Meanwhile, this is exactly why I don't want a generic beastfolk species. I don't want Wizards to stop printing stuff for Lizardfolk, Tortles, Yuan-Ti, Kenku, etc. just because there's a generic option available. A generic option would need to be incredibly robust to accommodate every animal with the same level of detail and unique flavor each animal species demands. At that point, they may as well just ditch species entirely in favor of a fully customizable "build your species" system.
As-is the difference between playing a Lizardfolk, a Yuan-Ti, an Aarakocra, and a Tabaxi is enormous compared to, say, playing one of the billion flavors of elf. I just don't see a generic beastfolk option offering the same huge variety in playstyle.
I agree that the generic beastfolk wouldn't necessarily convey 100% of the nuance of every species, but at least it would provide a framework to play your own kind of fursona. Just make it a combination of options like natural armaments (claws, teeth, horns, scales), senses (darkvision, keen sight, keen smell), movement (climbing, running, prowling, flying, amphibian), and instinct (pack tactics, cunning, ferocious, protective), and a budget to get a collection from these options, with things like flying having a high cost.
The reason why I advocate for a generic beastfolk is because that way most options will at least be accessible. It's been ten years of fifth edition and there's still no wolfmen in the official sourcebooks, or fox people. As for the cultural aspect, well, if humans can have wildly different cultures in different nations, then so can beastkin.
Specific elements can also be left to Species based Feats, like they did with Dragonborn and such.
I’m pretty sure Aasimar will be in the 2024 PHB. It’s been a while, but I remember them saying that. As for beast folk I feel like the PHB never gives that option. Since the game is backwards compatible you will have the beast folk from MoM, Aarocokra, Haregon, Kenku, Lizardfolk, Minotaur, Tabaxi, and Tortle available until they make a new Volo’s.
Which means "no actual generic Beastfolk". Still nothing for dog-folk*, rat-folk, bear-folk, deer-folk (all of which are common things various fiction).
(* I mean, the Kobolds are supposed to be that, but someone messed up and made them little dragon wannabes) (yes, this is an old-school joke that I will never stop making)
The problem with ardlings is that the people who want beastfolk mostly don't care about an upper plane lineage, and the people who want an upper plane lineage mostly don't care about beastfolk. Honestly, I'd be tempted by just adding a Planetouched modifier that can be applied to any other species.
Without Templates, and using the new mixed-species rules in the first OneD&D playtest, this is actually easy for me:
1- if you're more of a planetouched, with the planetouched features, you use the Aasimar species. Your beastial aspects will be cosmetic. 2- if you're more of a beastfolk, without planetouched features, you use a "Mundane Ardling" based species. Your celestial aspects will be cosmetic.
Mundane Ardling: change the cantrip part to Darkvision. Maybe give a choice for the skill (Perception, Nature, Survival).
also: have species based Feats that help enhance mixed-species characters, and/or specialized sub-species. This would replace the 3e Template system, IMO.
I’m pretty sure Aasimar will be in the 2024 PHB. It’s been a while, but I remember them saying that. As for beast folk I feel like the PHB never gives that option. Since the game is backwards compatible you will have the beast folk from MoM, Aarocokra, Haregon, Kenku, Lizardfolk, Minotaur, Tabaxi, and Tortle available until they make a new Volo’s.
Which means "no actual generic Beastfolk". Still nothing for dog-folk*, rat-folk, bear-folk, deer-folk (all of which are common things various fiction).
(* I mean, the Kobolds are supposed to be that, but someone messed up and made them little dragon wannabes) (yes, this is an old-school joke that I will never stop making)
Somebody at WotC hates Dog people. They didn’t even give us gnolls in Volo’s or MoM. I don’t think there has been a proper dog race since the Lupin. I don’t like generic beast folk because that would come with no in world lore for people who play in forgotten realms. If it’s just going to be generic you can just homebrew it.
They won't - we already know which 9 races are going to be in the 2024 PHB from the content creator summit.
Human
Dwarf
Halfling
Goliath
Dragonborn
Elf
Gnome
Orc
Tiefling
Presumably with some sort of "half-species" or "hybrid" rule so we can continue making half-elves, half-orcs, and other combinations.
I assume they'll just use the rule from the first UA:
CHILDREN OF DIFFERENT HUMANOID KINDS
Thanks to the magical workings of the multiverse, Humanoids of different kinds sometimes have children together. For example, folk who have a human parent and an orc or an elf parent are particularly common. Many other combinations are possible.
If you’d like to play the child of such a wondrous pairing, choose two Race options that are Humanoid to represent your parents. Then determine which of those Race options provides your game traits: Size, Speed, and special traits.
You can then mix and match visual characteristics—color, ear shape, and the like—of the two options. For example, if your character has a halfling and a gnome parent, you might choose Halfling for your game traits and then decide that your character has the pointed ears that are characteristic of a gnome.
Finally, determine the average of the two options’ Life Span traits to figure out how long your character might live. For example, a child of a halfling and a gnome has an average life span of 288 years.
It's ultimately cosmetic, but simple, avoids any weird trait interactions, and open ended.
It's ultimately cosmetic, but simple, avoids any weird trait interactions, and open ended.
That's my guess as well. Though I wouldn't mind being able to spend your 1st-level feat to grab a trait from your other parent too (perhaps with reduced uses.)
Note also that I'm not ruling out Aasimar being in the 2024 DMG (much like they're in the 2014 DMG). It's possible. But the DMG Aasimar.... sucks.
I’m pretty sure Aasimar will be in the 2024 PHB. It’s been a while, but I remember them saying that. As for beast folk I feel like the PHB never gives that option. Since the game is backwards compatible you will have the beast folk from MoM, Aarocokra, Haregon, Kenku, Lizardfolk, Minotaur, Tabaxi, and Tortle available until they make a new Volo’s.
Which means "no actual generic Beastfolk". Still nothing for dog-folk*, rat-folk, bear-folk, deer-folk (all of which are common things various fiction).
(* I mean, the Kobolds are supposed to be that, but someone messed up and made them little dragon wannabes) (yes, this is an old-school joke that I will never stop making)
Somebody at WotC hates Dog people. They didn’t even give us gnolls in Volo’s or MoM. I don’t think there has been a proper dog race since the Lupin. I don’t like generic beast folk because that would come with no in world lore for people who play in forgotten realms. If it’s just going to be generic you can just homebrew it.
Small nitpick: gnolls, being hyena based, are feliform, not caniform. (more closely related to cats than dogs)
It's ultimately cosmetic, but simple, avoids any weird trait interactions, and open ended.
That's my guess as well. Though I wouldn't mind being able to spend your 1st-level feat to grab a trait from your other parent too (perhaps with reduced uses.)
Note also that I'm not ruling out Aasimar being in the 2024 DMG (much like they're in the 2014 DMG). It's possible. But the DMG Aasimar.... sucks.
Honestly, I'd be surprised if they do that; they've already got MotM with good and compatible stats for most races, why put some lackluster options in the DMG when you can just point to another product that already did it better?
The ardling sunk because it was trying to be two entirely different, largely contradictory things. Players who wanted Majestic Golden Angel People to offset the Saucy Crimson* Devil People wanted absolutely nothing to do with the fursona stuff, and people who wanted a Beastman option to fill their wildlands and provide an outlet for their fursonas didn't really want anything to do with the Celestial tie-in. Yes yes, Guardinals, but ask ninety-five out of a hundred 5e players what a Guardinal is and you'll get a blank, confused stare.
A "Primal Ardling" doesn't really scan, though it'd mostly cover the fursona people outside of the folks who believe each variety of fuzzy critter deserves its own stat block. As a player with, like...three different varieties of kitsune in my homebrew creations list (one of these days I'll get the ****ers right), I can grok that desire. Which, sadly, doesn't leave much room for a generic Beastman under the heading of the ardling.
Mind, I fully expect to see ardlings come back in a future book. J-Craw even said they weren't deep-sixing the species, just admitting that it wasn't right for the PHB. So we'll see them again later, likely improved from the playtest cycle.
Honestly, I'd be surprised if they do that; they've already got MotM with good and compatible stats for most races, why put some lackluster options in the DMG when you can just point to another product that already did it better?
I could see them axing the "here's a bit on how to design a custom race" section entirely, sure. Both of the examples they came up with there aged like milk and got replaced in MotM by far superior models.
The ardling sunk because it was trying to be two entirely different, largely contradictory things. Players who wanted Majestic Golden Angel People to offset the Saucy Crimson* Devil People wanted absolutely nothing to do with the fursona stuff, and people who wanted a Beastman option to fill their wildlands and provide an outlet for their fursonas didn't really want anything to do with the Celestial tie-in. Yes yes, Guardinals, but ask ninety-five out of a hundred 5e players what a Guardinal is and you'll get a blank, confused stare.
A "Primal Ardling" doesn't really scan, though it'd mostly cover the fursona people outside of the folks who believe each variety of fuzzy critter deserves its own stat block. As a player with, like...three different varieties of kitsune in my homebrew creations list (one of these days I'll get the ****ers right), I can grok that desire. Which, sadly, doesn't leave much room for a generic Beastman under the heading of the ardling.
Mind, I fully expect to see ardlings come back in a future book. J-Craw even said they weren't deep-sixing the species, just admitting that it wasn't right for the PHB. So we'll see them again later, likely improved from the playtest cycle.
Or, well. "Improved"*.
I think those two elements are necessary though. "They're from Elysium, with a few specimens from Celestia and Arborea" is the ideal explanation for why a single species can be pigs, crocs, rats, eagles, lions, tigers, and bears (oh my!)
And sure, we could just make them come from the Feywild.... like the other two dozen races from there... but then we're left with only the Aasimar to be opposite Tieflings. The Aasimar took three iterations in a single edition to get the balance right and they still might not be where they need to be, so good luck getting them into the PHB.
Plus the Aasimar have the whole patron deva thing, which is popular enough that they're unlikely to drop it, but messy enough that you get both players and DMs that don't want to deal with it. Aardling is a good fix, as well as being a bit more thematically on point as the Upper Planes counterparts to tieflings since unlike the very human-looking Aasimar, Ardlings very much stand out.
Somebody at WotC hates Dog people. They didn’t even give us gnolls in Volo’s or MoM. I don’t think there has been a proper dog race since the Lupin. I don’t like generic beast folk because that would come with no in world lore for people who play in forgotten realms. If it’s just going to be generic you can just homebrew it.
Not only did they not give us playable gnolls, but they heavily retconned gnoll lore to turn them into unplayable demon-spawn that can't even be homebrewed into being playable without just rewriting their lore entirely.
Plus the Aasimar have the whole patron deva thing, which is popular enough that they're unlikely to drop it, but messy enough that you get both players and DMs that don't want to deal with it. Aardling is a good fix, as well as being a bit more thematically on point as the Upper Planes counterparts to tieflings since unlike the very human-looking Aasimar, Ardlings very much stand out.
That aspect of the Aasimar was removed in Monsters of the Multiverse. It doesn't mention a "guardian angel" anymore.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Plus the Aasimar have the whole patron deva thing, which is popular enough that they're unlikely to drop it, but messy enough that you get both players and DMs that don't want to deal with it. Aardling is a good fix, as well as being a bit more thematically on point as the Upper Planes counterparts to tieflings since unlike the very human-looking Aasimar, Ardlings very much stand out.
That aspect of the Aasimar was removed in Monsters of the Multiverse. It doesn't mention a "guardian angel" anymore.
And once again I'm reminded why I only use that book for race features.
The problem with ardlings is that the people who want beastfolk mostly don't care about an upper plane lineage, and the people who want an upper plane lineage mostly don't care about beastfolk. Honestly, I'd be tempted by just adding a Planetouched modifier that can be applied to any other species.
Vary valid point. They got rid of half-races (good decision IMO) only to offer us another half-race.
They're no more a half-race than Tieflings are. Plus, I was frankly disappointed at the loss of of half-elves; had a good vibe to them with the features. Half-orc has become pretty superfluous now that they've fully normalized orcs as player races, though.
Me too. I understand the loss, but half-elves have been my favorite race to play since the mid 80s. I'd also prefer the half-orc to the orc. I get what they are trying to do, but it 's not my favorite choice ever, though I will not be burning PHBs over it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Mind, I fully expect to see ardlings come back in a future book. J-Craw even said they weren't deep-sixing the species, just admitting that it wasn't right for the PHB. So we'll see them again later, likely improved from the playtest cycle.
I think this is the right decision, core D&D is very White-Christian-inspired. I'd prefer to see them branch out into different cultural influences as a whole book with multiple species, subclasses, and setting lore than have the random oddball thing like the UA ardling (and TBH the current Monk).
The ardling sunk because it was trying to be two entirely different, largely contradictory things.
I agree. I think some saw it as "finally, we have the generic beasty folk", and others saw it as "finally we'll have an (aasimar-light) in the PHB." And the Ardling is sort of a confusion of those things.
A "Primal Ardling" doesn't really scan,
IMO, if you lean to the "beasty-folk" angle, then it's like Wood Elves getting a Druid Cantrip*: Primal is the right fit for "magical beasty folk". But it's entirely at odds with "celestials who look like beasts." And my suggesting it wasn't as "either or". I don't want to get rid of Celestial Ardlings, I want there to be 3 types of Ardling: celestial, primal, mundane.
(* which is, admittedly, via a Feat, but for Ardlings, a cantrip is built in to the species)
Mind, I fully expect to see ardlings come back in a future book. J-Craw even said they weren't deep-sixing the species, just admitting that it wasn't right for the PHB. So we'll see them again later, likely improved from the playtest cycle.
Honestly, I think if it's not in the PHB, it's going to be too much of a confusion with the Aasimar. Do we have two different forms of Tiefling (in the broad sense of that species)?
I think if they're going to put it into an expansion, it should be the Mundane version, and then use the newer half-race rules for whether you're more of a celestial vs a beastfolk. And then use Species Feats to round out any extraordinary abilities (but it does bring up: do mixed-species characters get to pick which species is their Feat qualification? or do they have to pick the one whose stat-block they used? probably the latter, but I wonder about the other option. But for this exact case, it's sort of immaterial: that cantrip can be just as easily had via Magic Initiate as it can via a Species Feat).
and focusing on Mundane Ardlings would also allow fiendish ardlings to be a possibility (via the same half-species rules, and the idea of Species Feats, that allow for Mundane Ardlings to be flexible for celestial and primal versions).
Creature Type: Humanoid Size: Medium (4-7 feet tall) or Small (3-4 feet tall), chosen when you select this species. Speed: 30 feet Life Span: 100 years
Animal Ancestry
Climber
You have a Climb speed equal to your Speed.
Once per turn when you deal damage to a target with your Unarmed Strikes, you can increase your damage to that target by an amount equal to your Proficiency Bonus.
Defender
You have an extra thick hide or protective scales.
When you aren’t wearing armor, your base AC is: 13 + Dex bonus.
When you are wearing armor, you have a +1 AC bonus.
Flyer
You have wings or winglets that are of minimal utility.They can be feathered wings like a bird, leathery skin wings like e bat, or even loose skin areas under your arms.
When you take the Jump action, you have advantage on that action’s Ability check.
When you fall from at least 10 feet height, you may use your reaction to glide downward, taking no damage from the fall.
Racer
You are built for sprinting.
You may take the Dash action as a Bonus Action.
Your Speed increases by 5 feet (35 feet total).It increases by another 5 feet at each of the following levels: 5 (40 total), 11 (45 total), 17 (50 total).
Swimmer
You can hold your breath for up to an hour at a time.
You have a swim speed equal to your Speed.
You have resistance to Cold damage.
Primal Senses
You have Darkvision 60 feet.
You have advantage on any ability check that would involve knowing compass directions (knowing which way is north, knowing which compass direction a path goes, etc.).This includes any form of navigation.
Nature Affinity
Choose Proficiency in one of the following skills:
Nature, Perception, Survival
Species Feat ideas:
Any:
Ardling: you have a connection to divine or primal magic.Pick the Cleric or Druidic spell list when you take this Feat.Each time you finish a long rest, you may prepare one cantrip from that spell list, which does not count against your number of known/prepared cantrips. (probably needs a little more than this, to be as interesting/useful as Magic Initiate)
Echolocation: you have Blindsight 30 feet and are immune to being blinded, but being deafened, or being within a radius of silence, nullifies this feature for as long as the deafness/silence affects you.
Prehensile Tail: (can’t wield a weapon nor perform somatic components, but can wield a shield or hold other objects) (if it’s not holding anything it can be used to make a bonus action unarmed strike, or for advantage on checks involving balance or keeping a hold on something)
Primal Warrior: you have claws, spines, talons, fangs, horns, a beak, and/or a swift strong tail that are useful for making Unarmed Strikes.Your Unarmed Strikes damage is 1d6 + your Strength modifier.
Multiple Features: some animal types might have the features of several Animal Ancestries, such as a Hippopotamus who has both a Defender’s thick hide and being an excellent swimmer.Another example might be an Ostrich as a Racer who has the secondary traits of a Flyer. Taking this feat lets you add a second Animal Ancestry feature.(should there be any restrictions what you can combine?maybe this one can only be taken once)
?Burrower?add a burrowing speed and an ability to hold breath?
Climber:
Defender:
Flyer:
Identical to the Draconic Wings feat, changing your wings from semi-useful to fully useful.
Racer:
A feat comparable to Charger, but more specific to Beastfolk?
Swimmer:
?Gills and increased swim speed?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Specific elements can also be left to Species based Feats, like they did with Dragonborn and such.
Which means "no actual generic Beastfolk". Still nothing for dog-folk*, rat-folk, bear-folk, deer-folk (all of which are common things various fiction).
(* I mean, the Kobolds are supposed to be that, but someone messed up and made them little dragon wannabes) (yes, this is an old-school joke that I will never stop making)
Without Templates, and using the new mixed-species rules in the first OneD&D playtest, this is actually easy for me:
1- if you're more of a planetouched, with the planetouched features, you use the Aasimar species. Your beastial aspects will be cosmetic.
2- if you're more of a beastfolk, without planetouched features, you use a "Mundane Ardling" based species. Your celestial aspects will be cosmetic.
Mundane Ardling: change the cantrip part to Darkvision. Maybe give a choice for the skill (Perception, Nature, Survival).
also: have species based Feats that help enhance mixed-species characters, and/or specialized sub-species. This would replace the 3e Template system, IMO.
They won't - we already know which 9 races are going to be in the 2024 PHB from the content creator summit.
Presumably with some sort of "half-species" or "hybrid" rule so we can continue making half-elves, half-orcs, and other combinations.
Somebody at WotC hates Dog people. They didn’t even give us gnolls in Volo’s or MoM. I don’t think there has been a proper dog race since the Lupin. I don’t like generic beast folk because that would come with no in world lore for people who play in forgotten realms. If it’s just going to be generic you can just homebrew it.
I assume they'll just use the rule from the first UA:
It's ultimately cosmetic, but simple, avoids any weird trait interactions, and open ended.
That's my guess as well. Though I wouldn't mind being able to spend your 1st-level feat to grab a trait from your other parent too (perhaps with reduced uses.)
Note also that I'm not ruling out Aasimar being in the 2024 DMG (much like they're in the 2014 DMG). It's possible. But the DMG Aasimar.... sucks.
Small nitpick: gnolls, being hyena based, are feliform, not caniform. (more closely related to cats than dogs)
Honestly, I'd be surprised if they do that; they've already got MotM with good and compatible stats for most races, why put some lackluster options in the DMG when you can just point to another product that already did it better?
The ardling sunk because it was trying to be two entirely different, largely contradictory things. Players who wanted Majestic Golden Angel People to offset the Saucy Crimson* Devil People wanted absolutely nothing to do with the fursona stuff, and people who wanted a Beastman option to fill their wildlands and provide an outlet for their fursonas didn't really want anything to do with the Celestial tie-in. Yes yes, Guardinals, but ask ninety-five out of a hundred 5e players what a Guardinal is and you'll get a blank, confused stare.
A "Primal Ardling" doesn't really scan, though it'd mostly cover the fursona people outside of the folks who believe each variety of fuzzy critter deserves its own stat block. As a player with, like...three different varieties of kitsune in my homebrew creations list (one of these days I'll get the ****ers right), I can grok that desire. Which, sadly, doesn't leave much room for a generic Beastman under the heading of the ardling.
Mind, I fully expect to see ardlings come back in a future book. J-Craw even said they weren't deep-sixing the species, just admitting that it wasn't right for the PHB. So we'll see them again later, likely improved from the playtest cycle.
Or, well. "Improved"*.
Please do not contact or message me.
I could see them axing the "here's a bit on how to design a custom race" section entirely, sure. Both of the examples they came up with there aged like milk and got replaced in MotM by far superior models.
I think those two elements are necessary though. "They're from Elysium, with a few specimens from Celestia and Arborea" is the ideal explanation for why a single species can be pigs, crocs, rats, eagles, lions, tigers, and bears (oh my!)
And sure, we could just make them come from the Feywild.... like the other two dozen races from there... but then we're left with only the Aasimar to be opposite Tieflings. The Aasimar took three iterations in a single edition to get the balance right and they still might not be where they need to be, so good luck getting them into the PHB.
Plus the Aasimar have the whole patron deva thing, which is popular enough that they're unlikely to drop it, but messy enough that you get both players and DMs that don't want to deal with it. Aardling is a good fix, as well as being a bit more thematically on point as the Upper Planes counterparts to tieflings since unlike the very human-looking Aasimar, Ardlings very much stand out.
Not only did they not give us playable gnolls, but they heavily retconned gnoll lore to turn them into unplayable demon-spawn that can't even be homebrewed into being playable without just rewriting their lore entirely.
Still a little salty about that.
That aspect of the Aasimar was removed in Monsters of the Multiverse. It doesn't mention a "guardian angel" anymore.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
And once again I'm reminded why I only use that book for race features.
Me too. I understand the loss, but half-elves have been my favorite race to play since the mid 80s. I'd also prefer the half-orc to the orc. I get what they are trying to do, but it 's not my favorite choice ever, though I will not be burning PHBs over it.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
I think this is the right decision, core D&D is very White-Christian-inspired. I'd prefer to see them branch out into different cultural influences as a whole book with multiple species, subclasses, and setting lore than have the random oddball thing like the UA ardling (and TBH the current Monk).
I agree. I think some saw it as "finally, we have the generic beasty folk", and others saw it as "finally we'll have an (aasimar-light) in the PHB." And the Ardling is sort of a confusion of those things.
IMO, if you lean to the "beasty-folk" angle, then it's like Wood Elves getting a Druid Cantrip*: Primal is the right fit for "magical beasty folk". But it's entirely at odds with "celestials who look like beasts." And my suggesting it wasn't as "either or". I don't want to get rid of Celestial Ardlings, I want there to be 3 types of Ardling: celestial, primal, mundane.
(* which is, admittedly, via a Feat, but for Ardlings, a cantrip is built in to the species)
Honestly, I think if it's not in the PHB, it's going to be too much of a confusion with the Aasimar. Do we have two different forms of Tiefling (in the broad sense of that species)?
I think if they're going to put it into an expansion, it should be the Mundane version, and then use the newer half-race rules for whether you're more of a celestial vs a beastfolk. And then use Species Feats to round out any extraordinary abilities (but it does bring up: do mixed-species characters get to pick which species is their Feat qualification? or do they have to pick the one whose stat-block they used? probably the latter, but I wonder about the other option. But for this exact case, it's sort of immaterial: that cantrip can be just as easily had via Magic Initiate as it can via a Species Feat).
and focusing on Mundane Ardlings would also allow fiendish ardlings to be a possibility (via the same half-species rules, and the idea of Species Feats, that allow for Mundane Ardlings to be flexible for celestial and primal versions).
Beastfolk (Mundane Ardling)
Creature Type: Humanoid
Size: Medium (4-7 feet tall) or Small (3-4 feet tall), chosen when you select this species.
Speed: 30 feet
Life Span: 100 years
Species Feat ideas:
Any:
Climber:
Defender:
Flyer:
Racer:
Swimmer: