Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana May 2018: Centaurs and Minotaurs

[TwoSix]

Well, sure. How else do you think you get baby centaurs?

Yea, that's probably better than the way I was thinking of where horse-human hybrids came from.

 

[Bitbrain]

The Dawn Treader has a minotaur crewmember.

Not in the book it doesn't.

Oh, you must be thinking of the Walden Media films.

 

[CapnZapp]

Monks, for a start.

Personally I think it would be better to classify these things as not monk weapons, rationalizing that Minotaurs have no monastic tradition, so any Mino-Monk must rediscover the technique of using her horns effectively (and will do so at level 17).

You're asking us?

Yes. Are you answering me?

Personally I don't think that giving a weapon superior to even martial weapons as a racial ability is going to "break the game". Its powerful, and unbalancing, but you need to go quite a bit further to be able to consider 5e "broken".

Sure, but we don't need to go that far. As a d10 weapon, it would still not outpace greataxes (and would probably not qualify as a greatweapon at all).

Personally, I would probably have said simply this, and be done with it:

Horns. Your horns are natural melee weapons, with which you’re proficient. When you hit with
them, the target takes piercing damage equal to 1d6 + your Strength modifier.
Natural Charger. You gain Charger as a bonus feat for use with your horns only.

This doesn't make the horns themselves any better, but at least you gain the full Charger benefits (the UA benefits magnified for when you can move 10 ft in a straight line).

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Sure, but we don't need to go that far. As a d10 weapon, it would still not outpace greataxes (and would probably not qualify as a greatweapon at all).

D10 is better than any one-handed weapon, and horns leave hands free for using a shield and/or spell focus.

Personally, I would probably have said simply this, and be done with it:

Horns. Your horns are natural melee weapons, with which you’re proficient. When you hit with
them, the target takes piercing damage equal to 1d6 + your Strength modifier.
Natural Charger. You gain Charger as a bonus feat for use with your horns only.

This doesn't make the horns themselves any better, but at least you gain the full Charger benefits (the UA benefits magnified for when you can move 10 ft in a straight line).

Makes sense. I was thinking a flat 2d6 damage on the charge-type action, but charger feat is probably a better way of implementing that.

 

[Irda Ranger]

I'm a huge Dragonlance fan, and am currently running a Dragonlance campaign, so this is very relevant to my interests. The Minotaur seems fine, but the Centaur ... no. Just no.

My message to Wizards is: If you refuse to support Large PC races, don't offer Centaur as a race. Offering My Little Ponytaur goes against every story conception of what a Centaur is. Maybe it works for Bariaur, but not Centaur.

Horses are Large. Centaurs have the body of a Horse. Don't break our brains with this. If you can't support them, just don't support them.

Also, only being able to Charge only 1/short rest is stupid.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

I looked up a horse length is according to Wikipedia it's 8ft or 2.4M from nose to tail. Centaurs would approximately be a foot shorter in length as they're nose and neck don't extend out the same way, so maybe about 7ft in length.

Being 7' (Athasian Elves) or 8' (Firbolgs) in height is still qualified as being medium for some humanoid races, so you could still sort of work in that Centaurs are medium sized even if they're probably about as tall as those 2 examples as well. Certain measurements such as length aren't all that determine what size medium is, as some snakes could be 10' or 15' and still be medium.

 

[CapnZapp]

D10 is better than any one-handed weapon, and horns leave hands free for using a shield and/or spell focus.

Absolutely true.

But I'm hoping you aren't implying "+1 damage, but only for board'n'sworders and gishes" is so OMGWTFBBQ broken it was the reason for the redesign...? For one thing, you will never find "+1 Horns" - non-monk natural weapons has an expiry date at a disadvantage in a world where you can find weapons that do magic damage.

In other words, if it isn't better somewhere somehow, isn't it a ribbon ability?

Who would think making minotaur horns a ribbon ability when it should be the defining characteristic of a mino warrior?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Personally I think it would be better to classify these things as not monk weapons, rationalizing that Minotaurs have no monastic tradition, so any Mino-Monk must rediscover the technique of using her horns effectively (and will do so at level 17).

That's very clunky.

And whilst it doesn't otherwise "break the game" for minotaurs to have natural weapons that are better than swords, I really so no justification for horns being so damaging.

But I think your "natural charger" racial ability is better than the version presented in UA.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

There are problems with these presentations.

First, just make centaurs Large. Large gives you both advantages and disadvantages. And just like other races...that's okay! Some races take penalties in outdoor adventures (sunlight sensitivity). Why is it a problem if others take penalties in indoor adventures? And the advantages are not a big thing--centaurs don't have increased reach, and being able to be surrounded by extra creatures is usually more of a detriment than a benefit. The way to de-nerf them is to give them better abilities, like unlimited charges.

Volo's guide felt it was better to try to properly represent the race, than to twist it to absurdity to a higher level of balance. That's what they need to do for such an oddball PC race. If I want to play a centaur, I want to play an actual centaur.

Second, given that they don't update via errata, it is entirely inappropriate to give new races multiple creature types, because they aren't going to apply that feature to the core race of elves (which of all races, most deserves two types). Just make centaurs monstrosities. These minotaurs are of course not the same species as the MM ones, and can just be humanoids.

 

[MechaTarrasque]

There are problems with these presentations.

First, just make centaurs Large. Large gives you both advantages and disadvantages. And just like other races...that's okay! Some races take penalties in outdoor adventures (sunlight sensitivity). Why is it a problem if others take penalties in indoor adventures? And the advantages are not a big thing--centaurs don't have increased reach, and being able to be surrounded by extra creatures is usually more of a detriment than a benefit. The way to de-nerf them is to give them better abilities, like unlimited charges.

Volo's guide felt it was better to try to properly represent the race, than to twist it to absurdity to a higher level of balance. That's what they need to do for such an oddball PC race. If I want to play a centaur, I want to play an actual centaur.

Second, given that they don't update via errata, it is entirely inappropriate to give new races multiple creature types, because they aren't going to apply that feature to the core race of elves (which of all races, most deserves two types). Just make centaurs monstrosities. These minotaurs are of course not the same species as the MM ones, and can just be humanoids.

I think you could probably make a case for just about every humanoid except for humans, halflings, orcs, hobgoblins, and dwarves getting two types. That being said, I don't see them errata-ing this (as this isn't the type of thing they said they would change via errata), although I could see racial feats (let's call them "racial awakening" so that it makes sense that you didn't have it at level 1) that give elves the fey type, dragonborn the dragon type, etc. If saying your elf is a fey is more important to you than a stat boost, who am I to complain?