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

[Oofta]

Sure there is, and the idea that laughing at something other than a joke is insulting is absolutely preposterous on every level.

It's against the forum rules. While it's not normally caught people have been warned about it.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Why would I want to say something that I'm not saying?

IT is the only thing I can get from your insistence that your homebrew is RAW.

The point is that I can point to rules that allow it. RAW allows it, even if it's homebrew.

Congratulations, you've proven the rules allow homebrew. The thing I said a while ago.

That means you've.... basically just been arguing a point I conceded at the start of this. You created a homebrew. And as the DM you are allowed to homebrew anything.

However, just because RAW allows you to homebrew, does not make the actual thing that you have homebrewed a fact of RAW. Because "Rules as Written" does not include the things you make up for your own game.

Not really. The major difference is the duration of the use of the stat block, not whether the players are using the stat blocks for their PCs.

No, that is not the major difference.

"I have the magical ability to turn into a dragon temporarily." is fundamentally different from "I am a Dragon." Not that I see the point of this discussion, except you somehow trying to make your homebrew RAW, which it won't be, no matter what you try and say.

Why would I throw out 35+ years of how centaurs are, because WotC made a bad decision in 4e?

Can you prove it was a bad decision?

Why should someone who has been running their game for over a decade throw that out just because people in the past used different rules and WotC made a bad decision in 5e?

Or maybe, the point was that pretty much no one really noticed the change. Monstrous Humanoid or Fey, there really isn't a lot of difference. Want to know how I can tell?

Because you've already thrown out 35+ years of lore because of a decision made in 4e. In fact, I'd say most of us did without even realizing it.

Go look up the statblock for a 3.5 Hag. Know what it says? Monstrous Humanoid. Same as the Centaur did. 4e and 5e? Fey.

So, will the Forgotten Realms crumble under the weight of changing Centaur to medium Fey creatures? Nope. Because creature types changing over time is a pretty common thing actually. So, if it is easier to run them as Fey by just grabbing the Ravnica player rules and running them straight... We know that the Realms or whatever other place you'd like to point to can likely handle that change. Because they did already.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Agreed. I never said every climb requires a check. The reason: sometimes the DM says you can do that. Even in one of my bard chandelier examples I stated this. My point is a DC can change based on circumstances. And weight is is a circumstantial factor.

As for penalizing characters, I have always let characters choose acrobatics or athletics for their climbs, whichever is best. But having climbed quite a bit, I know when you hit sheer walls, it takes strength as equated to body weight, not dexterity. Hence, the 135 pound muscular climber is better than the 200 pound muscle bound climber. Much of that is because of finger strength. But, some things you just need to not be picky about - at least at my table.

I think the real question is can a centaur compete in America Ninja Warrior?

I guess since you were talking just "climbing" I was assuming that you like many many many people I've encountered would have athletics checks for even simple climbs. Like I said, a personal pet peeve.

And sure, a truly difficult climb should be athletics, 100% agree with that, but when we are talking scaling a ten foot wall or climbing a trellis of ivy, and you are making athletics checks? That's not how things should work.

Heck, I've had DMs have us roll atheltics to climb a knotted rope.

And could a Centaur compete on America Ninja Warrior? 100%.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How so?

You stated:

You stated since centaurs aren't real we can't compare them to anything. I stated that Max's tables uses their own logic: they compare them to horses (which are real) and people (which are real). I stated your side said it can't be compared because they are not real. That is what you meant when you said centaurs can't be compared because they aren't real creatures, right?

So to me, who still thinks the debate should be over the DC not whether they can or can't, isn't a one side logic wins. It is to see the absurdity of either side presented with game rules, physical evidence and general laws of physics and muscles and do everything to refute it rather than saying:
"We like our centaurs to be able to climb ropes. Here is how I picture it (add visual). Yeah, it is absurd, but you know, dragons. Anyway, it works for our table. How would you call this circumstance? (Add specific circumstance)"
or
"We don't like our centaurs to climb ropes. Here is how I picture it (add visual). Yeah, its simulationism, but it would break our immersion if we played it any differently. How would your table call this circumstance (Add specific circumstance)?"

I hope you can see the difference between that and someone saying: "A centaur weighs 600-800 pounds. No one can do a pullup with human arms with 600 pounds." And then watching twenty posts of people trying to deny this fact. Sometimes there are just facts. They should be accepted. Like how hooves are not as good as fingers for gripping.

There are two problems with your analysis.

1) Look at one of Max's most recent posts:

Whatever dude. Enjoy your game. I'll enjoy one that makes sense. Have a good day.

This is not a statement by someone who is acknowledging that this is a preference between tables. This is a statement of "my world is better than yours"

2) There is a fundamental problem with trying to compare a Centaur to a horse, which is that a Centaur is not a horse. I know this sounds like a silly argument, but there are a lot of reasons to put this forth. For example, a horse that break a leg more than 50% of the time, need to be euthanized. You cannot in most cases save the life of a horse with a broken leg.

Is this true of Centaurs? I don't know. I don't know the bone composition fo centaurs, I don't know how their immune system reacts, I don't know a lot of things about them, because Centaurs are not horses and they are not humans.

Everyone keeps describing the centaur facing the wall head on when they climb, but could they crab-climb up the wall, twisting their upper body and use one foreleg and one back leg to climb? Perhaps even angle themselves as they go to drag themselves sideways up a cliff?

We can't do that as humans, but we don't have a long body, and we don't have six limbs to find contact points. Treating a centaurs "optimal" climbing position as the same as a humans when they are not human is... kind of silly.

And sure, a horse couldn't do that. But Chimps can't dance Ballet either, having the same arrangement of limbs does not give you the same options, when having a high intellect can mean you can control those limbs in far different manner.

Perhaps a Centaur's legs can curl and press into the body with enough tension to push them back into a cliff, especially as they use their arms to pull them towards the cliff.

There are a lot of possibilities, and just declaring it impossible because a horse can't do it, or a human can't do it, doesn't mean a Centaur can't do it.

 

[Maxperson]

IT is the only thing I can get from your insistence that your homebrew is RAW.

Since I've told you at least 3 times that I'm not saying that, I'm going to tell you to stop twisting my arguments to suit your needs. If you don't want to be called out for twisting arguments. Stop doing it.

"I have the magical ability to turn into a dragon temporarily." is fundamentally different from "I am a Dragon."

In duration, yes. That's it. Otherwise you are a PC using the dragon statblock in both cases.

Or maybe, the point was that pretty much no one really noticed the change. Monstrous Humanoid or Fey, there really isn't a lot of difference. Want to know how I can tell?

Because you've already thrown out 35+ years of lore because of a decision made in 4e. In fact, I'd say most of us did without even realizing it.

Go look up the statblock for a 3.5 Hag. Know what it says? Monstrous Humanoid. Same as the Centaur did. 4e and 5e? Fey.

Yes. There are a lot of changes that I don't use. I already know that.

 

[Maxperson]

Everyone keeps describing the centaur facing the wall head on when they climb, but could they crab-climb up the wall, twisting their upper body and use one foreleg and one back leg to climb? Perhaps even angle themselves as they go to drag themselves sideways up a cliff?

No, they can't. Horse hooves, which are a fact in 5e for centaurs, can't do that. Nor are they strong enough to drag themselves by nothing but their arms.

 

[Scott Christian]

It's also less apparently "unfair" when two party members roll the same thing on their check, and one of them succeeds while the other one fails.

Sure the DM can provide justification, but the optics are bad.

I definitely agree with that first part. I think the optics are bad is only an issue at certain tables or with certain circumstances. (To get off climbing. ) Suppose two people are swimming to shore and the breaks are heavy. One is a triton and one is a centaur (and the water is warm). The DC is a 15 athletics check or be pulled by a riptide back out to sea. No one would fault the DM if they told the triton your DC is 5 or roll with advantage or you auto succeed. And then turned and said hey centaur, give me a standard athletics roll. You need a 15.

So if you don't like the look of DC's changing, I think it's understandable to mask it in advantage/disadvantage rolls. But, doing so comparative to changing the DC. (For you math wizards, I know it's not identical, but does create the same function.)

 

[Scott Christian]

Related to DCs, race can make a difference depending on the check. A dwarf is going to have a harder time convincing most elves as an example.

As long as the DM is up front about how they're going to do things and consistent I don't see a problem.

Yeah, I was just going to say this. Have a goblin PC make a persuasion roll to calm the human town guard a year after the Great Goblin Invasion of 862! Some things are based on race, and in the end, it is the DM's call.

 

[Scott Christian]

I guess since you were talking just "climbing" I was assuming that you like many many many people I've encountered would have athletics checks for even simple climbs. Like I said, a personal pet peeve.

You and me both. It has always irked me that they specifically placed athletics as strength based and climb under athletics, knowing full well that traditional rogues are the ones that scramble up walls, sneak inside towers, etc. A oversight in my opinion.

And sure, a truly difficult climb should be athletics, 100% agree with that, but when we are talking scaling a ten foot wall or climbing a trellis of ivy, and you are making athletics checks? That's not how things should work.

Definitely agree.

And could a Centaur compete on America Ninja Warrior? 100%.

Compete, yes. Succeed, no. (imho)
Although that first challenge, where they hop from one side to another might be cakewalk.

2) There is a fundamental problem with trying to compare a Centaur to a horse, which is that a Centaur is not a horse. I know this sounds like a silly argument, but there are a lot of reasons to put this forth. For example, a horse that break a leg more than 50% of the time, need to be euthanized. You cannot in most cases save the life of a horse with a broken leg.

Is this true of Centaurs? I don't know. I don't know the bone composition fo centaurs, I don't know how their immune system reacts, I don't know a lot of things about them, because Centaurs are not horses and they are not humans.

Everyone keeps describing the centaur facing the wall head on when they climb, but could they crab-climb up the wall, twisting their upper body and use one foreleg and one back leg to climb? Perhaps even angle themselves as they go to drag themselves sideways up a cliff?

We can't do that as humans, but we don't have a long body, and we don't have six limbs to find contact points. Treating a centaurs "optimal" climbing position as the same as a humans when they are not human is... kind of silly.

And sure, a horse couldn't do that. But Chimps can't dance Ballet either, having the same arrangement of limbs does not give you the same options, when having a high intellect can mean you can control those limbs in far different manner.

Perhaps a Centaur's legs can curl and press into the body with enough tension to push them back into a cliff, especially as they use their arms to pull them towards the cliff.

There are a lot of possibilities, and just declaring it impossible because a horse can't do it, or a human can't do it, doesn't mean a Centaur can't do it.

Thanks Chaos. That was kind of what I was referring to be describing it. For me, I think the reason I would say no as a DM is purely a weight issue. I have attempted too many pullups in my life to think I could ever do it with more weight than what is on my body. But, I like what you are saying about the flexibility and intellect. I think if I was at a table and the player through that my way, I would roll with it. But, then again, I roll with almost anything, and they do so in turn. That is the beauty of playing FR in my opinion. Almost anything goes.
And in my curated world, there are no centaur PCs, specifically because of reason like this. It might not be for everyone, but it certainly works for the tables I have and have had.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I have attempted too many pullups in my life to think I could ever do it with more weight than what is on my body

This guy did 160lbs, as a new personal record.

Imagine if he was able to stabilize using his feet against a wall.

now imagine he had extra legs, the ends of which are fitted with specialized spiked shoes that can only be jammed into nooks and crannies in the wall to make it possible to leverage the strength of those legs, and the extra weight was distributed along the length of that weird as hell body.

It’s kinda hard because there is some alien biology going on there, but centaurs are weird magical creatures, not horses.

 

[Gammadoodler]

I definitely agree with that first part. I think the optics are bad is only an issue at certain tables or with certain circumstances. (To get off climbing. ) Suppose two people are swimming to shore and the breaks are heavy. One is a triton and one is a centaur (and the water is warm). The DC is a 15 athletics check or be pulled by a riptide back out to sea. No one would fault the DM if they told the triton your DC is 5 or roll with advantage or you auto succeed. And then turned and said hey centaur, give me a standard athletics roll. You need a 15.

So if you don't like the look of DC's changing, I think it's understandable to mask it in advantage/disadvantage rolls. But, doing so comparative to changing the DC. (For you math wizards, I know it's not identical, but does create the same function.)

Am I meant to ignore that Tritons in 5e are amphibious with a swim speed? Because if not, the DC 5 check is stranger than the DC 15.

Outside of that, characters have skills modifiers to reflect how good they are at things, which would seem to do the job the dynamic DCs are intended to do.

But even accepting that the dynamic DC approach makes sense, it would only seem to work where DCs are stated to the players at the table. I'm not sure how common this is, but it's not something I've encountered in my games.

I realize advantage/disadvantage functions in a somewhat equivalent way, bit it at least allows for apples to apples comparisons at the table.

 

[Remathilis]

So has anyone considered that the centaur climbs Batman '68 style?