D&D 5E WotC to increase releases per year?

[Parmandur]

Neatly fits, if this year there truly are five books instead of four.

I think there will be five, as it doesn't make sense they are releasing Ravenloft so soon after Candlekeep, when I assume the release after would be the September Adventure Book.

Anyway, now that I re-read the Draconic subclasses, I'm skeptical this is Dragonlance. A dragon-monk especially feels ill-fitted for the setting.

So I still think it's going to be something like Dragotha's Dragonomicon or something. Big monster book, a couple new subclasses, lots of fluff on things like Gem Dragons, probably maps for each dragon type's lair, maybe even new races like half-dragons or something.

Yeah, just looking at the Subclasses, I'm not sure what Setting they would fit into neatly?

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Yeah, just looking at the Subclasses, I'm not sure what Setting they would fit into neatly?

MTG's Tarkir?

 

[Parmandur]

MTG's Tarkir?

Oh.

Um.

Yeah.

That would be perfect.

 

[Remathilis]

One of the reasons (IMO) they did this was that . . . we have plenty of evil humanoids in the game (orcs, goblins, etc) and gnolls were under-utilized. So, they got an upgrade in 3E starting with the Chainmail miniatures game, and that story became popular enough it "took over" gnolls. 5E certainly takes it even further than 3E did.

One of the things WotC, and the gaming community, is wrestling with is presenting classic "bad guy" races without the baggage of racist thinking/language. If gnolls are "people", sentient, capable of free-will . . . and they are all crazed demon-worshippers . . . that's a problem. But if gnolls are demonic creations of Yeenoghu incarnated on the mortal plain, they aren't "people" but "monsters/spirits". Is that better than the old story? YMMV.

I think that the gnoll update was my favorite because it seems to imply they aren't "people" in the traditional sense; they're mutated sentient hynea-men who have managed to gain some semblance of society. The closest to a hybrid of rabid animal and demon-made-flesh. It set them apart as a force of chaos, a low-level 'demon-like' enemy that didn't have much in terms of empathy, humanity, or free will. An orc could be reasoned with, a goblin can have a change of heart, a gnoll is nothing but hunger and death. I guess they should have typed them fiends, but that opened them up to planar effects like infernal calling or protection from good and evil.

What would disappoint me would be a complete undoing of the only thing that has made gnolls interesting. Remove the demonic connection, they become stock evil humanoids again and stock evil humanoids are rapidly becoming obsolete, which would further make gnolls humans with hyena heads. Even if we are going to remove the negative stereotypes from orcs, drow, and such, I'd like to keep something that is utterly inhuman, unflinchingly evil and can (and must) be fought without mercy or hesitancy. Sometimes, it's nice to have a foe that is unapologetically evil and insane-demonic-worshipping-hyeneamen would fit that bill, even if they are still "humanoids".

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

I think that the gnoll update was my favorite because it seems to imply they aren't "people" in the traditional sense; they're mutated sentient hynea-men who have managed to gain some semblance of society. The closest to a hybrid of rabid animal and demon-made-flesh. It set them apart as a force of chaos, a low-level 'demon-like' enemy that didn't have much in terms of empathy, humanity, or free will. An orc could be reasoned with, a goblin can have a change of heart, a gnoll is nothing but hunger and death. I guess they should have typed them fiends, but that opened them up to planar effects like infernal calling or protection from good and evil.

What would disappoint me would be a complete undoing of the only thing that has made gnolls interesting. Remove the demonic connection, they become stock evil humanoids again and stock evil humanoids are rapidly becoming obsolete, which would further make gnolls humans with hyena heads. Even if we are going to remove the negative stereotypes from orcs, drow, and such, I'd like to keep something that is utterly inhuman, unflinchingly evil and can (and must) be fought without mercy or hesitancy. Sometimes, it's nice to have a foe that is unapologetically evil and insane-demonic-worshipping-hyeneamen would fit that bill, even if they are still "humanoids".

I'm working on a list of creatures to fill a new creature type composed of humanoid-ish that lost any semblance of humanity, a blight upon creation. I took the name Abominations, as used in 4e.

''Abominations were hate-filled, self-loathing beings accursed of both heaven and hell. They took delight only in causing destruction and sought to destroy nothing less than all of creation.''

''As the offspring of the gods, abominations each possessed a spark of deific power, making them virtually immortal, as they aged so slowly and needed to eat, sleep, and breathe so rarely that death came only when killed in combat. However, they were known to eat for the enjoyment of it, especially enjoying eating still-living creatures''

Now, in 4e they were mostly high-level monsters, but I think that this descriptions would fit perfectly some creatures. Even the lore behind the deific sparks mixes well with the lore behind the spawning of Gnolls and the power of the Kuo-toa to create gods with their collective dementia.

For now the list includes:

• Gnolls
• Kuo-toa
• Derro
• Grimlock
• Meazel
• Skulk
• Troglodyte

In the ''maybe'' list are:

• Yuan-ti
• Nagpa
• Merrow
• The Wretched, Lost, Lonely, Hungry, Angry
• Minotaur

 

[see]

It’s the English term for American. It’s the southern term for Northerners.

YANKEE​

-n.

In Europe, an American. In the Northern States of our Union, a New Englander. In the Southern States the word is unknown. (See DAMNYANK.)

(Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary, 1906.)

 

[Demetrios1453]

Neatly fits, if this year there truly are five books instead of four.

I think there will be five, as it doesn't make sense they are releasing Ravenloft so soon after Candlekeep, when I assume the release after would be the September Adventure Book.

Anyway, now that I re-read the Draconic subclasses, I'm skeptical this is Dragonlance. A dragon-monk especially feels ill-fitted for the setting.

So I still think it's going to be something like Dragotha's Dragonomicon or something. Big monster book, a couple new subclasses, lots of fluff on things like Gem Dragons, probably maps for each dragon type's lair, maybe even new races like half-dragons or something.

I really hope so. Ever since the sapphire dragon tease and the draconic subclasses, it seems like a book like this will be released sooner or later, and hopefully sooner rather than later.

 

[Reynard]

Re: gnolls as soulless demon spawn Canon fodder:

This is what orcs are -- or were, before WoW (among other things) made them attractive as a player species. I find it odd and a little ironic that the attempted solution of the orc issue is to turn gnolls into orcs.

 

[Remathilis]

Re: gnolls as soulless demon spawn Canon fodder:

This is what orcs are -- or were, before WoW (among other things) made them attractive as a player species. I find it odd and a little ironic that the attempted solution of the orc issue is to turn gnolls into orcs.

Ideally SOMETHING has to fill that low-level cannon fodder role. You need stormtroopers of some type recognized on sight as evil. I can't imagine three levels of bandits and skeletons will be exciting.

 

[Reynard]

Ideally SOMETHING has to fill that low-level cannon fodder role. You need stormtroopers of some type recognized on sight as evil. I can't imagine three levels of bandits and skeletons will be exciting.

I mean, you can't use bandits either. That is even worse than orcs, arguably, from the perspective that you are turning sentient people into cannon fodder.

I know I am beating a dead horse here but I'll say it one more time for the back: orcs are not a racist trope unless YOU decide they are in YOUR game. If you want to use orcs as irredeemable bad guys, just do so. Hell, use "Easterlings" if you want. Fantasy monsters and races are not stand ins for real world anything unless you decide they are, so don't do that. Or do. You are allowed to do that to. You can talk about how different cultures paint their enemies as an inhuman Other and say their gods are demons, etc... Just make sure your players are in for that first. And if you are going to publish or broadcast it, make it clear to your audience what you are doing and why.