Mordenkainen Presents: Monsters of the Multiverse is arriving on May 16 and with it comes over 30 playable races! These races have been collected from across the multiverse—from the Feywild's harengon to Theros' satyr—and have been tweaked to make them setting-agnostic.
In this article, we're going to examine a few of the all-time greats when it comes to monstrous races: the goblin, hobgoblin, and kobold. We'll discuss what's changed for these races since their original appearance in Volo's Guide to Monsters and show how to build characters around them.
Ability score Increases and Languages
Newer Dungeons & Dragons races don't come with set ability score increases. Instead, players will get to choose one of the following options at character creation:
- Increase one score by 2 and increase a different score by 1
- Increase three different scores by 1
Instead of preset language proficiencies, you'll learn Common and one other language of your choice (with your DM's approval).
Goblin
To enable more diversified goblin characters, the updates in Monsters of the Multiverse present goblins in a more positive light than previous sources. As made apparent by adding the Fey Ancestry trait, Monsters of the Multiverse focuses on how goblins originated in the Feywild and were later conquered by the god Maglubiyet when they crossed into the Material Plane.
Goblin Traits
In Monsters of the Multiverse, goblins retain all of the traits from their previous version, with slight tweaks. They are still Small creatures that are exceptionally good at hiding, escaping danger, and taking down foes that are larger than them. Their trademark ability, Fury of the Small, is slightly changed to deal damage equal to your proficiency modifier and can be used a number of times equal to your proficiency modifier per long rest. They are also granted the Fey Ancestry trait, which provides them advantage on saving throws made to avoid and end the charmed condition.
The most significant change comes from the ability to choose your ability score array, rather than having to work with a set +2 Dexterity, +1 Constitution. While this previous array was incredible for stealthy rogues, Charisma-focused bards or Intelligence-focused wizards would overlook the goblin as a viable race. Now, you could easily make a Strength-focused goblin Battle Master who wears heavy armor for defense and can use their Nimble Escape to move around the battlefield while using Fury of the Small to pump up damage.
Hobgoblin
Hobgoblins receive quite the glow-up from their grim depiction in Volo's Guide to Monsters. In Monsters of the Multiverse, hobgoblins are described as charismatic leaders who form deep bonds with their comrades. Like the treatment goblins received, Monsters of the Multiverse focuses on the hobgoblin's origins in the Feywild and ties that into their new racial features.
Hobgoblin Traits
In exchange for their martial weapon and light armor proficiencies, hobgoblins now receive an interesting racial feature called Fey Gift in Monsters of the Multiverse. It allows them to take the Help action as a bonus action a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus per long rest. Starting at 3rd level, when you take the Help action in this way, you also benefit in other ways:
- You and the creature you help gain temporary hit points.
- You and the creature you help temporarily increase your walking speeds.
- When the creature you help hits a target with an attack roll, that target gets disadvantage on the next attack roll it makes within the next minute.
Being able to take the Help action as a bonus action is already a strong ability because it grants a party member advantage on their next attack or ability check. Getting to also debuff an enemy or gain some temporary hit points make this an even more stellar resource in combat.
Previously, hobgoblins came with a set +2 Constitution, +1 Intelligence array, which provided a solid base for a tank wizard when combined with the race's light armor proficiency. The addition of the Fey Gift feature from Monsters of the Multiverse opens up the door for new builds. Combine Fey Gift with the Fortune from the Many trait—a reskinned Saving Face feature from the hobgoblin's previous appearance—and you have a solid support-focused martial class that works excellently with other martial party members. But while Fey Gift makes good use of an empty bonus action slot, builds that already have a use for their bonus action, like bards, rogues, and two-weapon fighters, might want to look elsewhere in order to maximize their action economy.
Kobold
The kobolds of Volo's Guide to Monsters is the only race to receive two ability score increases instead of the typical three. They also have Sunlight Sensitivity, which can be a challenging setback in campaigns that tend to spend more time above ground than not. In Monsters of the Multiverse, the kobold's racial traits offer a more level playing field plus abilities from their draconic ancestors.
Kobold Traits
The new version of the kobold introduces the Draconic Cry feature, which replaces the previous version's Pact Tactics. This new feature functions fairly similar in that it is a reliable source of advantage on attacks. However, it is an expendable resource, costing a bonus action and only being usable a number of times equal to your proficiency modifier per long rest. In exchange, Draconic Cry also offers allies advantage on their attacks and doesn't require an ally to be within 5 feet of you to activate it.
In place of the Grovel, Cower, and Beg racial trait, kobolds are given a new feature called Kobold Legacy. This new trait allows you to choose between a skill proficiency in Arcana, Investigation, Medicine, Sleight of Hand, or Survival, getting advantage on saving throws against the frightened condition, or a sorcerer cantrip.
Like Pack Tactics, the Draconic Cry racial trait lends itself to a martial build as it can give you advantage on attacks against enemies within melee range. This can be an excellent way to ensure you can reliably sneak attack as a rogue or when you just need to land that smite as a paladin. These martial builds will be able to make good use of either the advantage against being frightened or the sorcerer cantrip granted through Kobold Legacy. The frightened condition can be a tough one to overcome for builds lacking proficiency in Wisdom saves, and the sorcerer cantrip could be a great way to snag green-flame blade or booming blade.
A Multiverse Worth of Options Awaits
Mordenkainen Presents: Monsters of the Multiverse allows players to choose from over 30 races, each of which can be viable in any number of new and exciting builds. Players will have to be careful, however. The book also contains over 250 monster stat blocks that Dungeon Masters will undoubtedly use to put your new characters to the test!
Mike Bernier (@arcane_eye) is the founder of Arcane Eye, a site focused on providing useful tips and tricks to all those involved in the world of D&D. Outside of writing for Arcane Eye, Mike spends most of his time playing games, hiking with his girlfriend, and tending the veritable jungle of houseplants that have invaded his house.
You know that book you're quoting is perhaps the best example of Orcs in D&D being portrayed in a racist manner in the whole history of the game, right? Invoking "Orcs of Thar" is perhaps the best reason to support changes to D&D Orcs. Seriously, the Yellow and Red Orcs of that book are incredibly racist caricatures of Mongolians and Native Americans. And there's even more in that product that proves that D&D should not follow its historical versions of these races.
Saying "D&D Orcs shouldn't be changed because of this one racist book that was published back in the day" is an incredibly dumb argument. Especially when you're calling them "smelly and depraved scum" in the same book where they're stand-ins for real world marginalized people.
@Squirrely_Sama, you replied to me. Are you saying that I'm like that? Or the post I linked? Because the Red and Yellow Orcs in that book are definitely racist. Its racism is not up for question. It's a fact.
This is no rabid ranting or delusional perception of racism in everything. The book (Orcs of Thar) literally used racial slurs ("Yellow" for the Mongolian-based Orcs and "Redskin" for the Orcs based off of Native Americans), directly references the cultures it's misappropriating ("Mongols" and "Nakota"), and mocks marginalized races from the real world ("Big Chief Sitting Drool", "Mongol-Khan Orkian Chief", and "the only good orc is a dead orc").
That book was racist. It's okay to admit that.
I’m just happy that D&D is different these days.
I’m not responding to anybody with my previous post. I just for some reason couldn’t post without quoting or replying to a previous post, so I picked yours cause it was the most recent.
Y'know, it's refreshing to see that someone can work so hard to pwn someone else about a topic that they prove their own stance to be objectively false. The admission that playing non-human races runs all the way back to the roots of D&D, and was included in the original version, really undermines the idea that these choices should be unplayable. Also of note, this dates back to the original version, which I think covers the majority of the time the game has been around.
Strange that you omitted some portions of that "review" that weren't as supportive of your perjoritive viewpoint. Also odd that you cite a rule that isn't a rule. Maybe you can cite an excerpt of the text that requires players to kill Orcs, or any creature, on sight? If that's how you homebrew at your table, so be it. Not a rule that I'm familiar with.
As for the person that was referenced, there's probably a reason that they were referenced in the past tense. Maybe there's something to be learned from that perspective.
Bottom line, you don't speak for anyone but yourself. Until those that want you to, put you in a position of authority to do so. You also don't get to decide what the "thrust" of D&D is for everyone. The only part of your post that I can get behind is the support that you offer for people to do as they will with their game. Even then, it's not done in a very supportive manner.
FIFY, again.
Yeah, but that’s Tolkien. Third was talking about Orcs of Thar. Also, I learned in college (English major lol) that what an author says about the intent of their writing is not necessarily dispositive.
Taking a reference from Author A. and applying it to Author B. does nothing to explain Author B.'s actual position. Pulling a reference from a novel to defend your streotype in a TTRPG does more work in obfuscating that fact than it does in normalizing the idea that these stereotypes aren't offensive. Just because Tolkein didn't intend for these to be allegorical or topical doesn't prevent them from being so. One might argue this statement was put in as an afterthought to prevent legal action and to soothe tempers. After all, it was put in the 2nd Ed., during the 1960's which was a pretty tumultuous time for anything that looked like racial stereotyping.
Whether an individual creature is good/evil is more dependent on the individual than on the race. Morality is not moored to race, it is a product of societal and cultural norms. Good/Evil judgements are based solely on the perspective of the observer. To say that "all Orcs are evil", or maybe"the only good Orc, is a dead Orc", might come from the perspective of someone at odds, or in conflict with that race. While from the perspective of the Orcs, they might be on the side of "Right", in that they are defending themselves from the marauding band of (insert PCs here) or trying to take back their homeland that was lost to the viscious elves. Making the wholesale negative judgment that "All (insert race) are evil" is the basis for racist thought and behaviour. We get better at what we practice. Continuing to practice this type of thought exercise only makes us better at negatively categorizing things we don't agree with.
The false dichotomy that is presented requiring everyone not sharing this view point to be ignoring objective reality is objectively false. The inability of some to fail to see this from another's perspective (see also: Empathy) tends toward the idea that "their way is the only way". To imply that those of us who don't share the same view point, also don't understand and love this game is another false dichotomy.
You can post in an article thread without using the "Reply' or 'Quote' buttons. You just have to remember that the article's response box is at the top, above all the comments/discussion and directly below the article itself, rather than at the bottom of the discussion thread. A smidge irritating for discourse, perhaps, but these articles' comments sections aren't really meant for this sort of discourse. They're meant as reactions and feedback to the article.
Nevertheless.
The idea of Death of the Author, which I've seen mentioned a few times, bears reinforcing here. An author's intent when writing a given work does not invalidate anyone else's reaction to or interpretation of that work. An author can mean a certain thing when they write their words, and they can even explain that meaning later. That doesn't mean their view is the only view. Once they submit their work to the world, others are allowed to form their own interpretation of the work and the author is not really allowed to tell them not to. The author can attempt to persuade people to their own viewpoint, but that is the only tool they have.
Tolkien is, at this point, suffering from two different forms of Death of the Author - the literary form in which his works are free to be interpretted by others regardless of his later clarifications and opinions of his work, and also the biological form in which J.R.R. Tolkien is dead. He is no longer around to clarify his intent when he wrote Lord of the Rings and its surrounding body of work, and it has been seventy years since the first publication of the first book. Even under the assumption that he had the purest, noblest intentions he possibly could at the time, society has morphed and moved on. Thigns that were once considered verboten, taboo and utterly reprehensible to discuss in polite societyare now open subjects of discussion, and things that were once considered perfectly fine and dandy are being called out as the hurtful, hateful rhetoric they are.
Whatever Tolkien intended his orcs to be does not matter. We aren't reading a Rings book, we're playing D&D. Our orcs aren't his orcs, our goblins aren't his goblins, our kobolds aren't his kobolds. If someone wishes to create a game that remains faithful to Tolkien's body of work as much as possible? Excellent. They are absolutely free to do so, and once they secure their table's buy-in they can present orcs, gobbs, kobolds, and anything else as being utterly irredeemable while humanity is the only species on the planet capable of doing Good. No one will ever burst into your home mid-session and tell you nay.
The official books cannot do this. The official books are for everyone, not just Tolkien fans. The official books are also for Neil Gaiman fans, or Piers Anthony fans, or J.K. Rowling fans, or any other fans of fantasy books that wants to try and run a D&D game. The official books are also for people who aren't fans of traditional fantasy but maybe want to try running a D&D game anyways in a nontraditional setting. The official books do not get the same level of broad discretion an individual table gets because the official books are tools for every table.
If they aren't? There's no purpose in writing, printing, or selling them.
Extra wierd since they also made The Golden Khan of Ethengar & The Atruaghin Clans which are blatantly the Mongol Horde & First Americans.
Yes, but from everything I’ve heard (I haven’t actually read them) those versions of Ethengar and Atruaghin humans are much more nuanced and positive portrayals of Mongol and First American culture.
I sort of agree. The min-maxer in me appreciates the versatility of being able to choose ASIs, so I don't necessarily dislike the choice (turns out half orcs with their relentless endurance is pretty good for squishy spellcasters), but I wish that they had at least said something along the lines of, "[Race] are usually more [stat] and [stat]" just for flavor reasons. It makes them more real.
As I understand it, the choice was made to not say "[race] are usually more [stat] and [stat]" specifically because that doesn't reflect real-world population groups, and that sort of thinking relies on stereotyping. We know there's more genetic variation within racial groups than between them in the real world (race itself being an arbitrary social term that has no biological or scientific basis, as we all know). If we want D&D population groups to feel more real - and I agree that's a laudable goal - then the ideal should be to forego outdated "orcs are stronger, while elves are more dextrous" stereotypes. We're better off applying real-world population group genetics, and mechanically representing that as "there's more ability score variation within D&D fantasy races than between them." Meaning within each population of orcs, elves, halfings, tabaxi, humans, etc., there are wide distributions of traits (manifested mechanically as ability scores) that run the gamut, and on the balance no one population is wildly different from another population.
🤦♂️
Elves and Orcs don’t reflect real world population groups, they’re fantasy races that actually do have biological and scientific differences. That’s not stereotyping, it’s genetics. And all of that variation within each of those races is not supposed to be represented by their racial ASIs, that’s what the other 27 points are supposed to be for.
Well, I was replying to the "make them more real" point. If you're going to handwave that away because this is all made-up fantasy, then poof, a wizard did it, fantasy races are more malleable and less stereotypical now. Move on with your lives.
A lot of companies have been very successful by following a progressive philosophy. Including WOTC.
And that’s the last thing I’m gonna say on this issue. I don’t want to be drawn into an endless argument.
I knew what you were referring to, it was easy on account of you quoted it. My point is that the genetics of Elves being more nimble and Orcs being stronger makes it more real to some of us. I was agreeing with and defending the post you replied to.
I disagree. A company that knows what the market and its customers want at any given moment will do very well. And what the market wants is inclusiveness.
General reminder to everyone: It's human nature to assume "bowing to narratives of the moment at the expense of it's customer base" or "what the market wants is inclusiveness", but unless you've got access to actual market research that backs you up (and that you can share with the forum), it's almost always better (and more honest) to stick with "In my opinion..." Anything else is far more likely to be projection of your own beliefs than objective reality, especially regarding something as mercurial & dynamic as "customer base" or "market".
What? Go take a look at Amazon, the thing is has some of the lowest sales in 5e and all the reviews are trashing it. The market is most definitely not happy with this.
Also the sentence “diverse and inclusive goblins” could literally be the punchline of a joke. As it’s completely hilarious and totally ludicrous. Don’t be a goblin bigot! Goblins have rights too! I have no clue how anyone can say that with a straight face.
I really dislike this direction DnD is going where they remove all challenge from the newer releases. The only thing I can be glad for is my DM will properly put the challenge back in where Wizards tries to remove it