Honestly, I think both versions of the Ardling that we have seen are pretty solid mechanically. They could use a little tweaking, but overall I think they work well. I like the first UA Ardling’s choice of Exhalted, Heavenly, and Idyllic Legacies as a counterpoint to the Tiefling's new choices. I like bringing in more of the rich Outer Planar lore that DnD has. And I like the second UA version of Ardling’s rules for creating a myriad variety of bestfolk. The biggest problem with both of them is the flavor and the appearance. A lot of people don't want to be limited to an animal head for the only PHB option for a Celestial species. And even if it is appealing, there is room for more variety of mythological inspiration that is untapped. For people who want a generic beastfolk species, tacking on the Celestial angle seems out of place. And they don't seem to have their own reason for existing on top of dozens of other more confined animal options.
So I've worked on creating a fix for both of them. One where they can both be used in the game. The focus is on making the Ardling a true Celestial choice, but giving more room for different appearances, and drawing on the established lore for more depth. For the other version, I wanted to make a beastfolk with a lot of options, but give it their own identity. Something truly new, with a tie to the Feywild.
I'm not concerned with game balance and rules specifics so much at this point. Just making them both feel like interesting and unique choices. The mechanics are easily tinkered with. So here is my ideas for making both versions of the Ardling their own thing (feel free to suggest other names for the second one):
Ardlings
New flavor text (Leave all of the mechanics the same as they were in the first UA.) -
Ardlings are supernal beings who are either born on the Upper Planes or have one or more ancestors who originated there. Their bright souls shine with the light of immortal beings who call the Upper Planes home.
Ardlings vary greatly in physical appearance, resembling the diverse native beings of the Upper Planes - the animal headed Guardinals of Elysium, the Ki-Rin of Mount Celestia, the Sphinxes of Arborea, the Foo Creatures of the Beastlands, the Treants of Bytopia, and Arcadia's wonderous animals with metallic feathers and fur.
An Ardling might have vibrant colored skin, ornate feathers in place of hair, a single pearl horn in the center of their forehead, a thick golden mane, soft fur with glowing patterns, gnarled bark-like growths, fine shimmering scales, or even the head of an animal associated with a divine power. Each Ardling is an individual, and the expression of their immortal souls in their outward appearance is as varied as they are.
Use all of the mechanics from the 1st UA Ardling - Angelic Flight, Divine spells from the Celestial Legacy of choice, and Radiant Damage resistance.
Wyldborn
Wherever the boundaries between the Material Plane and the Feywild are the thinnest, rare children are sometimes born. They share the traits of the magical creatures that roam the Fey and the local peoples of the world on the other side of the veil. Gifted with a spark of creativity and wonder, they often set off to see the whole scope of creation, and place their mark on it.
Wyldborn come in all shapes and sizes. They share the general humanoid form of the Material Plane people they grow up near, with the beastial traits of the mysterious fauna of the Feywild. Some appear almost Human, with a few unmistakably Fey marks such as velvet ears, whiskers, dappled skin, swishing tail, branching antlers, or sharp teeth. Others appear like fully bipedal animals, but with unusual fur colors and patterns, striking intelligent eyes, or the faint glow of fairy fireflies drifting around them.
Wyldborn commonly find themselves overcome with wanderlust, eager to adventure and experience the new places that their hearts tell them are just over the next hill. Their exceptional physical skills make them perfect explorers. And their natural charms help them fit in wherever they go.
Use the 2nd UA version of Ardling's mechanics with the following updates:
Animal Ancestry - keep the same choices from the 2nd version (Climber, Flyer, Racer, Swimmer)
Keen Senses - keep the same from the 2nd version - proficiency in Perception
Add 'Creative Spark' - You have proficiency in the Performance skill
Remove Divine Magic from the 2nd version and add 'Fey Magic' - You know the Druidcraft cantrip, and can exchange it for any other Primal cantrip after Long Rest. You know the Charm Person spell, and can cast it at first level once per Long Rest, or with any spell slots you have.
Edit: given some extra time to thingk, my only note would be, I partially would want to focus the celestial ardling just a tad more, but that is my selfish side of wanting to see more varied celestial options. I don't want ardling to cover all of those options because I want ANOTHER race later, BUT given the fight we are already having with the "we already have Aasimar" crowd, I don't think I would want to see the fight with the "we already have Aasimar AND Ardling crowd".
I like these ideas. But I don't think it would work if both of them were to be used at once, since so many of their abilities do overlap. But I also really like both of these species ideas and I want them to stay. In order to do that, Ardling or Wyldborn would have to have their mechanics changed a lot. I do really, really like your idea to differentiate the lore of Ardling and a new Beastfolk species.
Edit: Nevermind the feedback that is now struck out, I got confused.
I like these ideas. But I don't think it would work if both of them were to be used at once, since so many of their abilities do overlap. But I also really like both of these species ideas and I want them to stay. In order to do that, Ardling or Wyldborn would have to have their mechanics changed a lot. I do really, really like your idea to differentiate the lore of Ardling and a new Beastfolk species.
Thanks so much! I really appreciate the feedback.
Since my Ardling is based on the first UA version, and Wyldborn is based on the second version with some modification, there shouldn't be any ability overlap.
The Ardling would get Angelic Flight, Divine spells from the Celestial Legacy of choice, and Radiant Damage resistance.
The Wyldborn would get the Animal options from the second UA version (Climber, Flyer, Racer, Swimmer), proficiency in Preception and Performance, a Druid cantrip, and Charm Person.
I updated the original post to make that a little more clear. Thanks!
Since my Ardling is based on the first UA version, and Wyldborn is based on the second version with some modification, there shouldn't be any ability overlap.
Oops! My bad for misunderstanding which UAs you were basing the versions of these species off. My feedback about the mechanical overlap is now null, great ideas Steg!
Since my Ardling is based on the first UA version, and Wyldborn is based on the second version with some modification, there shouldn't be any ability overlap.
Oops! My bad for misunderstanding which UAs you were basing the versions of these species off. My feedback about the mechanical overlap is now null, great ideas Steg!
Totally my fault! I didn't make it as clear as I had hoped. I appreciate you pointing it out so I could fix it. Thanks!
Never felt right to me to have another celestial species when there's aasimar. It's like they were deemed too boring and unsalvageable. But a beastfolk option, that's way better. There's a huge amount of species based on all kinds of animals and there's no end to that. Making one definitive beastfolk species with maximum flexibility as a definitive beastfolk/Feywild option would be nice.
Never felt right to me to have another celestial species when there's aasimar. It's like they were deemed too boring and unsalvageable. But a beastfolk option, that's way better. There's a huge amount of species based on all kinds of animals and there's no end to that. Making one definitive beastfolk species with maximum flexibility as a definitive beastfolk/Feywild option would be nice.
So for you fey folk or beast folk number 12 or 15 is fine but heaven forbidden we have more than 1 celestial race?
JC already said Ardling isn't replacing aasimar. Aasimars are still in the game and a second celestial option doesn't change that.
The problem with this is the fact that the "Original Ardling" was already found lacking in the survey. WotC aren't going to go back to that version.
Looking at the way people are reacting here to the latest version, I doubt that it will get above a 60% rating either.
Unfortunately. I am hoping that means they do a third option that blends, realizing they went to far the other direction, but most likely it will mean that we just won't get it at all. which does make me sad.
I can only speak for myself of course, and listen to what WotC said on the topic. But I think this is what happened to some degree:
The Ardling was a total surprise. They didn't really explain why they were adding it, or what their concept was. We just got a few short paragraphs to go by with no context and no art. I think a lot of people looked at it, myself included, and kind of scratched our heads.
I didn't put it together that these were supposed to represent Guardinals. A lot of people probably didn't. I didn't connect it to the Glitchling either. Based on the mechanics it looked very similar to the Aasimar. To be honest, actually better than the Aasimar in design. But then they added on - 'Ardlings have animal heads on human bodies.' And without context that seemed like an odd choice to limit it in that way.
So for me I thought, why not just use the Aasimar and give more options for their appearance? I told them in the survey that I didn't understand why they were trying to tie a Celestial species with one very specific beastfolk kind of aesthetic, instead of all of the possibilities for those Planes. I thought that people who wanted to play a Beastfolk probably weren't looking for a bunch of Divine abilities. They wanted a beastfolk with claws or fangs or whatever. And people who wanted to play a Celestial character probably weren't thinking of an animal head. Even if 50% of people understood what they were going for and liked it, we'd get the survey results we did.
So the first part of the problem was just confusion. Then they looked at the survey and saw that most people said they 'were trying to do too many things at once.' But what did that mean? The mechanical abilities weren't 'too many things.' They were all very much along one simple theme. The only other thing was the animal head. So it sounds like 'too many things at once' really meant that people didn't understand why one species option was trying to be a Celestial and a Beastfolk at the same time.
But apparently WotC didn't see it that way. Maybe because they understood what a lot of us didn't. They knew what they were gong for. They had a clear picture and we didn't. So they made a new version that leaned into the animal part more. I imagine a lot of people asked for this because a large number of players really love anthropomorphic characters. We wouldn't have so many already if that wasn't true. In fact, I would say the demand for more animal people is much larger than the demand for Celestials. So WotC made a version that was more animal. But the one thing they didn't change was the fact these were still Celestials. Because they knew what they wanted, and we didn't know. The new version is still doing 'too many things at once' for everyone that doesn't understand or agree with that vision. So the new version is still broken in the same way the first one was.
It's clear a lot of people want a new Celestial that widens the scope of what an angelic being might look like. One that takes into account other mythologies. And it's clear that a lot of people want a beastfolk option in the PHB. If everyone only gets one in the book, they want it to be as flexible as possible. Both of these desires are understandable. But it seems one species that does both things isn't really what people want. Because each group isn't always interested in the other.
So I personally think the only way to make as many people as happy as possible is to make two different species. They can make an Ardling that has a little broader range of appearance options. And they can make an animal species that is flexible, but with its own identity. That's what I tried to do here. I don't know if that's really the answer. But I think it's one way to address the root of the issue.
Personally, I am very against "Generic Beast Species".
Creating a "Generic Species" only give ammunition to those that don't want "Furries" in the first place. They would get to point at "Generic Beast Species" and say, why do you need a Kitsune?! Play "Generic Beast Species"! They don't care that a Kitsune isn't just a "Fox Person", you can just pick the same generic traits as every other "Generic Beast Species" character.
Secondly, all the people that cried foul that all the Species in the game are "becoming homogenized" would actually have a "Generic Beast Species" to point at and say "I told you so".
We already have too many people saying if you want "X thing" in the game you should homebrew it, completely dismissing anything someone other than themselves might want. I do not want them to have any more leverage than they already do.
Personally, I am very against "Generic Beast Species".
Creating a "Generic Species" only give ammunition to those that don't want "Furries" in the first place. They would get to point at "Generic Beast Species" and say, why do you need a Kitsune?! Play "Generic Beast Species"! They don't care that a Kitsune isn't just a "Fox Person", you can just pick the same generic traits as every other "Generic Beast Species" character.
Secondly, all the people that cried foul that all the Species in the game are "becoming homogenized" would actually have a "Generic Beast Species" to point at and say "I told you so".
We already have too many people saying if you want "X thing" in the game you should homebrew it, completely dismissing anything someone other than themselves might want. I do not want them to have any more leverage than they already do.
Well, I guess I understand that to some degree. That's why I tried to make mine Fey so they had their own identity that didn't step on other toes. The problem is there's thousands real world animal-people myths. And even more modern concepts. How many need to have their own distinct entries?
They can make a Kitsune, but someone else wants a Tanuki. Or a Kappa. Or a Jorogumo. Or a Tengu. And we're not even partly through Japan alone yet. Add on top of that the fact that for every person who really wants a wolf-man, there is another person who will never want any anthropomorphic characters whatsoever.
The new PHB will have one beastfolk option at best. They haven't shown us plans yet for even that much. So if there can be only a single option, I would think it would make the most players happy if it could at least be adapted to as many character concepts as possible. By making it Fey, and giving a wide range of appearances, at least there's room for all the other animal species like Tabaxi that already exist too. But the Players Handbook will be lucky to get any at all.
You have just proven my point. They won't care that Kitsune, Tanuki, Kappa, Tengu or Jorogumo are NOT beast folk at all. You can't make any of those using the rules present in the UA. Each and every one has a distinct lore from a real world culture. No, not everyone will get the options they want published, but trying to diminish them into a "Generic Beast Species" is not the right way to go. It certainly would not be culturally sensitive.
You have just proven my point. They won't care that Kitsune, Tanuki, Kappa, Tengu or Jorogumo are NOT beast folk at all. You can't make any of those using the rules present in the UA. Each and every one has a distinct lore from a real world culture. No, not everyone will get the options they want published, but trying to diminish them into a "Generic Beast Species" is not the right way to go. It certainly would not be culturally sensitive.
Real world cultures have distinct lore as well, even biological differences in people that created them, like skin color, average height, eye shape, but they're all mankind. If we can be so very different in the real world, why can't a fantasy species also be diverse? I kind of like the idea of a species with wildly variating features having the same roots, same origin.
So for you fey folk or beast folk number 12 or 15 is fine but heaven forbidden we have more than 1 celestial race?
JC already said Ardling isn't replacing aasimar. Aasimars are still in the game and a second celestial option doesn't change that.
The whole point is in having one beast folk instead of 15. I just like to take Occam's razor and slash stuff left and right.
Ya, but that is not going to happen, they have specifically stated that is not going to happen. If that is your reason you are just going to be disappointed. It would be like doing the rain dance every day hoping that a million dollars will just fall in your lap, it is not happening, stop go back to work and be actually productive.
You have just proven my point. They won't care that Kitsune, Tanuki, Kappa, Tengu or Jorogumo are NOT beast folk at all. You can't make any of those using the rules present in the UA. Each and every one has a distinct lore from a real world culture. No, not everyone will get the options they want published, but trying to diminish them into a "Generic Beast Species" is not the right way to go. It certainly would not be culturally sensitive.
Real world cultures have distinct lore as well, even biological differences in people that created them, like skin color, average height, eye shape, but they're all mankind. If we can be so very different in the real world, why can't a fantasy species also be diverse? I kind of like the idea of a species with wildly variating features having the same roots, same origin.
So do I, but that doesn't mean we are going to see other species besides the varied one. Because you literally CAN'T make an option that covers all the feature differences. Kitsune, tanooki and the like aren't just different in origins, physical appearance and lore, their abilities are also WILDLY different and have nothing to do with the animal they are based on. Just because they include a generic race does not mean tabaxi are going anywhere, or lizard folk, or leonin, or owlin or any of the rest. And there will be more, either you are going to get used to it, or you will have a psychotic episode.
Ya, but that is not going to happen, they have specifically stated that is not going to happen. If that is your reason you are just going to be disappointed. It would be like doing the rain dance every day hoping that a million dollars will just fall in your lap, it is not happening, stop go back to work and be actually productive.
Remember 3.5e and the myriad of classes that the game ended up having. A couple of razor slashes later we're down to 12 classes in 5e PHB, plus one after like 5 years or so. I can't see the reason why species would not be affected by it. Hell, they've just cut the sub-race thing altogether in 1DnD.
Also: I could bet real money that you'll never get any kitsune or tanuki in official DnD releases, at least in the following 10 years, because of how narrow, specific and obscure they are. And because you won't settle for a compromise, this way neither you nor anyone who wants to play a fox person will get anything official at all, only homebrew. How satisfying is that?
Ya, but that is not going to happen, they have specifically stated that is not going to happen. If that is your reason you are just going to be disappointed. It would be like doing the rain dance every day hoping that a million dollars will just fall in your lap, it is not happening, stop go back to work and be actually productive.
Remember 3.5e and the myriad of classes that the game ended up having. A couple of razor slashes later we're down to 12 classes in 5e PHB, plus one after like 5 years or so. I can't see the reason why species would not be affected by it. Hell, they've just cut the sub-race thing altogether in 1DnD.
Also: I could bet real money that you'll never get any kitsune or tanuki in official DnD releases, at least in the following 10 years, because of how narrow, specific and obscure they are. And because you won't settle for a compromise, this way neither you nor anyone who wants to play a fox person will get anything official at all, only homebrew. How satisfying is that?
Well considering JC and the people of wizards have already stated they aren't slashing species AND it wouldn't make any sense for them to NOT print more species because that is more money your statement makes no sense. Also the fact that you think Kitsune are obscure is hilarious. They cut down subraces sure, but MoTM is already out, the setting books are already coming out with new species. They are even trying to put MORE species in the PHB. They are not going to slash a single beast person, nor are they going to stop making them just because they make a generic one they have already stated this is the case. If you think Giants are going to be in PHB because they have stated they will put them there, and you believe the new dragonborn doesn't prevent the use of or get rid of Fizban's dragonborn because JC said so, then you have to believe and understand that one generic beast race can not, will not and will never be intended to slash the other. You are wasting yours and everyone else's time with a bad dream.
I give Kitsune 5 years, though they may not be called kitsune. Tanuki's are obscure enough with problematic enough lore they won't touch them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Honestly, I think both versions of the Ardling that we have seen are pretty solid mechanically. They could use a little tweaking, but overall I think they work well. I like the first UA Ardling’s choice of Exhalted, Heavenly, and Idyllic Legacies as a counterpoint to the Tiefling's new choices. I like bringing in more of the rich Outer Planar lore that DnD has. And I like the second UA version of Ardling’s rules for creating a myriad variety of bestfolk. The biggest problem with both of them is the flavor and the appearance. A lot of people don't want to be limited to an animal head for the only PHB option for a Celestial species. And even if it is appealing, there is room for more variety of mythological inspiration that is untapped. For people who want a generic beastfolk species, tacking on the Celestial angle seems out of place. And they don't seem to have their own reason for existing on top of dozens of other more confined animal options.
So I've worked on creating a fix for both of them. One where they can both be used in the game. The focus is on making the Ardling a true Celestial choice, but giving more room for different appearances, and drawing on the established lore for more depth. For the other version, I wanted to make a beastfolk with a lot of options, but give it their own identity. Something truly new, with a tie to the Feywild.
I'm not concerned with game balance and rules specifics so much at this point. Just making them both feel like interesting and unique choices. The mechanics are easily tinkered with. So here is my ideas for making both versions of the Ardling their own thing (feel free to suggest other names for the second one):
Ardlings
New flavor text (Leave all of the mechanics the same as they were in the first UA.) -
Ardlings are supernal beings who are either born on the Upper Planes or have one or more ancestors who originated there. Their bright souls shine with the light of immortal beings who call the Upper Planes home.
Ardlings vary greatly in physical appearance, resembling the diverse native beings of the Upper Planes - the animal headed Guardinals of Elysium, the Ki-Rin of Mount Celestia, the Sphinxes of Arborea, the Foo Creatures of the Beastlands, the Treants of Bytopia, and Arcadia's wonderous animals with metallic feathers and fur.
An Ardling might have vibrant colored skin, ornate feathers in place of hair, a single pearl horn in the center of their forehead, a thick golden mane, soft fur with glowing patterns, gnarled bark-like growths, fine shimmering scales, or even the head of an animal associated with a divine power. Each Ardling is an individual, and the expression of their immortal souls in their outward appearance is as varied as they are.
Use all of the mechanics from the 1st UA Ardling - Angelic Flight, Divine spells from the Celestial Legacy of choice, and Radiant Damage resistance.
Wyldborn
Wherever the boundaries between the Material Plane and the Feywild are the thinnest, rare children are sometimes born. They share the traits of the magical creatures that roam the Fey and the local peoples of the world on the other side of the veil. Gifted with a spark of creativity and wonder, they often set off to see the whole scope of creation, and place their mark on it.
Wyldborn come in all shapes and sizes. They share the general humanoid form of the Material Plane people they grow up near, with the beastial traits of the mysterious fauna of the Feywild. Some appear almost Human, with a few unmistakably Fey marks such as velvet ears, whiskers, dappled skin, swishing tail, branching antlers, or sharp teeth. Others appear like fully bipedal animals, but with unusual fur colors and patterns, striking intelligent eyes, or the faint glow of fairy fireflies drifting around them.
Wyldborn commonly find themselves overcome with wanderlust, eager to adventure and experience the new places that their hearts tell them are just over the next hill. Their exceptional physical skills make them perfect explorers. And their natural charms help them fit in wherever they go.
Use the 2nd UA version of Ardling's mechanics with the following updates:
Animal Ancestry - keep the same choices from the 2nd version (Climber, Flyer, Racer, Swimmer)
Keen Senses - keep the same from the 2nd version - proficiency in Perception
Add 'Creative Spark' - You have proficiency in the Performance skill
Remove Divine Magic from the 2nd version and add 'Fey Magic' - You know the Druidcraft cantrip, and can exchange it for any other Primal cantrip after Long Rest. You know the Charm Person spell, and can cast it at first level once per Long Rest, or with any spell slots you have.
All I can say is yes this. Let's go.
Edit: given some extra time to thingk, my only note would be, I partially would want to focus the celestial ardling just a tad more, but that is my selfish side of wanting to see more varied celestial options. I don't want ardling to cover all of those options because I want ANOTHER race later, BUT given the fight we are already having with the "we already have Aasimar" crowd, I don't think I would want to see the fight with the "we already have Aasimar AND Ardling crowd".
I like these ideas.
But I don't think it would work if both of them were to be used at once, since so many of their abilities do overlap. But I also really like both of these species ideas and I want them to stay. In order to do that, Ardling or Wyldborn would have to have their mechanics changed a lot.I do really, really like your idea to differentiate the lore of Ardling and a new Beastfolk species.Edit: Nevermind the feedback that is now struck out, I got confused.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.Thanks so much! I really appreciate the feedback.
Since my Ardling is based on the first UA version, and Wyldborn is based on the second version with some modification, there shouldn't be any ability overlap.
The Ardling would get Angelic Flight, Divine spells from the Celestial Legacy of choice, and Radiant Damage resistance.
The Wyldborn would get the Animal options from the second UA version (Climber, Flyer, Racer, Swimmer), proficiency in Preception and Performance, a Druid cantrip, and Charm Person.
I updated the original post to make that a little more clear. Thanks!
Oops! My bad for misunderstanding which UAs you were basing the versions of these species off. My feedback about the mechanical overlap is now null, great ideas Steg!
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.Totally my fault! I didn't make it as clear as I had hoped. I appreciate you pointing it out so I could fix it. Thanks!
Never felt right to me to have another celestial species when there's aasimar. It's like they were deemed too boring and unsalvageable. But a beastfolk option, that's way better. There's a huge amount of species based on all kinds of animals and there's no end to that. Making one definitive beastfolk species with maximum flexibility as a definitive beastfolk/Feywild option would be nice.
So for you fey folk or beast folk number 12 or 15 is fine but heaven forbidden we have more than 1 celestial race?
JC already said Ardling isn't replacing aasimar. Aasimars are still in the game and a second celestial option doesn't change that.
The problem with this is the fact that the "Original Ardling" was already found lacking in the survey. WotC aren't going to go back to that version.
Looking at the way people are reacting here to the latest version, I doubt that it will get above a 60% rating either.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Unfortunately. I am hoping that means they do a third option that blends, realizing they went to far the other direction, but most likely it will mean that we just won't get it at all. which does make me sad.
I can only speak for myself of course, and listen to what WotC said on the topic. But I think this is what happened to some degree:
The Ardling was a total surprise. They didn't really explain why they were adding it, or what their concept was. We just got a few short paragraphs to go by with no context and no art. I think a lot of people looked at it, myself included, and kind of scratched our heads.
I didn't put it together that these were supposed to represent Guardinals. A lot of people probably didn't. I didn't connect it to the Glitchling either. Based on the mechanics it looked very similar to the Aasimar. To be honest, actually better than the Aasimar in design. But then they added on - 'Ardlings have animal heads on human bodies.' And without context that seemed like an odd choice to limit it in that way.
So for me I thought, why not just use the Aasimar and give more options for their appearance? I told them in the survey that I didn't understand why they were trying to tie a Celestial species with one very specific beastfolk kind of aesthetic, instead of all of the possibilities for those Planes. I thought that people who wanted to play a Beastfolk probably weren't looking for a bunch of Divine abilities. They wanted a beastfolk with claws or fangs or whatever. And people who wanted to play a Celestial character probably weren't thinking of an animal head. Even if 50% of people understood what they were going for and liked it, we'd get the survey results we did.
So the first part of the problem was just confusion. Then they looked at the survey and saw that most people said they 'were trying to do too many things at once.' But what did that mean? The mechanical abilities weren't 'too many things.' They were all very much along one simple theme. The only other thing was the animal head. So it sounds like 'too many things at once' really meant that people didn't understand why one species option was trying to be a Celestial and a Beastfolk at the same time.
But apparently WotC didn't see it that way. Maybe because they understood what a lot of us didn't. They knew what they were gong for. They had a clear picture and we didn't. So they made a new version that leaned into the animal part more. I imagine a lot of people asked for this because a large number of players really love anthropomorphic characters. We wouldn't have so many already if that wasn't true. In fact, I would say the demand for more animal people is much larger than the demand for Celestials. So WotC made a version that was more animal. But the one thing they didn't change was the fact these were still Celestials. Because they knew what they wanted, and we didn't know. The new version is still doing 'too many things at once' for everyone that doesn't understand or agree with that vision. So the new version is still broken in the same way the first one was.
It's clear a lot of people want a new Celestial that widens the scope of what an angelic being might look like. One that takes into account other mythologies. And it's clear that a lot of people want a beastfolk option in the PHB. If everyone only gets one in the book, they want it to be as flexible as possible. Both of these desires are understandable. But it seems one species that does both things isn't really what people want. Because each group isn't always interested in the other.
So I personally think the only way to make as many people as happy as possible is to make two different species. They can make an Ardling that has a little broader range of appearance options. And they can make an animal species that is flexible, but with its own identity. That's what I tried to do here. I don't know if that's really the answer. But I think it's one way to address the root of the issue.
Personally, I am very against "Generic Beast Species".
Creating a "Generic Species" only give ammunition to those that don't want "Furries" in the first place. They would get to point at "Generic Beast Species" and say, why do you need a Kitsune?! Play "Generic Beast Species"! They don't care that a Kitsune isn't just a "Fox Person", you can just pick the same generic traits as every other "Generic Beast Species" character.
Secondly, all the people that cried foul that all the Species in the game are "becoming homogenized" would actually have a "Generic Beast Species" to point at and say "I told you so".
We already have too many people saying if you want "X thing" in the game you should homebrew it, completely dismissing anything someone other than themselves might want. I do not want them to have any more leverage than they already do.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Well, I guess I understand that to some degree. That's why I tried to make mine Fey so they had their own identity that didn't step on other toes. The problem is there's thousands real world animal-people myths. And even more modern concepts. How many need to have their own distinct entries?
They can make a Kitsune, but someone else wants a Tanuki. Or a Kappa. Or a Jorogumo. Or a Tengu. And we're not even partly through Japan alone yet. Add on top of that the fact that for every person who really wants a wolf-man, there is another person who will never want any anthropomorphic characters whatsoever.
The new PHB will have one beastfolk option at best. They haven't shown us plans yet for even that much. So if there can be only a single option, I would think it would make the most players happy if it could at least be adapted to as many character concepts as possible. By making it Fey, and giving a wide range of appearances, at least there's room for all the other animal species like Tabaxi that already exist too. But the Players Handbook will be lucky to get any at all.
You have just proven my point. They won't care that Kitsune, Tanuki, Kappa, Tengu or Jorogumo are NOT beast folk at all. You can't make any of those using the rules present in the UA. Each and every one has a distinct lore from a real world culture. No, not everyone will get the options they want published, but trying to diminish them into a "Generic Beast Species" is not the right way to go. It certainly would not be culturally sensitive.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
The whole point is in having one beast folk instead of 15. I just like to take Occam's razor and slash stuff left and right.
Real world cultures have distinct lore as well, even biological differences in people that created them, like skin color, average height, eye shape, but they're all mankind. If we can be so very different in the real world, why can't a fantasy species also be diverse? I kind of like the idea of a species with wildly variating features having the same roots, same origin.
Ya, but that is not going to happen, they have specifically stated that is not going to happen. If that is your reason you are just going to be disappointed. It would be like doing the rain dance every day hoping that a million dollars will just fall in your lap, it is not happening, stop go back to work and be actually productive.
So do I, but that doesn't mean we are going to see other species besides the varied one. Because you literally CAN'T make an option that covers all the feature differences. Kitsune, tanooki and the like aren't just different in origins, physical appearance and lore, their abilities are also WILDLY different and have nothing to do with the animal they are based on. Just because they include a generic race does not mean tabaxi are going anywhere, or lizard folk, or leonin, or owlin or any of the rest. And there will be more, either you are going to get used to it, or you will have a psychotic episode.
Remember 3.5e and the myriad of classes that the game ended up having. A couple of razor slashes later we're down to 12 classes in 5e PHB, plus one after like 5 years or so. I can't see the reason why species would not be affected by it. Hell, they've just cut the sub-race thing altogether in 1DnD.
Also: I could bet real money that you'll never get any kitsune or tanuki in official DnD releases, at least in the following 10 years, because of how narrow, specific and obscure they are. And because you won't settle for a compromise, this way neither you nor anyone who wants to play a fox person will get anything official at all, only homebrew. How satisfying is that?
Well considering JC and the people of wizards have already stated they aren't slashing species AND it wouldn't make any sense for them to NOT print more species because that is more money your statement makes no sense. Also the fact that you think Kitsune are obscure is hilarious. They cut down subraces sure, but MoTM is already out, the setting books are already coming out with new species. They are even trying to put MORE species in the PHB. They are not going to slash a single beast person, nor are they going to stop making them just because they make a generic one they have already stated this is the case. If you think Giants are going to be in PHB because they have stated they will put them there, and you believe the new dragonborn doesn't prevent the use of or get rid of Fizban's dragonborn because JC said so, then you have to believe and understand that one generic beast race can not, will not and will never be intended to slash the other. You are wasting yours and everyone else's time with a bad dream.
I give Kitsune 5 years, though they may not be called kitsune. Tanuki's are obscure enough with problematic enough lore they won't touch them.