I don't know. Ardlings are in a bad spot with the latest form. It has moved from celestial animals to just animals at this point so it has kind of lost it's purpose of being a mirror to Tieflings.
Aasimar are already the mirror to Tieflings - that's the problem. They're encroaching on a space already taken. Embrace the furry / beast portion as their own individual primal species.
I don't know. Ardlings are in a bad spot with the latest form. It has moved from celestial animals to just animals at this point so it has kind of lost it's purpose of being a mirror to Tieflings.
Aasimar always were a mirror to tieflings. But we did lack a catch-all basic beast race in the base game. There were Shifters in Eberron, but very few people are familiar with them.
I don't know. Ardlings are in a bad spot with the latest form. It has moved from celestial animals to just animals at this point so it has kind of lost it's purpose of being a mirror to Tieflings.
Aasimar are already the mirror to Tieflings - that's the problem. They're encroaching on a space already taken. Embrace the furry / beast portion as their own individual primal species.
I am just saying that the reasons that the Ardlings were even being considered in the first place was to be a mirror to Tieflings in the PHB. If they aren't fulfilling that purpose anymore, then why keep any of the Celestial part at all? The cantrip is just vestigial at this point and no longer really fits.
I am fine with just making them animal people, but if they wanted to keep the planar theme along with animal visual, then flavorful Primal Spells and Abilities would have made more sense than copying Aasimar's abilities and would have made them distinct. Then you would also have Arcane (Tiefling), Aasimar (Divine) and Ardling (Primal) and it would still work as a mirror to the Tiefling that they wanted in the first place.
Of course then you have Elves so maybe that wouldn't work.
I think there's a definite demand for beast-folk, but I'd be inclined to associate them with the feywild, not celestials. Swapping all the divine spell picks for primal would result in people immediately grabbing it for easy access to shillelagh (which is enough of an 'every melee spellcaster' wants this to argue for it either being nerfed or made universal).
I think there's a definite demand for beast-folk, but I'd be inclined to associate them with the feywild, not celestials. Swapping all the divine spell picks for primal would result in people immediately grabbing it for easy access to shillelagh (which is enough of an 'every melee spellcaster' wants this to argue for it either being nerfed or made universal).
Why would picking Ardling give them access to Shillelagh? If you don't make it one of the three options then it isn't a problem.
Why would picking Ardling give them access to Shillelagh? If you don't make it one of the three options then it isn't a problem.
The new playtest gets one cantrip from the divine list, which can be changed at a long rest. If all the divine spells were replaced by primal spells, that would include the cantrip.
Why would picking Ardling give them access to Shillelagh? If you don't make it one of the three options then it isn't a problem.
The new playtest gets one cantrip from the divine list, which can be changed at a long rest. If all the divine spells were replaced by primal spells, that would include the cantrip.
Oh, I meant giving them spells like Teiflings (Cantrip at 1st, 1st level at 3rd and 2nd level at 5th)
But they went the other way with making them more animal, which is fine, but the cantrip now seem out of place.
Yeah, I think they really need to figure out the point of ardlings and just go with it. Are the celestials? Are they a replacement for the 101 animal hybrid species? Do they compliment the animal hybrid species? Pick one and go with it. I’m kind of agnostic on them at this point, but a defined niche would go a long way.
As-is the Ardling's associations with the Celestial plane is a single cantrip. That's really minor. They went too far into the animal motif to the point just dropping the Celestial origins and making them a Feywild animalfolk species would make more sense.
Personally I feel they should give the Ardlings a little more celestial flavor. I suggested in another thread that they could get a radiant damage natural weapon attack or maybe get a free casting of Detect Good and Evil. Something to thematically show that they are from a celestial plane and not your typical animal people native to various planets of the multiverse like Tabaxi or Lizardfolk.
I also feel like giving the player character WINGS and then never letting them fly is kind of a slap in the face. Wings are big and cumbersome. I know there's not explicit rules concerning having a whole pair of huge extra limbs that have no function, but I'd at least consider that more of a drawback than a boon.
Also am I the only one who thinks its weird they gave Cold Resistance to the group of animal people that included frogs and crocodiles?
If they do end up going fully into the animal theme they need to just drop the celestial Beastlands origin, in my opinion, and tie them to the Primal domain of magic like others have suggested.
As-is the Ardling's associations with the Celestial plane is a single cantrip. That's really minor. They went too far into the animal motif to the point just dropping the Celestial origins and making them a Feywild animalfolk species would make more sense.
Actually, I'd be all for this. There's already tieflings and aasimar, base species connected to celestials and fiends with pretty strong identity. Of course, there's fairies and theoretically eladrin that may or may not be a subtype of elf, but I'd like to have one distinct species with firm connection to Feywild and a solid identity.
I really do not want Ardling to become ANOTHER Fey race or ANOTHER generic beast race. Why is everyone ok with Fey race number 15, or Beast race number 12, but scoff at the idea of Celestial race number 2? Or more specifically THE ONE AND ONLY EXPLICITLY non-Judeo-Christian celestial race. JC said they were trying to do too much with the Ardling, I disagree. I believe the problem was the flavor appearance said one thing to some people and the flavor mechanics said another to those people and those people were not ready for the idea that a celestial player could be something that explicitly could not be similar to the Judeo-Christian concept of divinity in appearance.
If you lose the celestial part, it isn't the Ardling anymore. I would rather it get scrapped entirely than see it become yet another generic beast or fey creature. Having animal qualities WITH more divinity than a single cantrip is 100% the way I feel it needs to go. NOT primal, we have fey and elves for that.
The problem is that the Ardling is meant to fill a role in the PHB specifically, as well as being an intersting new species. It's going to be the only representative of certain traits for many new players. Similar to what they were saying about the Orc being the only 'big and beefy' option new players would see, so they decided to add Goliath in.
If they add Ardling and not Aasimar, then it's literally the only Celestial option people have. But people who aren't into the animal part will be disappointed.
If they add Ardling but none of the dozens of other beast folk, then it's the only option for people who want an animal based character. And they probably weren't thinking of it as a divine creature at the same time. They're probably imagining something more primal.
So the Ardling is in a tough spot. When viewed against all of the MoM options, it's just one of many beast folk. It looks like it isn't needed without something to set it apart. One cool thing it does have going for it that none of them do, is that it's the only one that let's the player choose the animal. But that also works against it if someone wants to be a wolf person without the divine aspect.
When viewed against the Aasimar, it's the only option that doesn't scream 'biblical angel.' But any Aasimar could look like an animal person. If they just showed more varied art for them, people would understand that. So they have to have something else unique to set them apart from Aasimar. More of the same spells and angel wings isn't going to do that.
I don't know what the answer is. In a perfect world we would have all the options. We'd get Aasimar in the PHB (with more varied art) for people who want that kind of thing. We'd get a generic beast species with primal/fey traits for anyone who wants that. And we'd get other options for characters with ties to the outer planes too. We'd get holy beastfolk, and robotic modrons, and some kind of creepy hellish thing that doesn't look like a 'devil' too.
The problem is that the Ardling is meant to fill a role in the PHB specifically, as well as being an intersting new species. It's going to be the only representative of certain traits for many new players. Similar to what they were saying about the Orc being the only 'big and beefy' option new players would see, so they decided to add Goliath in.
If they add Ardling and not Aasimar, then it's literally the only Celestial option people have. But people who aren't into the animal part will be disappointed.
If they add Ardling but none of the dozens of other beast folk, then it's the only option for people who want an animal based character. And they probably weren't thinking of it as a divine creature at the same time. They're probably imagining something more primal.
So the Ardling is in a tough spot. When viewed against all of the MoM options, it's just one of many beast folk. It looks like it isn't needed without something to set it apart. One cool thing it does have going for it that none of them do, is that it's the only one that let's the player choose the animal. But that also works against it if someone wants to be a wolf person without the divine aspect.
When viewed against the Aasimar, it's the only option that doesn't scream 'biblical angel.' But any Aasimar could look like an animal person. If they just showed more varied art for them, people would understand that. So they have to have something else unique to set them apart from Aasimar. More of the same spells and angel wings isn't going to do that.
I don't know what the answer is. In a perfect world we would have all the options. We'd get Aasimar in the PHB (with more varied art) for people who want that kind of thing. We'd get a generic beast species with primal/fey traits for anyone who wants that. And we'd get other options for characters with ties to the outer planes too. We'd get holy beastfolk, and robotic modrons, and some kind of creepy hellish thing that doesn't look like a 'devil' too.
People might also understand that if they put it anywhere in the rules for Aasimar, but it is missing in all of the "options" on how to make the character look other worldly, so it isn't explicitly something that Aasimar can do and is entierly up to the DM to allow you to do something that isn't written. Also because of the way they were doing half races, had they kept ardling as purely celestial there were a lot of ways to make a celestial character that didn't have an animal head by making it a Half-Ardling.
The problem with Ardlings is that they are trying to make a catch-all beast people race and D&D doesn’t need one on account of all of the various beast people races.
I really do not want Ardling to become ANOTHER Fey race or ANOTHER generic beast race. Why is everyone ok with Fey race number 15, or Beast race number 12, but scoff at the idea of Celestial race number 2? Or more specifically THE ONE AND ONLY EXPLICITLY non-Judeo-Christian celestial race. JC said they were trying to do too much with the Ardling, I disagree. I believe the problem was the flavor appearance said one thing to some people and the flavor mechanics said another to those people and those people were not ready for the idea that a celestial player could be something that explicitly could not be similar to the Judeo-Christian concept of divinity in appearance.
If you lose the celestial part, it isn't the Ardling anymore. I would rather it get scrapped entirely than see it become yet another generic beast or fey creature. Having animal qualities WITH more divinity than a single cantrip is 100% the way I feel it needs to go. NOT primal, we have fey and elves for that.
If you have a problem with the amount of half animal races (which is completely valid), then a more beast-focused Ardling should be a good thing. After all, it could effectively replace a large number of beast races that are already in the game and prevent people from demanding new ones for every species on the planet. I also don't see why fey races are so bad; it's a realm of life and beauty with a lot of interesting lore, there's a lot of cool things that can come of it. I argue that not a single fey race is "generic."
A new celestial would be interesting, but I think races in the PHB should be more, well, basic. I like the idea of a more exotic celestial in later sourcebooks, but I prefer the idea of a more basic celestial in the PHB.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I would be very surprised if a DM only allowed the specific cosmetic options listed as examples.
But yes, that is a good point. New players and new DMs might not know that an animal head is an option. Or how far they can bend cosmetic changes. And adding it as sample descriptions along with the art would help make it more obvious. And inspire more people to think outside the box. So I'm all for it.
I think it would be harder for people to guess you could make a half-Ardling to get the powers without any animal traits at all. But more importantly they were mechanically so similar to Aasimar in the first draft that there wasn't any point. In fact, I think they could take those mechanics and use them to make a better generic Aasiamar.
Then they can still make the new Aardling unique. They aren't especially overpowered in this version. I think they could give them something else divine, without just making it more spells. I would also love to see one more animal archetype option given. I think they're missing something to cover the animals that are just big and bulky. Like hogs, elephants, moose, etc. Where is the option for the husky ones? The ones that don't fly, swim, climb, or run fast.
Edit - sorry for the confusion but this was meant to be in reply to Aquilontune. I just didn't quote it. And a lot of people were faster at typing than me haha.
Aasimar are already the mirror to Tieflings - that's the problem. They're encroaching on a space already taken. Embrace the furry / beast portion as their own individual primal species.
Aasimar always were a mirror to tieflings. But we did lack a catch-all basic beast race in the base game. There were Shifters in Eberron, but very few people are familiar with them.
I am just saying that the reasons that the Ardlings were even being considered in the first place was to be a mirror to Tieflings in the PHB. If they aren't fulfilling that purpose anymore, then why keep any of the Celestial part at all? The cantrip is just vestigial at this point and no longer really fits.
I am fine with just making them animal people, but if they wanted to keep the planar theme along with animal visual, then flavorful Primal Spells and Abilities would have made more sense than copying Aasimar's abilities and would have made them distinct. Then you would also have Arcane (Tiefling), Aasimar (Divine) and Ardling (Primal) and it would still work as a mirror to the Tiefling that they wanted in the first place.
Of course then you have Elves so maybe that wouldn't work.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I think there's a definite demand for beast-folk, but I'd be inclined to associate them with the feywild, not celestials. Swapping all the divine spell picks for primal would result in people immediately grabbing it for easy access to shillelagh (which is enough of an 'every melee spellcaster' wants this to argue for it either being nerfed or made universal).
Why would picking Ardling give them access to Shillelagh? If you don't make it one of the three options then it isn't a problem.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
The new playtest gets one cantrip from the divine list, which can be changed at a long rest. If all the divine spells were replaced by primal spells, that would include the cantrip.
Oh, I meant giving them spells like Teiflings (Cantrip at 1st, 1st level at 3rd and 2nd level at 5th)
But they went the other way with making them more animal, which is fine, but the cantrip now seem out of place.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Ardlings get spells?
Characters (Links!):
Faelin Nighthollow - 7th Sojourn
Yeah, I think they really need to figure out the point of ardlings and just go with it. Are the celestials? Are they a replacement for the 101 animal hybrid species? Do they compliment the animal hybrid species? Pick one and go with it. I’m kind of agnostic on them at this point, but a defined niche would go a long way.
As they pointed out in the video, "We tried to do too many things".
Guess what... they're still trying to do too many things.
As-is the Ardling's associations with the Celestial plane is a single cantrip. That's really minor. They went too far into the animal motif to the point just dropping the Celestial origins and making them a Feywild animalfolk species would make more sense.
Personally I feel they should give the Ardlings a little more celestial flavor. I suggested in another thread that they could get a radiant damage natural weapon attack or maybe get a free casting of Detect Good and Evil. Something to thematically show that they are from a celestial plane and not your typical animal people native to various planets of the multiverse like Tabaxi or Lizardfolk.
I also feel like giving the player character WINGS and then never letting them fly is kind of a slap in the face. Wings are big and cumbersome. I know there's not explicit rules concerning having a whole pair of huge extra limbs that have no function, but I'd at least consider that more of a drawback than a boon.
Also am I the only one who thinks its weird they gave Cold Resistance to the group of animal people that included frogs and crocodiles?
If they do end up going fully into the animal theme they need to just drop the celestial Beastlands origin, in my opinion, and tie them to the Primal domain of magic like others have suggested.
Actually, I'd be all for this. There's already tieflings and aasimar, base species connected to celestials and fiends with pretty strong identity. Of course, there's fairies and theoretically eladrin that may or may not be a subtype of elf, but I'd like to have one distinct species with firm connection to Feywild and a solid identity.
Unlikely. I've seen way too many people ask for animal-themed options ("there's a cat-people race--but where's the dog-people race?!")
It does seem like it's outgrown the celestial concept. Not sure that will survive.
I really do not want Ardling to become ANOTHER Fey race or ANOTHER generic beast race. Why is everyone ok with Fey race number 15, or Beast race number 12, but scoff at the idea of Celestial race number 2? Or more specifically THE ONE AND ONLY EXPLICITLY non-Judeo-Christian celestial race. JC said they were trying to do too much with the Ardling, I disagree. I believe the problem was the flavor appearance said one thing to some people and the flavor mechanics said another to those people and those people were not ready for the idea that a celestial player could be something that explicitly could not be similar to the Judeo-Christian concept of divinity in appearance.
If you lose the celestial part, it isn't the Ardling anymore. I would rather it get scrapped entirely than see it become yet another generic beast or fey creature. Having animal qualities WITH more divinity than a single cantrip is 100% the way I feel it needs to go. NOT primal, we have fey and elves for that.
The problem is that the Ardling is meant to fill a role in the PHB specifically, as well as being an intersting new species. It's going to be the only representative of certain traits for many new players. Similar to what they were saying about the Orc being the only 'big and beefy' option new players would see, so they decided to add Goliath in.
If they add Ardling and not Aasimar, then it's literally the only Celestial option people have. But people who aren't into the animal part will be disappointed.
If they add Ardling but none of the dozens of other beast folk, then it's the only option for people who want an animal based character. And they probably weren't thinking of it as a divine creature at the same time. They're probably imagining something more primal.
So the Ardling is in a tough spot. When viewed against all of the MoM options, it's just one of many beast folk. It looks like it isn't needed without something to set it apart. One cool thing it does have going for it that none of them do, is that it's the only one that let's the player choose the animal. But that also works against it if someone wants to be a wolf person without the divine aspect.
When viewed against the Aasimar, it's the only option that doesn't scream 'biblical angel.' But any Aasimar could look like an animal person. If they just showed more varied art for them, people would understand that. So they have to have something else unique to set them apart from Aasimar. More of the same spells and angel wings isn't going to do that.
I don't know what the answer is. In a perfect world we would have all the options. We'd get Aasimar in the PHB (with more varied art) for people who want that kind of thing. We'd get a generic beast species with primal/fey traits for anyone who wants that. And we'd get other options for characters with ties to the outer planes too. We'd get holy beastfolk, and robotic modrons, and some kind of creepy hellish thing that doesn't look like a 'devil' too.
People might also understand that if they put it anywhere in the rules for Aasimar, but it is missing in all of the "options" on how to make the character look other worldly, so it isn't explicitly something that Aasimar can do and is entierly up to the DM to allow you to do something that isn't written. Also because of the way they were doing half races, had they kept ardling as purely celestial there were a lot of ways to make a celestial character that didn't have an animal head by making it a Half-Ardling.
I mean, one option is to delete most of them and replace them with a family of feats
The problem with Ardlings is that they are trying to make a catch-all beast people race and D&D doesn’t need one on account of all of the various beast people races.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
If you have a problem with the amount of half animal races (which is completely valid), then a more beast-focused Ardling should be a good thing. After all, it could effectively replace a large number of beast races that are already in the game and prevent people from demanding new ones for every species on the planet. I also don't see why fey races are so bad; it's a realm of life and beauty with a lot of interesting lore, there's a lot of cool things that can come of it. I argue that not a single fey race is "generic."
A new celestial would be interesting, but I think races in the PHB should be more, well, basic. I like the idea of a more exotic celestial in later sourcebooks, but I prefer the idea of a more basic celestial in the PHB.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I would be very surprised if a DM only allowed the specific cosmetic options listed as examples.
But yes, that is a good point. New players and new DMs might not know that an animal head is an option. Or how far they can bend cosmetic changes. And adding it as sample descriptions along with the art would help make it more obvious. And inspire more people to think outside the box. So I'm all for it.
I think it would be harder for people to guess you could make a half-Ardling to get the powers without any animal traits at all. But more importantly they were mechanically so similar to Aasimar in the first draft that there wasn't any point. In fact, I think they could take those mechanics and use them to make a better generic Aasiamar.
Then they can still make the new Aardling unique. They aren't especially overpowered in this version. I think they could give them something else divine, without just making it more spells. I would also love to see one more animal archetype option given. I think they're missing something to cover the animals that are just big and bulky. Like hogs, elephants, moose, etc. Where is the option for the husky ones? The ones that don't fly, swim, climb, or run fast.
Edit - sorry for the confusion but this was meant to be in reply to Aquilontune. I just didn't quote it. And a lot of people were faster at typing than me haha.