As presented is rough, I wouldn't mind it too much as presented, but the issue is the Celestial part is too much of a splash, but it is still present at least and a divine magic initiate feat could help, but it is, underwhelming.
A simple question, but like most polls it's framed in a way that directs people to a predetermined outcome.
Yes will only apply to people that like the concept of the Ardling right now in general, AND are mostly satisfied with the mechanics.
The 'No's are probably going to win out here, because they capture more possible feelings.
No will apply to -
People who don't want to play any beast person ever
People who don't want to play any celestial ever
People who like one concept but not the other
People who like the concept but don't like the mechanics
People who think there needs to be some adjustments to either the flavor or the mechanics to be satisfied
So if you only want a poll that shows if the current Ardling is going to pass this playtest phase, then I guess this works.
But if you want to see if people like certain concepts or mechanics in general, you probably need some more answer options. Here's some suggestions -
Yes I like it just like this
Yes, but it could use some minor tweaks to rules
Yes, but I'd like more divine spells/powers
Yes, but I'd like more beast type options
No, I want the Ardling to be mostly Celestial
No, I want a Beastfolk option that's not Celestial
No, I'm not interested in beast people of any sort
No, I'm not interested in Celestial characters
No, I like the concept but I'm unhappy with the mechanics overall
But you didn't answer the question.
Do you want to play Ardling as presented in the UA?
People can say why they answered the way they did in the comments, but that is the question I want the answer to. If you want that other info, then please make the poll. That would be interesting as well.
A simple question, but like most polls it's framed in a way that directs people to a predetermined outcome.
Yes will only apply to people that like the concept of the Ardling right now in general, AND are mostly satisfied with the mechanics.
The 'No's are probably going to win out here, because they capture more possible feelings.
No will apply to -
People who don't want to play any beast person ever
People who don't want to play any celestial ever
People who like one concept but not the other
People who like the concept but don't like the mechanics
People who think there needs to be some adjustments to either the flavor or the mechanics to be satisfied
So if you only want a poll that shows if the current Ardling is going to pass this playtest phase, then I guess this works.
But if you want to see if people like certain concepts or mechanics in general, you probably need some more answer options. Here's some suggestions -
Yes I like it just like this
Yes, but it could use some minor tweaks to rules
Yes, but I'd like more divine spells/powers
Yes, but I'd like more beast type options
No, I want the Ardling to be mostly Celestial
No, I want a Beastfolk option that's not Celestial
No, I'm not interested in beast people of any sort
No, I'm not interested in Celestial characters
No, I like the concept but I'm unhappy with the mechanics overall
But you didn't answer the question.
Do you want to play Ardling as presented in the UA?
People can say why they answered the way they did in the comments, but that is the question I want the answer to. If you want that other info, then please make the poll. That would be interesting as well.
I did answer the question, using the poll. I'm was just pointing out that you aren't going to get much information here. Other than how it might perform in the next UA survey. Some people will love the idea of the Ardling and still vote no if the mechanics or specific flavor doesn't suit them. That's fine if that's what you're going for.
i feel like ardlings would be about as accepted by random peasants as would be an orc, tiefling, kobold, goliath, etc. if your poll included a "they're okay, but not for me" i'd have chosen that. i had to vote 'no' since i'd much rather play one of the four main races: human, elf, plasmoid (blue), or plasmoid (green).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: providefeedback!
i feel like ardlings would be about as accepted by random peasants as would be an orc, tiefling, kobold, goliath, etc. if your poll included a "they're okay, but not for me" i'd have chosen that. i had to vote 'no' since i'd much rather play one of the four main races: human, elf, plasmoid (blue), or plasmoid (green).
Thanks for the response. You answer is basically want I want to know. Who would play the Ardling. Not if they are ok or not for other people, but for the person voting.
There is another poll seeking information on Ardlings. Maybe you should make a Poll to gather more detailed info.
Like I said, it would be interesting. I just can't make it because I am currently away from my computer and suck at doing things on mobile.
That's no problem, I can totally relate haha. I do all of this stuff on my phone and it sucks. I was in the middle of cooking lunch at the same time too. I only brought it up because all of the comments so far have been 'Yes, but...,' or 'No, but....' My answer was a 'Yes, but...' because I guess it was closest to an accurate response for me.
i feel like ardlings would be about as accepted by random peasants as would be an orc, tiefling, kobold, goliath, etc. if your poll included a "they're okay, but not for me" i'd have chosen that. i had to vote 'no' since i'd much rather play one of the four main races: human, elf, plasmoid (blue), or plasmoid (green).
I'm more of an "Ehhhhhhhhh", but I put no. The previous version, I found myself coming up with character concepts fairly easily. This latest one? Not so much. It just feels anemic to me.
Yes, I want to play an Ardling. Specifically an Ardling (Racer) Scout Rogue. Because that is crazy movement, and I want to see how good that might actually be. Taking the Athlete feat mostly for the climb speed, could climb 200' / turn at level 9. Now that Jump distance is no longer limited by strength, the Rogue's proficiency in Athletics combined with advantage on Athletic checks from the Athlete feat should enable some pretty great jumping, and won't consume movement (other than the movement from using a Dash action instead.) And, notably, jumping distance is not reduced by the Slowed condition.
I like the idea of figuring out a snatcher build that takes an enemy out of combat via grappling, using ridiculously high movement to overcome the Slowed condition from grappling, especially with climbing and jumping in the mix. You gotta love the idea of going all Zangief on someone, taking a grappled creature and long jumping with them into a wall/environmental hazard. Or standing by a wall, grappling someone, then dragging them >50' up the wall.
Yes, I want to play an Ardling. Specifically an Ardling (Racer) Scout Rogue. Because that is crazy movement, and I want to see how good that might actually be. Taking the Athlete feat mostly for the climb speed, could climb 200' / turn at level 9. Now that Jump distance is no longer limited by strength, the Rogue's proficiency in Athletics combined with advantage on Athletic checks from the Athlete feat should enable some pretty great jumping, and won't consume movement (other than the movement from using a Dash action instead.) And, notably, jumping distance is not reduced by the Slowed condition.
I like the idea of figuring out a snatcher build that takes an enemy out of combat via grappling, using ridiculously high movement to overcome the Slowed condition from grappling, especially with climbing and jumping in the mix. You gotta love the idea of going all Zangief on someone, taking a grappled creature and long jumping with them into a wall/environmental hazard. Or standing by a wall, grappling someone, then dragging them >50' up the wall.
Which animal type are you thinking for your Racer?
Yes, I want to play an Ardling. Specifically an Ardling (Racer) Scout Rogue. Because that is crazy movement, and I want to see how good that might actually be. Taking the Athlete feat mostly for the climb speed, could climb 200' / turn at level 9. Now that Jump distance is no longer limited by strength, the Rogue's proficiency in Athletics combined with advantage on Athletic checks from the Athlete feat should enable some pretty great jumping, and won't consume movement (other than the movement from using a Dash action instead.) And, notably, jumping distance is not reduced by the Slowed condition.
I like the idea of figuring out a snatcher build that takes an enemy out of combat via grappling, using ridiculously high movement to overcome the Slowed condition from grappling, especially with climbing and jumping in the mix. You gotta love the idea of going all Zangief on someone, taking a grappled creature and long jumping with them into a wall/environmental hazard. Or standing by a wall, grappling someone, then dragging them >50' up the wall.
Which animal type are you thinking for your Racer?
Yes, I want to play an Ardling. Specifically an Ardling (Racer) Scout Rogue. Because that is crazy movement, and I want to see how good that might actually be. Taking the Athlete feat mostly for the climb speed, could climb 200' / turn at level 9. Now that Jump distance is no longer limited by strength, the Rogue's proficiency in Athletics combined with advantage on Athletic checks from the Athlete feat should enable some pretty great jumping, and won't consume movement (other than the movement from using a Dash action instead.) And, notably, jumping distance is not reduced by the Slowed condition.
I like the idea of figuring out a snatcher build that takes an enemy out of combat via grappling, using ridiculously high movement to overcome the Slowed condition from grappling, especially with climbing and jumping in the mix. You gotta love the idea of going all Zangief on someone, taking a grappled creature and long jumping with them into a wall/environmental hazard. Or standing by a wall, grappling someone, then dragging them >50' up the wall.
Which animal type are you thinking for your Racer?
I think the Ardlings are trying to sell the fantasy of playing a character inspired by all those theriocephalous gods of classical mythologies. Notably from the classical cultures of the Mediterranean basin (Egyptian, Greco-Latin, Minoan, etc...). But also from Asia Minor, and other Indo-European cultures. The problem is that it doesn't quite fit well in the default setting of 5e, which is forgotten realms. In other types of settings I think they would be better received. would i play it? It depends. In forgotten realms, and other similar fantasies, I would hardly play something like that. But, for example, in an ancient egyptian inspired setting, and with the right lore, I would play it just fine.
I can't say this with 100% certainty, but I get the feeling WOTC is trying to move away from FR as the "default" setting. From what I can understand, most people prefer to use their own homebrew world, and WOTC seems like they're trying to capitalize on that.
EDIT: That's neither really here nor there I suppose, but for me personally FR so so far from my list of priorities I don't even think about it unless it's explicitly brought up.
I don't really have any interest in them, and honestly doubt I will no matter what they do with them. But I feel that way about a lot of the different species, as I imagine most people do, they have some they like and some they don't.
That said, I want other people who are interested in them to have the option. And I'd like that option to be the best it can, both for the sake of those people who want them, and for people like myself who might one day play at a table with someone else playing one.
I could play many races/species but I can't say Ardling are high up on the list of races I am yet to play as and would like too, I think they need more development before that point since right now... their lore is still very up in the air. However comparing Ardling from the 1st UA to the current UA. I think I actually prefer the 1st UA. I don't mind them having some link to their bestial heritage but at the same point I think they still need a strong link to their celestial heritage and that feels quiet weak in the latest UA, I'm not fond of generic races/species in general and one of the reasons I am not too fond of Aasimar either, the lore is very weak around Aasimar.
Maybe Wizards can put more deep lore behind Ardling, I think it is needed to introduce them.
I could play many races/species but I can't say Ardling are high up on the list of races I am yet to play as and would like too, I think they need more development before that point since right now... their lore is still very up in the air. However comparing Ardling from the 1st UA to the current UA. I think I actually prefer the 1st UA. I don't mind them having some link to their bestial heritage but at the same point I think they still need a strong link to their celestial heritage and that feels quiet weak in the latest UA, I'm not fond of generic races/species in general and one of the reasons I am not too fond of Aasimar either, the lore is very weak around Aasimar.
Maybe Wizards can put more deep lore behind Ardling, I think it is needed to introduce them.
I think, reading the lore on new Ardling is much better focused and less generic, it is just the mechanics that are missing. My opinion of course.
Pretty simple poll.
Do you personally want to play an Ardling as presented in this UA?
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
As presented is rough, I wouldn't mind it too much as presented, but the issue is the Celestial part is too much of a splash, but it is still present at least and a divine magic initiate feat could help, but it is, underwhelming.
A simple question, but like most polls it's framed in a way that directs people to a predetermined outcome.
Yes will only apply to people that like the concept of the Ardling right now in general, AND are mostly satisfied with the mechanics.
The 'No's are probably going to win out here, because they capture more possible feelings.
No will apply to -
So if you only want a poll that shows if the current Ardling is going to pass this playtest phase, then I guess this works.
But if you want to see if people like certain concepts or mechanics in general, you probably need some more answer options. Here's some suggestions -
But you didn't answer the question.
Do you want to play Ardling as presented in the UA?
People can say why they answered the way they did in the comments, but that is the question I want the answer to. If you want that other info, then please make the poll. That would be interesting as well.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I did answer the question, using the poll. I'm was just pointing out that you aren't going to get much information here. Other than how it might perform in the next UA survey. Some people will love the idea of the Ardling and still vote no if the mechanics or specific flavor doesn't suit them. That's fine if that's what you're going for.
i feel like ardlings would be about as accepted by random peasants as would be an orc, tiefling, kobold, goliath, etc. if your poll included a "they're okay, but not for me" i'd have chosen that. i had to vote 'no' since i'd much rather play one of the four main races: human, elf, plasmoid (blue), or plasmoid (green).
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: provide feedback!
There is another poll seeking information on Ardlings. Maybe you should make a Poll to gather more detailed info.
Like I said, it would be interesting. I just can't make it because I am currently away from my computer and suck at doing things on mobile.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Thanks for the response. You answer is basically want I want to know. Who would play the Ardling. Not if they are ok or not for other people, but for the person voting.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
That's no problem, I can totally relate haha. I do all of this stuff on my phone and it sucks. I was in the middle of cooking lunch at the same time too. I only brought it up because all of the comments so far have been 'Yes, but...,' or 'No, but....' My answer was a 'Yes, but...' because I guess it was closest to an accurate response for me.
Ah, the Tolkien classics.
I'm more of an "Ehhhhhhhhh", but I put no. The previous version, I found myself coming up with character concepts fairly easily. This latest one? Not so much. It just feels anemic to me.
Yes, I want to play an Ardling. Specifically an Ardling (Racer) Scout Rogue. Because that is crazy movement, and I want to see how good that might actually be. Taking the Athlete feat mostly for the climb speed, could climb 200' / turn at level 9. Now that Jump distance is no longer limited by strength, the Rogue's proficiency in Athletics combined with advantage on Athletic checks from the Athlete feat should enable some pretty great jumping, and won't consume movement (other than the movement from using a Dash action instead.) And, notably, jumping distance is not reduced by the Slowed condition.
I like the idea of figuring out a snatcher build that takes an enemy out of combat via grappling, using ridiculously high movement to overcome the Slowed condition from grappling, especially with climbing and jumping in the mix. You gotta love the idea of going all Zangief on someone, taking a grappled creature and long jumping with them into a wall/environmental hazard. Or standing by a wall, grappling someone, then dragging them >50' up the wall.
Which animal type are you thinking for your Racer?
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
There is only one option - the Triceratops.
YES!
I think the Ardlings are trying to sell the fantasy of playing a character inspired by all those theriocephalous gods of classical mythologies. Notably from the classical cultures of the Mediterranean basin (Egyptian, Greco-Latin, Minoan, etc...). But also from Asia Minor, and other Indo-European cultures.
The problem is that it doesn't quite fit well in the default setting of 5e, which is forgotten realms. In other types of settings I think they would be better received. would i play it? It depends. In forgotten realms, and other similar fantasies, I would hardly play something like that. But, for example, in an ancient egyptian inspired setting, and with the right lore, I would play it just fine.
I can't say this with 100% certainty, but I get the feeling WOTC is trying to move away from FR as the "default" setting. From what I can understand, most people prefer to use their own homebrew world, and WOTC seems like they're trying to capitalize on that.
EDIT: That's neither really here nor there I suppose, but for me personally FR so so far from my list of priorities I don't even think about it unless it's explicitly brought up.
I don't really have any interest in them, and honestly doubt I will no matter what they do with them. But I feel that way about a lot of the different species, as I imagine most people do, they have some they like and some they don't.
That said, I want other people who are interested in them to have the option. And I'd like that option to be the best it can, both for the sake of those people who want them, and for people like myself who might one day play at a table with someone else playing one.
I could play many races/species but I can't say Ardling are high up on the list of races I am yet to play as and would like too, I think they need more development before that point since right now... their lore is still very up in the air. However comparing Ardling from the 1st UA to the current UA. I think I actually prefer the 1st UA. I don't mind them having some link to their bestial heritage but at the same point I think they still need a strong link to their celestial heritage and that feels quiet weak in the latest UA, I'm not fond of generic races/species in general and one of the reasons I am not too fond of Aasimar either, the lore is very weak around Aasimar.
Maybe Wizards can put more deep lore behind Ardling, I think it is needed to introduce them.
I think, reading the lore on new Ardling is much better focused and less generic, it is just the mechanics that are missing. My opinion of course.