D&D 5E A Compilation of all the Race Changes in Monsters of the Multiverse

Over on Reddit, user KingJackel went through the video leak which came out a few days ago and manually compiled a list of all the changes to races in the book. The changes are quite extensive, with only the fairy and harengon remaining unchanged. The book contains 33 races in total, compiled and updated from previous Dungeons & Dragons books.

D&D 5E - List of All 33 Races in Mordenkainen's Monsters of the Multiverse

Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse contains 33 races compiled from previous Dungeons & Dragons books. Aarackocra Assimar Bugbear Centaur Changeling Deep Gnome Duergar Eladrin Fairy Firbolg Genasi, Air Genasi, Earth Genasi, Fire Gennasi, Water Githyanki Githzerai Goblin Goliath...

www.enworld.org

D&D 5E - Full List of Monsters in Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse

Mordenkainen Presents Monsters of the Multiverse contains revamped stat blocks for 260 monsters previously published in previous Dungeons & Dragons 5E books. The list was compiled by YouTuber Bob Worldbuilder based on some blurry screenshots originally shared by Nerd Immersion (see the video...

www.enworld.org

 

[Malmuria]

Does it matter that the goliath player who wants to be a really strong goliath only get to be at the 95th percentile of strength among goliaths while the halfling gets to be at the 99.995th percentile among halflings?

I think if we are talking about simulation, this point stands whether or not we use floating or fixed asi. For example, if the +2 Str of the Goliath pc extends to all Goliaths in the setting, then high str Goliath pc is not unusual relative to the world, but is more likely to be a bit stronger than the halfling str-based fighter in their party. Meanwhile, the 15Str halfling fighter is still quite rare relative to other halflings. So that dynamic stays the same. The thing that changes is whether the 1st level PC is allowed to be even 5% more out of that range. The only way to avoid this would be to cap ability scores based on race (so that a 15 str is outside of the norm relative to halflings, but their str is capped at 15). Possibly restricting class options based on race would also produced the desired effect.

Fwiw, I think the "stone's endurance" and "powerful build" traits are more flavorful; there should be more of those, including maybe choices (i.e. racial feats). I also think, because of archetype, players are more likely to choose to make a dexterous halfling than a strong one, but that's speculation. Finally, optimizers will not make a Str-based pc to begin with (see other thread on dump stats).

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Issue is that I think for a Goliath being stronger than at least regular humans, is part of their special trait.

I also think that quite often the character's special traits are written to complement their existing ASIs. Half-Orcs and Goliaths are written to be melee combatants. Their whole package is written to support that. (It's overly narrow, but then that in effect is the problem with archetypes.)

Edit: Also the whole thing where the Goliath Sorcerer has a Str of 10 and Powerful Build (which already exists under current rules), is already pretty unsatisfactory.

It's like putting someone in a running race, tying both their legs together, and then giving them a big propeller on their back to compensate.

What it's really saying is that we think Goliaths should be stronger than other races, just not in any way that really matters.

I agree that the double trait and ASI thing is incoherent. We basically have two things that represent same concept, it is weird. But my conclusion is opposite to yours: I think as long as ability scores exist, they alone should be used to represent these things. Because even if ASIs wouldn't exist, strength score would, so the same weirdness with the trait would remain.

 

[Mordhau]

I agree that the double trait and ASI thing is incoherent. We basically have two things that represent same concept, it is weird. But my conclusion is opposite to yours: I think as long as ability scores exist, they alone should be used to represent these things. Because even if ASIs wouldn't exist, strength score would, so the same weirdness with the trait would remain.

I didn't think I came to any real conclusion.

I think the end proccess of all this, or at least the way the logic is leading is to some kind of fate like aspects. But the fanbase would never wear that, so I think we're doomed to continued incoherence.

 

[Hussar]

Then get rid of classes.

Ahh, slippery slope, how I have missed thee.

I'd point out that with what, a hundred or so different subclasses in 5e now across 11 base classes, the notion of "class" isn't really quite the same as it used to be.

Why we have these numbers then? If they don't simulate anything and aren't even noticeable in play, why have ability scores?

Because we're playing a game? The numbers matter to the game, but not to anything approaching a simulation of reality.

And, again, note, you're not actually countering my point. The difference of +1 for a stat is going to be pretty much invisible by very early levels. To the point where it will not be noticeable. I've often been baffled by players who insist that they get that 20 stat as soon as possible. It's largely just gilding the lily. Completely unnecessary.

-----------

Note, there's an unspoken assumption here as well. That the idea that enforcing archetypes through ASI's leads to characters that fit with that archetype. Is that actually true? I find that there is a significant number of players who simply choose the race based on the best "fit" for the class and then never reference the race again unless it comes with a bonus - "oh, it's dark? That's okay, I'm a __, I have darkvision". The fact that the character is a __ is never referenced again. To the point where I've actually seen other players say, "Wait, you're a ___ since when?"

Enforcing archetypes has a long tradition in D&D. AD&D enforced it both through ability scores AND level limits. Heck, Basic/Expert enforced it by having races actually be classes.

Both ideas have long been left by the wayside. This is no different. Over time, it's been found that you don't actually need to enforce archetypes. People will play them anyway. So, you will always have elven archers because of the LotR. And halfing rogues because that's a thing. And Big Race Barbarian because that's a thing. You don't NEED to pigeonhole the races. Players will happily fill up those holes anyway.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Because we're playing a game? The numbers matter to the game, but not to anything approaching a simulation of reality.

And, again, note, you're not actually countering my point. The difference of +1 for a stat is going to be pretty much invisible by very early levels. To the point where it will not be noticeable. I've often been baffled by players who insist that they get that 20 stat as soon as possible. It's largely just gilding the lily. Completely unnecessary.

How can it matter to the game if it is not noticeable?

 

[Hussar]

How can it matter to the game if it is not noticeable?

Really? That's your takeaway? That's your counter point?

 

[Mordhau]

How can it matter to the game if it is not noticeable?

I'm not entirely sure what point Hussar was making, but I would suggest it matters a lot more in some circumstances than others.

As a Fighter I use Strength in every combat, so my score definitely matters there. I'll notice very quickly if I've dropped Strength. However, If have a 14 in Int rather 10 it's going to have very little real effect on my History rolls.

So if I bump my Int to 14 because I really want to think of my Fighter as above average Intelligence, I'm doing it mostly because of my own interpration of what the score represents in a non-mechanical game interface way.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Really? That's your takeaway? That's your counter point?

It is a question. I don't understand how this game where participants do not notice what is happening it works.

 

[Azzy]

Let's make D&D more like OD&D, and just dump racial ASIs altogether (whether floating or not). They're just Johnny-come-lately rules after all.

 

[Hussar]

It is a question. I don't understand how this game where participants do not notice what is happening it works.

I'm sorry, I can't parse that. Can you restate?

----
@Mordhau basically has the right of it. Even that fighter, losing a +1 on attacks isn't going to be all that noticeable. An easy way to see is to track your attacks next session. How often did you hit by exactly the right number? It should be 5%. Which means that 95% of the time, that +1 has no actual impact on the game.

So, basically, arguing that halflings should be -1 to big races is arguing about that 5%. Now, it might be a bit more noticeable with strength simply because you make so many attack rolls. But, again, at the absolute outside, it's only actually affecting 1 roll in 20 hits. So about 1 roll in 30 (ish).

From a simulationist standpoint, it simply isn't important enough to make any difference. Most of the difference will be at very low levels, and even then, mostly just psychological.