D&D 5E What is the appeal of the weird fantasy races?

[Maxperson]

Sure, but what would we call it?

I could look it up. Those were on the same Castle Greyhawk level as the Minitaurs.

 

[Gammadoodler]

I could look it up. Those were on the same Castle Greyhawk level as the Minitaurs.

I dunno, I trust @Minigiant to come up with something. Something tells me this might be a topic where they have some level of expertise.

 

[Voadam]

I, for one, support a miniature, humaniod size, giant race.

Arcana Evolved had medium sized giants who could racial prestige class into large and then huge sizes.

I loved that in d20 you could have medium sized dwarves and giants in the same party. It in part led me to homebrew having dwarves be humanoid subtype giant and dwarven and giant be dialects of the same language, with both dwarves and giants vociferously denying any connection.

Dark Sun and Arcanis both had connections between dwarves and giants as well.

 

[generic]

Sure, but what would we call it?

Goliath.

/ducks

 

[Scott Christian]

Arcana Evolved had medium sized giants who could racial prestige class into large and then huge sizes.

I loved that in d20 you could have medium sized dwarves and giants in the same party. It in part led me to homebrew having dwarves be humanoid subtype giant and dwarven and giant be dialects of the same language, with both dwarves and giants vociferously denying any connection.

Dark Sun and Arcanis both had connections between dwarves and giants as well.

Duergar come to mind, with their innate enlarge spell. Can't they shift to a large sized version of themselves once a day?

 

[Chaosmancer]

Sucks to be a druid now. And I guess no companions for rangers. RAW lets the DM use MM races as PCs if he wants.

I'm curious, since when is wildshape or a ranger companion letting you be a player race? Ever had a druid Wildshape into a dwarf? Your Ranger have an Elf as their Beast Companion?

As you say, False Equivalences are False.

How I think they should be is part of discussing how centaurs should be. How is it possible that you don't understand that?

See, we are getting somewhere. Them being large is how you think they should be. And sure, it is an opinion, but just like if someone starts telling me about how Dragonborn are very powerful because they can fly and use their breath weapon every turn, I'm going to say "those aren't the rules that we have"

Because if we get into discussing every single persons homebrew, we'll quickly be talking about dozens of different types of centaurs, because everyone will be different, and that makes it incredibly difficult to have a conversation.

The Centaur playable race has rules, being a Large Monstrosity is not one of those rules.

Meh! Tired grumpy staying up until midnight me was being stubborn. That would be homebrew. I still maintain, though, that in a discussion about what centaurs should and should not be able to do and not interpretation of RAW, homebrew changes are a valid part of the discussion. As is the reasoning behind it.

Thank you.

I wrote my other responses before seeing this. And sure, there is a role in the conversation, but there really isn't any possible response we can make to "well, I homebrewed them to be like this". Its your homebrew, can't exactly tell someone their homebrew is wrong unless it makes zero sense or is incredibly over or underpowered. And even then, it is still their homebrew, they can do what they want.

 

[Maxperson]

I'm curious, since when is wildshape or a ranger companion letting you be a player race? Ever had a druid Wildshape into a dwarf? Your Ranger have an Elf as their Beast Companion?

You said the MM is off limits to the players. It isn't. PC use MM statistics for all kinds of things. Race would just be another similar use.

As you say, False Equivalences are False.

As noted above, it wasn't a False Equivalence. Using the MM stats as players for PCs has been in use since the game began. Using them to make a character would just be another similar use.

See, we are getting somewhere. Them being large is how you think they should be. And sure, it is an opinion, but just like if someone starts telling me about how Dragonborn are very powerful because they can fly and use their breath weapon every turn, I'm going to say "those aren't the rules that we have"

Because if we get into discussing every single persons homebrew, we'll quickly be talking about dozens of different types of centaurs, because everyone will be different, and that makes it incredibly difficult to have a conversation.

I think that's the beginnings of a Slipper Slope. I really doubt there are dozens of ways people view how centaurs should be. I mean, in this thread we've already been discussing both RAW and homebrew for dozens of pages and there have only been a handful of different ways, all of which were easily handled in the discussion.

I wrote my other responses before seeing this. And sure, there is a role in the conversation, but there really isn't any possible response we can make to "well, I homebrewed them to be like this". Its your homebrew, can't exactly tell someone their homebrew is wrong unless it makes zero sense or is incredibly over or underpowered. And even then, it is still their homebrew, they can do what they want.

Thank you as well.

I don't mind people disagreeing with me on whether centaurs should be able to climb a wall(medium or large), but it shouldn't just be dismissed out of hand for being homebrew. I tell you my reasoning. You tell me yours. We discuss and the discussion moves on. There's value to such discussions, because people may or may not have considered certain things and may want to adopt some portion or even all of someone's homebrew ideas and reasoning.

 

[Remathilis]

I loved that in d20 you could have medium sized dwarves and giants in the same party. It in part led me to homebrew having dwarves be humanoid subtype giant and dwarven and giant be dialects of the same language, with both dwarves and giants vociferously denying any connection.

Obligatory Galavant clip for how this would look.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

You're been beaten to the punch...

View attachment 130765

This is from Monstrous Manual Annual 2. there was also dorvesh (dwarf/donkey), gnoats (gnome/goats) and Zebranaur (human/zebra). Centaurs were viewed as elf/horse.

AD&D 2nd Edition already has you covered, via the Monstrous Compendium Annual, Vol. II. They were (rather cleverly) called ha'ponies.

View attachment 130766

Ah, so it seems like this idea is literally older than I am.

 

[Oofta]

Ah, so it seems like this idea is literally older than I am.

Not by much for some of us, I suspect.