The 10 Player Races in Volo's Guide Revealed

On its Volo's Guide to Monsters product page, Fantasy Grounds has a screenshot up listing the 10 playable races - Aasimar, Bugbear, Firbolg, Goblin, Goliath, Hobgoblin, Kenku, Kobold, Lizardfolk, Orc, Tabaxi, Triton, Yuan-ti Pureblood.

​

Product Page: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/store/product.xcp?id=WOTC5EVGM
Screenshot: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/images/screenshots/Screenshots/WOTC5EVGM/New-Monstrous-Races.jpg

Biggest surprise for me is Kenku. Bugbear is also unexpected.

SaveSave
SaveSave​

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

Both I think. From the one page example it sounds like to me some may be born descended from a Fallen /AasimarAngel/Celestial, but potentially become Scourage or Protector through good deeds with DM permission, and a Aasimar born as a Protector or Scourage can become a Fallen Aasimar through evil deeds with DM permission.

I interpreted that one page a bit differently, as only evil Aasimar can be Fallen and if your Aasimar becomes evil during a campaign it automatically stops being Protector or Scourge and becomes Fallen. No choice for the player.

Edit: just looked at the leaked pages again. It is the sidebar that I was remembering where it said the DM can change the character's subrace on an alignment shift, not that it was automatic.

 

[One_Shots]

First, the Monster races are presented to emulate the monster, not be balanced like the other races are. The way they are presented is a bit "caveat emptor", which is why they are put at the back of the book without full write ups. (The quick stats alluded to?)

First, if that were true then we wouldn't have gotten the abhorrent mess that is the firbolg because there would have been no reason not to build it to represent what it has been since its inception, instead of the monstrosity of terrible that it now is.

Secondly, basing design on feels instead of balance is the exact reason why 3e and 4e were abandoned for 5e. All the design and development and playtesting that made this a successful edition is now being ignored for... why? There's not even a good reason for it. This is just sloppy and quite frankly a spit in the face to everyone who contributed to the success of this edition by playtesting and engaging in creative discussions for years.

The very design principles that made 5e the most successful edition to date, are now being thrown out.

 

[gyor]

I interpreted that one page a bit differently, as only evil Aasimar can be Fallen and if your Aasimar becomes evil during a campaign it automatically stops being Protector or Scourge and becomes Fallen. No choice for the player.

Edit: just looked at the leaked pages again. It is the sidebar that I was remembering where it said the DM can change the character's subrace on an alignment shift, not that it was automatic.

Yeah they can also be turned out into a Fallen Aasimar at a young age through the touch of dark powers, so that gives loopholes for none evil Fallen Aasimar.

 

[gyor]

The thing that amazes me, and I'll have to see if the lore in the book covers this, is that they've now made a bunch of playable versions of 'evil' monsters, despite making the explicit claim in the Player's Handbook that evil monsters are always drawn to evil:

"The evil deities who created other races, though, made those races to serve them. Those races have strong inborn tendencies that match the nature of their gods. Most orcs share the violent, savage nature of the orc god, Gruumsh, and are thus inclined toward evil. Even if an orc chooses a good alignment, it struggles against its innate tendencies for its entire life."

The reference to orcs seems to be just an example; considering that now goblins, hobgoblins, kobolds, and kenku are now playable along with orcs, it'll be interesting to see if these races are at least required to take personality traits that reflect their 'inborn' tendency to evil.

--
Pauper

Kenku aren't evil, just Chaotic Neutral normally. Your thinking of Kobolds and Purebloods.

 

[Remathilis]

Secondly, basing design on feels instead of balance is the exact reason why 3e and 4e were abandoned for 5e. All the design and development and playtesting that made this a successful edition is now being ignored for... why? There's not even a good reason for it. This is just sloppy and quite frankly a spit in the face to everyone who contributed to the success of this edition by playtesting and engaging in creative discussions for years.

I'm sorry, I'm confused. Are you saying that 5e is successful because it stopped the slavish devotion to Perfect Balance that made 3e and 4e tick, or are you saying 3e and 4e put "feels" first and balance last. If its the latter, that may be the lousiest observation I've seen on this board.

 

[SkidAce]

Outside of human, all the races can be considered monster races.

Thus they let their anger and fury take from them the sense of humanity, and demonstrated that no beast is more savage than man when possessed with power answerable to his rage.
— Plutarch, "The Life of Cicero"

 

[gyor]

"The way they are presented is a bit "caveat emptor", which is why they are put at the back of the book without full write ups. (The quick stats alluded to?)"

They aren't in the back of the book, they're crunch is near the end of the races chapter and they're fluff is in Chapter 1, it'd be redundant to write it up twice. Ironically the Monster Races get more lore and fluff then the "None Monster Races", which get a trickle by comparison.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

First, if that were true then we wouldn't have gotten the abhorrent mess that is the firbolg because there would have been no reason not to build it to represent what it has been since its inception, instead of the monstrosity of terrible that it now is.

I think the Firbolg is cool.

 

[unknowable]

First, if that were true then we wouldn't have gotten the abhorrent mess that is the firbolg because there would have been no reason not to build it to represent what it has been since its inception, instead of the monstrosity of terrible that it now is.

Secondly, basing design on feels instead of balance is the exact reason why 3e and 4e were abandoned for 5e. All the design and development and playtesting that made this a successful edition is now being ignored for... why? There's not even a good reason for it. This is just sloppy and quite frankly a spit in the face to everyone who contributed to the success of this edition by playtesting and engaging in creative discussions for years.

The very design principles that made 5e the most successful edition to date, are now being thrown out.

Oh you mean that these MINOR changes will alter bounded accuracy limits and majorly change class balance, feat balance and the revamped spellcaster balance systems that are BAKED into the system?

No?

Then it is fine, it may not be for everyone but the concept is to make these rarer and DM approve only races a bit different.

Racial variants like this aren't going to upset the balanced concept of the game. Because of bounded accuracy it doesn't even limit class builds in the same way that 3.5 did or earlier did.

Heck even without ability modifiers there are races that just do worse at certain class jobs as it is. Sneaking rogues being anything other than a lightfoot halfling for instance.

And then we have kobolds... who cares about a strength deficit... They are small and cannot use heavy weapons without a feat anyway, might as well go with the large variety of finesse or ranged weapons if you aren't building a spellcaster.

Again, these are optional races at GM discretion, not mandatory core races.
Heck even the PHB lists a bunch of uncommon races as ones that need GM approval.

 

[Demetrios1453]

I think the Firbolg is cool.

Same here - I'm itching to play a firbolg druid now.

Yes, they changed the concept of the race a bit and took a foot off their average height, but those are hardly major changes compared to some with the game over the years. Back in 1st Edition days, who would have imagined drow as a basic player race and 20th-level halfling barbarians or dwarf wizards?