What does everyone think about Centaur/Minotaur PC races? I've seen a bunch of complaints elsewhere about the Centaur being Medium rather than large, but that doesn't bother me at all. I kinda want to play a Centaur Cleric with either the Tempest or War domains.
I really enjoy both, and as Zealot said, I don't mind that they're Medium. They've set that player races in 5E are all medium, and I'm glad they're not breaking that tbh. Keeps things simpler to have consistent rules like that. I really dig Hybrid Nature, and I hope they do more with it. You could see if they redid Aasimar, Tiefling, Genasi and Goliath that they could have hybrid nature of Celestial, Fiend, Elemental and Giant, which would be interesting to see.
Do ya'll think a centaur would be able to wield a lance single handed, as though mounted? Also if they were allowing a ally to use them as a mount, would they get the benefit from the charge ability?
You could see if they redid Aasimar, Tiefling, Genasi and Goliath that they could have hybrid nature of Celestial, Fiend, Elemental and Giant, which would be interesting to see.
I think that'd be really disruptive for all but goliaths. Tieflings already struggle enough with the fact that they're not, in fact, fiends, and have free will. Letting people detect Tieflings with Detect Evil and Good or Divine Sense has a lot of really unfortunate worldbuilding and roleplaying implications, and letting tieflings and genasi be affected by spells like Magic Circle or Hallow is likewise going to cause a lot of gameplay problems.
I'm not a huge fan of the dual type thing but centaurs can get away with it because almost nothing targets monstrosities specifically, and they definitely fit the bill for a monstrosity. Adding the humanoid type keeps them on par with other playable races.
Do ya'll think a centaur would be able to wield a lance single handed, as though mounted? Also if they were allowing a ally to use them as a mount, would they get the benefit from the charge ability?
RAW, no. If centaurs counted as being mounted, the rules would say so.
I'm intrigued by the centaurs and Hybrid Nature. The new minotaurs, though, are just another big, brutish monster race--exactly what the old minotaurs were explicitly stated as trying to avoid. I am underwhelmed. Still, waste not, want not; I'm using the old minotaurs for Krynnese minotaurs and the new ones for Therosian minotaurs, with the change that Therosian minotaurs are almost always CE.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
What would be the effects of saying something like this:
"Size: Your size is Large, although you use the normal damage dice for weapons, because of your humanoid upper body."
rather than all of this:
"Equine Build. You count as one size larger when determining your carrying capacity and the weight you can push or drag."
"Size. Your size is Medium, yet you tower over most other humanoids."
"Finally, a Medium or smaller creature can ride on your equine back if you allow it. In such a situation, you continue to act independently, not as a controlled mount."
Because right now, it seems kind of silly that the centaur isn't just Large with one different rule.
Plus, doesn't the Centaur's medium size mean that it can ride on Large creatures as mounts? As in, say, a Centaur?
What would be the effects of saying something like this:
"Size: Your size is Large, although you use the normal damage dice for weapons, because of your humanoid upper body."
A large creature can grapple huge monsters, and with a bit of help from Enlarge/Reduce, even gargantuan monsters. Grappling a kraken with a 2nd-level spell is a dealbreaker for me.
Having to squeeze in 5-foot-wide areas is also kind of problematic.
Also, there's no need to say "you use the normal damage dice for weapons" because there's no rule that says a large player uses different damage dice.
Plus, doesn't the Centaur's medium size mean that it can ride on Large creatures as mounts? As in, say, a Centaur?
A mount needs to have appropriate anatomy. A centaur riding a centaur just doesn't work.
Your points are bolded since I can't figure out how to break up quotes (:|).
"A large creature can grapple huge monsters, and with a bit of help from Enlarge/Reduce, even gargantuan monsters. Grappling a kraken with a 2nd-level spell is a dealbreaker for me."
Being able to grapple huge monsters doesn't seem that bad. You're still going to have to beat their strength, which will be easy against a few, hard against some and harder against others.
Minor nitpick: Grappling the Kraken, unless you have some bonus grappling abilities, isn't going to do much, since the Kraken has the Freedom of Movement Trait, allowing it to spend only 5 feet of movement to escape that grapple, without any checks. I realize that's not the point, but it is still important to note that many high-cr monsters will have ways of overcoming your wrestling maneuvers (such as damaging that spell-caster that's using their concentration on a 2nd-level spell).
Also, if you grapple a huge or gargantuan monster, you are almost certainly going to die unless you are of a higher level. That's even if you beat their Athletics or Acrobatics check.And once you are at levels where you can grapple a cyclops or storm giant into submission, I say "good for you!" You're likely at a level where the spell-casters are teleporting and throwing meteors, so why shouldn't you get to have some fun?
"Having to squeeze in 5-foot-wide areas is also kind of problematic."
Problematic indoors, sure, but it's the price you pay for playing a Centaur. And (outside of AL, if this were released) if your DM thinks that they want a ton of combat in 5-foot-wide corridors, they'll (hopefully) give you a heads-up. To me, it's more problematic to pretend that my "towering over other creatures" Centaur can magically walk through 5-foot-wide areas without any problems.
"Also, there's no need to say "you use the normal damage dice for weapons" because there's no rule that says a large player uses different damage dice."
I do realize that this is probably unnecessary. I mostly added that bit because certain large creatures do use, not different, but extra damage dice for their weapon attacks. For example, the Ogre rolls 2d8 for the damage of their greatclub, rather than 1d8.
" A mount needs to have appropriate anatomy. A centaur riding a centaur just doesn't work."
Except that the centaur and horse do have appropriate anatomy to serve as a mount (they would have this bone). I guess it's kind of subjective whether the text:
"A willing creature that is at least one size larger than you and that has an appropriate anatomy can serve as a mount"
means that a creature with a generally appropriate anatomy can serve as a mount or that the creature must have the appropriate anatomy to serve as a mount for the specific creature attempting to ride it, though. So you may be right on that, but I feel that it could go either way, and I could see some players firmly arguing that their centaur character can ride a horse because "I'm medium-sized!"
Plus, the monster manual/ NPC version of the Centaur is large. So what is the player playing, a pony centaur?
Being able to grapple huge monsters doesn't seem that bad. You're still going to have to beat their strength, which will be easy against a few, hard against some and harder against others.
Monsters are very rarely proficient in skills, however, and players can easily stack bonuses to skill checks like Bardic Inspiration and Expertise (or the Prodigy racial feat). Enlarge/Reduce already gives you advantage on the check.
Minor nitpick: Grappling the Kraken, unless you have some bonus grappling abilities, isn't going to do much, since the Kraken has the Freedom of Movement Trait, allowing it to spend only 5 feet of movement to escape that grapple, without any checks. I realize that's not the point, but it is still important to note that many high-cr monsters will have ways of overcoming your wrestling maneuvers (such as damaging that spell-caster that's using their concentration on a 2nd-level spell).
Actually, other than the Kraken's ability or spellcasting (which is a good solution to most problems), they rarely do. The usual safeguard is Legendary Resistance, but grappling is an opposed ability check. This is a decision Jeremy regrets, based on his comments on today's Dragon+ episode; he says saving throws work much better for combat, and he's "phased out" using ability checks for combat features, which is why the Minotaur uses a save for its Hammering Horns trait.
Speaking of Dragon+, Jeremy addressed the size question at around 56:00 in the video. Among the issues with large players is the fact it allows them to cover a much wider area for opportunity attacks by virtue of their 10x10 space (especially when combined with reach weapons), and any features like a Paladin's Aura of Protection or Antimagic Field will also cover a wider area. Obviously you can then make the problem worse by growing to huge with Enlarge/reduce. He says there's many other problems, but sadly doesn't mention any of them other than being able to block 10-foot-wide hallways. He does say that the game wasn't designed for large playable races.
Also, if you grapple a huge or gargantuan monster, you are almost certainly going to die unless you are of a higher level.
If you're at a high enough level to fight such a monster, grappling it isn't going to significantly reduce your chance of survival. On the contrary, if you knock it prone or prevent it from flying, all the better for you.
"Also, there's no need to say "you use the normal damage dice for weapons" because there's no rule that says a large player uses different damage dice."
I do realize that this is probably unnecessary. I mostly added that bit because certain large creatures do use, not different, but extra damage dice for their weapon attacks. For example, the Ogre rolls 2d8 for the damage of their greatclub, rather than 1d8.
I knew where you were coming from, but that's strictly a monster thing. Monster stat blocks can cheat.
Except that the centaur and horse do have appropriate anatomy to serve as a mount (they would have this bone). I guess it's kind of subjective whether the text:
"A willing creature that is at least one size larger than you and that has an appropriate anatomy can serve as a mount"
means that a creature with a generally appropriate anatomy can serve as a mount or that the creature must have the appropriate anatomy to serve as a mount for the specific creature attempting to ride it, though. So you may be right on that, but I feel that it could go either way, and I could see some players firmly arguing that their centaur character can ride a horse because "I'm medium-sized!"
Technically speaking, humans can already carry humans, and elves can carry elves, etc - although you'd have to be very strong to carry more than two/carry one for far. I'd be more concerned about centaurs riding other mounts, which they'd have to if they wanted to keep up with a riding horse or warhorse.
I was surprised that the new version of the minotaur does not have the 'powerful build' trait, such as goliaths and orcs have.
Still, it's always great to see new races in the pipeline. I wonder if they'll convert any more of the other monstrous-humanoids into player races?
I have a player who plays a minotaur in my current campaign. He was designed using the 2015 UA document so I deal with them quite a bit. This feels like a considerable overall downgrade. I'm disappointed that it looks like they pretty much dumped the nautical heritage in favor of what seems like a goliath reskin. Also, they dropped the horns from 1d10 damage to 1d6 damage in what is probably the biggest difference I see.
Yes, I know UA stuff is optional and I already made a homebrew minotaur race in D&D Beyond that we are using. Still, kind of a bummer.
All of the interesting bits of the Minotaur were removed, it's nothing but another goliath/half-orc now, the nautical parts that made them interesting are gone.
I'm laughing at the fact that the centaur and minotaur players in my group waited ages for something like this before our campaign and now they get it. Very intrigued by the dual creature type of humanoid/monstrosity. I assume this means they would be affected by something such as a Sword of Monstrosity Slaying, what other effects in the game specifically target creature type?
Are the new UA Minotaur and centaur races coming to DnD Beyond?
https://media.wizards.com/2018/dnd/downloads/UA-Centaur.pdf
It takes about a week for new UA to be implemented.
Sweet. Thanks for the info
What does everyone think about Centaur/Minotaur PC races? I've seen a bunch of complaints elsewhere about the Centaur being Medium rather than large, but that doesn't bother me at all. I kinda want to play a Centaur Cleric with either the Tempest or War domains.
I really enjoy both, and as Zealot said, I don't mind that they're Medium. They've set that player races in 5E are all medium, and I'm glad they're not breaking that tbh. Keeps things simpler to have consistent rules like that. I really dig Hybrid Nature, and I hope they do more with it. You could see if they redid Aasimar, Tiefling, Genasi and Goliath that they could have hybrid nature of Celestial, Fiend, Elemental and Giant, which would be interesting to see.
Do ya'll think a centaur would be able to wield a lance single handed, as though mounted? Also if they were allowing a ally to use them as a mount, would they get the benefit from the charge ability?
I'm intrigued by the centaurs and Hybrid Nature. The new minotaurs, though, are just another big, brutish monster race--exactly what the old minotaurs were explicitly stated as trying to avoid. I am underwhelmed. Still, waste not, want not; I'm using the old minotaurs for Krynnese minotaurs and the new ones for Therosian minotaurs, with the change that Therosian minotaurs are almost always CE.
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
Tooltips (Help/aid)
What would be the effects of saying something like this:
"Size: Your size is Large, although you use the normal damage dice for weapons, because of your humanoid upper body."
rather than all of this:
"Equine Build. You count as one size larger when determining your carrying capacity and the weight you can push or drag."
"Size. Your size is Medium, yet you tower over most other humanoids."
"Finally, a Medium or smaller creature can ride on your equine back if you allow it. In such a situation, you continue to act independently, not as a controlled mount."
Because right now, it seems kind of silly that the centaur isn't just Large with one different rule.
Plus, doesn't the Centaur's medium size mean that it can ride on Large creatures as mounts? As in, say, a Centaur?
And that's all I have to say about that.
A large creature can grapple huge monsters, and with a bit of help from Enlarge/Reduce, even gargantuan monsters. Grappling a kraken with a 2nd-level spell is a dealbreaker for me.
Having to squeeze in 5-foot-wide areas is also kind of problematic.
Also, there's no need to say "you use the normal damage dice for weapons" because there's no rule that says a large player uses different damage dice.
Your points are bolded since I can't figure out how to break up quotes (:|).
"A large creature can grapple huge monsters, and with a bit of help from Enlarge/Reduce, even gargantuan monsters. Grappling a kraken with a 2nd-level spell is a dealbreaker for me."
Being able to grapple huge monsters doesn't seem that bad. You're still going to have to beat their strength, which will be easy against a few, hard against some and harder against others.
And that's all I have to say about that.
Monsters are very rarely proficient in skills, however, and players can easily stack bonuses to skill checks like Bardic Inspiration and Expertise (or the Prodigy racial feat). Enlarge/Reduce already gives you advantage on the check.
Am I correct in understanding that Centaurs, can mount Centaurs, which can then be mounted by another centaur....
I want recursive Centaurs.
Technically speaking, humans can already carry humans, and elves can carry elves, etc - although you'd have to be very strong to carry more than two/carry one for far. I'd be more concerned about centaurs riding other mounts, which they'd have to if they wanted to keep up with a riding horse or warhorse.
I was surprised that the new version of the minotaur does not have the 'powerful build' trait, such as goliaths and orcs have.
Still, it's always great to see new races in the pipeline. I wonder if they'll convert any more of the other monstrous-humanoids into player races?
Site Rules & Guidelines - Please feel free to message a moderator if you have any concerns.
My homebrew: [Subclasses] [Races] [Feats] [Discussion Thread]
I have a player who plays a minotaur in my current campaign. He was designed using the 2015 UA document so I deal with them quite a bit. This feels like a considerable overall downgrade. I'm disappointed that it looks like they pretty much dumped the nautical heritage in favor of what seems like a goliath reskin. Also, they dropped the horns from 1d10 damage to 1d6 damage in what is probably the biggest difference I see.
Yes, I know UA stuff is optional and I already made a homebrew minotaur race in D&D Beyond that we are using. Still, kind of a bummer.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
And that's all I have to say about that.
RIP Centaur and Minotaur homebrew races. You served us well.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
All of the interesting bits of the Minotaur were removed, it's nothing but another goliath/half-orc now, the nautical parts that made them interesting are gone.
I'm laughing at the fact that the centaur and minotaur players in my group waited ages for something like this before our campaign and now they get it. Very intrigued by the dual creature type of humanoid/monstrosity. I assume this means they would be affected by something such as a Sword of Monstrosity Slaying, what other effects in the game specifically target creature type?
"Roll for kink."
My homebrews - Naturalcrit