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?
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?
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?
Nothing in Dominate Monster says anything about the target creature needing to be a Monstrosity -- the wording it uses is "creature". If anything, it's so non-specific that you could theoretically use it in place of Dominate Person and Dominate Beast, since both beasts and humanoids are creature types, meaning they would fall under the umbrella of "creature" in Dominate Monster. Also, a monster isn't necessarily the same as a Monstrosity; monster is just a catch all for any baddies you might face. A hostile dragon or even a lich could be considered a monster, but it is not a member of the Monstrosity creature type. This is why Hold Monster specifies that it doesn't affect the Undead.
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?
Nothing in Dominate Monster says anything about the target creature needing to be a Monstrosity -- the wording it uses is "creature". If anything, it's so non-specific that you could theoretically use it in place of Dominate Person and Dominate Beast, since both beasts and humanoids are creature types, meaning they would fall under the umbrella of "creature" in Dominate Monster. Also, a monster isn't necessarily the same as a Monstrosity; monster is just a catch all for any baddies you might face. A hostile dragon or even a lich could be considered a monster, but it is not a member of the Monstrosity creature type. This is why Hold Monster specifies that it doesn't affect the Undead.
I think what they meant is that Hold Monster and Dominate Monster both effect monstrosities, whereas Hold Person and Dominate Person do not
Hrm...you know, I'm a bit disappointed we don't have a Dex-based centaur for archery specializations. Centaur archers are classic! Str/Wis, the hooves, the equine build, charge... I feel very much pushed towards a melee fighter or barbarian this way. Maybe a paladin on occasion. I like the feel of the centaurs, but I could use a bit of variety from the super strong brute types. Otherwise, I'm a fan of the centaur. Would definitely play one!
As for the Minotaur.... strength and con again. boo. I liked being able to pick the second stat back in the original minotaur. I like variety. That said, we have an extra stat, for three total, instead of the old one's two. Horns are a bit weaker, and Hammering Horns is... different, but that's okay. I guess I mostly feel odd that Hammering Horns is now a Reaction instead of bonus action; I don't really like using a Reaction as part of your turn. You're not reacting to anything, you're just plain acting. You also lose the nautical and labyrinth stuff for Intimidation. I also wish that they'd written the Goring Charge to not overlap so much with the Charger feat. Technically, you can't use them together, which is a shame.
Overall, when comparing the two, I have to say that Minotaurs are very lackluster. Just like the Centaur, everything is heavily defined by their inhuman features, but in the case of the minotaur, its just being horny. Stab with the horns, even when it doesn't make sense!
I think what they meant is that Hold Monster and Dominate Monster both effect monstrosities, whereas Hold Person and Dominate Person do not
As both humanoids and monstrosities, I think Hold Person works on these PC races anyways.
Honestly, the only thing I can think of in the game that really matters here are the occasional magic item (Arrow of Slaying) and the Ranger Favored Enemy skill. And I can't see either of them making an appearance to the detriment of the PCs.
Now that I have gotten over my initial rage at the changes to the minotaur race, I'd like to consider some opportunities opened up by the changes made to them.
Hammering horns was changed from a bonus action to a reaction. Furthermore, they removed the restriction that said hammering horns could not be used to knock a foe prone. This sets up an opportunity for a minotaur to move up to 30', take a dash action for up to another 30', then as a bonus action, use Goring Rush (which now specifies the minotaur has to cover at least 30' in movement) to hit with the horns. And if the horns hit, the minotaur can now immediately use the reaction to shove the opponent, knocking it prone. This has some potential.
I still feel that as a whole, this is a significant downgrade to minotaurs and I expect my minotaur player will want to continue using the 2015 rules.
Now that I have gotten over my initial rage at the changes to the minotaur race, I'd like to consider some opportunities opened up by the changes made to them.
Hammering horns was changed from a bonus action to a reaction. Furthermore, they removed the restriction that said hammering horns could not be used to knock a foe prone. This sets up an opportunity for a minotaur to move up to 30', take a dash action for up to another 30', then as a bonus action, use Goring Rush (which now specifies the minotaur has to cover at least 30' in movement) to hit with the horns. And if the horns hit, the minotaur can now immediately use the reaction to shove the opponent, knocking it prone. This has some potential.
I don't think it works that way. Goring Rush requires you to use the Dash Action, then attack with your horns as a bonus action. Hammering Horns requires you to use the Attack Action. Even multiclassing to Rogue or Monk won't work, since the Dash Action would become the bonus action and making it impossible to use the Goring Rush feature. Now, Hammering Horns does let you make a horn attack while two weapon fighting, or using Polearm / Crossbow Mastery or otherwise using your bonus action in some other way, so you'd be able to make a Battlerager or Berserker without issue.
Furthermore, they removed the restriction that said hammering horns could not be used to knock a foe prone. This sets up an opportunity for a minotaur to move up to 30', take a dash action for up to another 30', then as a bonus action, use Goring Rush (which now specifies the minotaur has to cover at least 30' in movement) to hit with the horns. And if the horns hit, the minotaur can now immediately use the reaction to shove the opponent, knocking it prone. This has some potential.
They didn't remove the restriction on knocking foes prone, they just worded it better so you don't have to go look up the shoving rules but ignore half of it. The new version specifies the target is pushed back 5 feet if they fail the save.
Mephista is also right about Goring Rush and Hammering Horns not working together. The bonus attack from Goring Rush is not the Attack action, so you don't meet the condition for Hammering Horns. Goring Rush is nice for Barbarians to keep their Rage going though.
I honestly don't even think it needs the fix, tbh. It's pretty easy to just say that the playable version is just a subrace of the MM Centaur.
As for the Minotaur, I think it could do with having a couple subraces, one to be the standard +2 Strength/+1 Constitution brute, and another to be a more civilized, Dragonlance style minotaur.
The centaur size issue comes down to it coming off as being weirdly inconsistent with the presentation of centaurs as monsters as well as the implicit "you're now smaller than a regular horse" bits. From a mechanical perspective, strange things happen when you make Large PCs, so that's not something we can really do, but it does create a bit of dissonance for some people.
I think the dissonance comes entirely from a meta-game level, and won't really happen with a PC.
I think the size issue is simply mechanical more than anything else. If 5e had large player races, I imagine they would have made goliaths and firbolgs large, as well as these centaur.
Medium creatures can only normally ride large creatures, yet they can ride centaurs due to the centaur's Equine Build trait. They can also carry and push anything as if they had the large size thanks to the same trait. Effectively, the designers want them to be large without actually making them large.
In other news, both the centaur and minotaur races are now available to try on D&D Beyond!
Mmhm. The devs did say that funky math things happen when you make Large PCs, so that's why they're not doing it with the centaurs. Its just that this is the first time its really obvious - goliath and firbolgs aren't in the Monster Manual, so its not like we ever had anything to compare before. Now that we do?
I think the Minotaur is fine. I do think they should have a sub-race that allows for the Krynn Minotaur.
The one problem I have with the Centaur is the Charge ability. Once you use it you have to take at least a short rest to use it again? That makes no sense. If it was a magical power it would be fine, but it isn't. It's just a physical action. Does the Centaur get to tired? Does it forget how to do it?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Site Rules & Guidelines - Please feel free to message a moderator if you have any concerns.
My homebrew: [Subclasses] [Races] [Feats] [Discussion Thread]
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Nothing in Dominate Monster says anything about the target creature needing to be a Monstrosity -- the wording it uses is "creature". If anything, it's so non-specific that you could theoretically use it in place of Dominate Person and Dominate Beast, since both beasts and humanoids are creature types, meaning they would fall under the umbrella of "creature" in Dominate Monster. Also, a monster isn't necessarily the same as a Monstrosity; monster is just a catch all for any baddies you might face. A hostile dragon or even a lich could be considered a monster, but it is not a member of the Monstrosity creature type. This is why Hold Monster specifies that it doesn't affect the Undead.
"Roll for kink."
My homebrews - Naturalcrit
Hrm...you know, I'm a bit disappointed we don't have a Dex-based centaur for archery specializations. Centaur archers are classic! Str/Wis, the hooves, the equine build, charge... I feel very much pushed towards a melee fighter or barbarian this way. Maybe a paladin on occasion. I like the feel of the centaurs, but I could use a bit of variety from the super strong brute types. Otherwise, I'm a fan of the centaur. Would definitely play one!
As for the Minotaur.... strength and con again. boo. I liked being able to pick the second stat back in the original minotaur. I like variety. That said, we have an extra stat, for three total, instead of the old one's two. Horns are a bit weaker, and Hammering Horns is... different, but that's okay. I guess I mostly feel odd that Hammering Horns is now a Reaction instead of bonus action; I don't really like using a Reaction as part of your turn. You're not reacting to anything, you're just plain acting. You also lose the nautical and labyrinth stuff for Intimidation. I also wish that they'd written the Goring Charge to not overlap so much with the Charger feat. Technically, you can't use them together, which is a shame.
Overall, when comparing the two, I have to say that Minotaurs are very lackluster. Just like the Centaur, everything is heavily defined by their inhuman features, but in the case of the minotaur, its just being horny. Stab with the horns, even when it doesn't make sense!
I was also wondering about the hold person spell on this races
That's true, the Hold/Dominate Monster spells will work on any PCs.
The Hold Person spell will also work on them - they can be affected by spells that work on either humanoids or monstrosities, or both.
Overall it's a tiny downside, although still a downside.
Site Rules & Guidelines - Please feel free to message a moderator if you have any concerns.
My homebrew: [Subclasses] [Races] [Feats] [Discussion Thread]
Now that I have gotten over my initial rage at the changes to the minotaur race, I'd like to consider some opportunities opened up by the changes made to them.
Hammering horns was changed from a bonus action to a reaction. Furthermore, they removed the restriction that said hammering horns could not be used to knock a foe prone. This sets up an opportunity for a minotaur to move up to 30', take a dash action for up to another 30', then as a bonus action, use Goring Rush (which now specifies the minotaur has to cover at least 30' in movement) to hit with the horns. And if the horns hit, the minotaur can now immediately use the reaction to shove the opponent, knocking it prone. This has some potential.
I still feel that as a whole, this is a significant downgrade to minotaurs and I expect my minotaur player will want to continue using the 2015 rules.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Great point! I take back everything positive I said about the changes and I maintain everything negative I said about them.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I love how my simple question now is just a topic of how shit the races are now lol. I am glad to see all this information
I have a fix for the Centaur's size issue:
CentaurBariaurI honestly don't even think it needs the fix, tbh. It's pretty easy to just say that the playable version is just a subrace of the MM Centaur.
As for the Minotaur, I think it could do with having a couple subraces, one to be the standard +2 Strength/+1 Constitution brute, and another to be a more civilized, Dragonlance style minotaur.
The centaur size issue comes down to it coming off as being weirdly inconsistent with the presentation of centaurs as monsters as well as the implicit "you're now smaller than a regular horse" bits. From a mechanical perspective, strange things happen when you make Large PCs, so that's not something we can really do, but it does create a bit of dissonance for some people.
I think the dissonance comes entirely from a meta-game level, and won't really happen with a PC.
I think the size issue is simply mechanical more than anything else. If 5e had large player races, I imagine they would have made goliaths and firbolgs large, as well as these centaur.
Medium creatures can only normally ride large creatures, yet they can ride centaurs due to the centaur's Equine Build trait. They can also carry and push anything as if they had the large size thanks to the same trait. Effectively, the designers want them to be large without actually making them large.
In other news, both the centaur and minotaur races are now available to try on D&D Beyond!
Site Rules & Guidelines - Please feel free to message a moderator if you have any concerns.
My homebrew: [Subclasses] [Races] [Feats] [Discussion Thread]
Mmhm. The devs did say that funky math things happen when you make Large PCs, so that's why they're not doing it with the centaurs. Its just that this is the first time its really obvious - goliath and firbolgs aren't in the Monster Manual, so its not like we ever had anything to compare before. Now that we do?
Another reason I think they went with medium, and are shying away from Large races in general, is how much space they take up.
I doubt it would be much fun to be stuck sitting in the lobby of the evil temple by yourself because you can't fit in the hallways.
I think the Minotaur is fine. I do think they should have a sub-race that allows for the Krynn Minotaur.
The one problem I have with the Centaur is the Charge ability. Once you use it you have to take at least a short rest to use it again? That makes no sense. If it was a magical power it would be fine, but it isn't. It's just a physical action. Does the Centaur get to tired? Does it forget how to do it?