potential for Gnolls in 5e. One poster has invoked the arguably gatekeeping, definitely narrow, interpretation of the Gnolls' place in "true D&D." I gotta say all caps challenges to that post and claims of personal attacks I just don't see evident in this thread isn't keeping that view in the marginal position it actually occupies in this thread until it got elevated by call outs. Just saying, there's productive conversation going on here, that I'm enjoying, I can say my perspective has even been broadened, but some rhetoric is escalating in a way that makes me worry if this thread will be available to continue tomorrow.
So if we were to PC race Gnoll, +2 STR +1DEX. Darkvision, natural weapon bite. And "rampage" just like the MM a bonus action of a bonus bite attack within a half movement radius from an enemy it brought to 0 hp? Seems like a fair race to play not really problematic in terms of the mainline races, actually maybe even a little conservative.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I mean, accusing people of shouting and "choosing their facts" when they weren't doing either to begin with is pretty rude.
I seem to remember reading somewhere about gnolls being able to eat without having to worry about food spoilage, but for the life of me I can't seem to find that little tidbit. Am I misremembering?
Meh. There's (gnomish) cities built on steampunk themes in the Forgotten Realms. Arguably, the entire Outer Plane of Mechanus along with Primus and the modruns are based on steampunk. Steampunk has been part of D&D for a long time now. One could say... its "true D&D."
Well, pretty much every other fiendish-touched has done it, so why not? Drow, tieflings and orcs have been for quite the while. One could almost say that its "true D&D" for monstrous races to break away from their cultures and instincts to become Goodly people.
And in the course of this thread, that post was marginal in terms of the volume already written on the matter. There's no need to elevate it onto a stage and pull focus from the thread by engaging in the theatrics of all caps and bolded call outs.
Yeah, I've heard that too; but like way back in lore. Can't remember where though, and I'm thinking maybe it was usenet. The claim is funny because, while it's not accurate among varieties, hyenas are often associated with carrion eaters, basically flightless vultures, probably because people conflate hyenas and jackals, and even the latter is a bit of false association.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Okay, have we finished that argument? Done with the gatekeeping discussion? If so, here's my viewpoint on this thread.
I don't think the art in Tasha's is enough to go off of in this case. Without WotC commenting on this, there just isn't enough evidence to back this up, especially due to the fact that Gnolls aren't demonic in Eberron or Exandria. Sure, maybe they're basically humanoids possessed by demonic spirits in the Forgotten Realms, but that doesn't have any jurisdiction over the world of Eberron or Exandria.
The best way to do gnolls is to make a new race, not trying to shove the race into the Custom Lineage from Tasha's. That system is meant to provide races for character that don't fit any others, not to prevent all possible future races from coming out. That would be insane, and is in no way the direction WotC will be going.
A Gnoll race would almost definitely get a bite attack, possibly proficiency in some weapons/armor (shields, spears, longbows, flails), darkvision, powerful build, and possibly Rampage (I would limit it to once a short rest like Hungry Jaws). They could even get Cunning Artisan, fitting their tribal nature.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
[REDACTED] I will qualify my statement. If some DM is operating in the Eberron or Exandria settings, guess they can say "yeah, Gnoll's can be lawful good clerics of Life". But much of Eberron is utterly incompatible with the base of 5e, which is the vast majority of the lore and rules. I have never looked at Exandria, so can't comment on it. There is classic 5e. There is there is all the wild divergent works like Eberron that are published to make cash for WOTC. It is 5.5e. Tasha's is 5.6 e, or 6e. But don't suggest that Gnolls as a playable species, or anything but CE, can be played in the classic 5e setting.
My horse poopy meter was reading full so I came to see what had caused it and low and behold I found this.
Gnolls were playable as a PC race going all the way back to 1e. If you find the 1e supplement The Orcs of Thar, there are rules in there for making a Gnoll PCs, and also Goblins, Orcs, Hobgoblins, Kobolds, Ogres, Bugbears, and Trolls as well.
So again, I’ll say: “STOP GATEKEEPING VINCE.”
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
And my thread blew up.
I have a weird sense of humor.
I also make maps.(That's a link)
Eberron is an official WotC setting. It isn't incompatible with 5E, it simply has it's own specific lore like every setting does. WotC is working on 3 classic settings for 5E, those will all have their own lore that'll be equally different from each other's. The FR's races differ from Greyhawk's, which in turn differ from Dragonlance's, which are not the same as Dark Sun's, and so on.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].