D&D General I miss Mountain Dwarfs

[Micah Sweet]

Removing cultural aspects from characters wasn't a bad idea.

The issue is not replacing them with anything and then using a mindset of old fantasy where people are humanocentric and thus turning those species into humans.

It's like playing Vampire The Masquerade and playing a clanless character who doesn't have a clan bane nor any vampiristic weaknesses or strengths. You're just a boring Caitiff or thin blood who acts like a human. Boring.

Where's your evidence that removing culture from character creation wasn't a bad thing?

 

[Minigiant]

Where's your evidence that removing culture from character creation wasn't a bad thing?

Dragonborn

Dragonborn are so inhuman you don't need to keep the cultural ideas of 4e or dragons to make them interesting and create various subspecies of them.

 

[Theory of Games]

I thought all Dwarves were Mountain Dwarves? Primarily?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Dragonborn

Dragonborn are so inhuman you don't need to keep the cultural ideas of 4e or dragons to make them interesting and create various subspecies of them.

Yet they remain more interesting with a cultural component, and make no sense if they're the only species without one.

 

[Argyle King]

While I'm not necessarily a fan of adding more Elemental sub-species (because 5e24 already has a lot,) I think there may be a way to lean Dwarves into the WoTC vision in a different way: start from the perspective of Mag8c the Gathering's mana colors.

•Dwarves tend to be associated with mountains, so Red would be their primary.

•Other sub-species, cultures, and etc could branch out from that and ponder what that primary ("Red") culture might look like (and how it might change) when mixed with other colors of mana.

•Red/White - mountains tempered by plains might produce something similar to what we're "Hill Dwarves." Less Isolationist; More Rural; Generally Good Natured

•Red/Green - This might be more of a subculture within Mountain Dwarf society. These are dwarves who embrace their mythic connection to earth & stone. They understand that Dwarven industriousness needs to be balanced against caring for Mother Earth and Father Stone, for an anvil is of no use if there are no resources to smith.

•Red/Black - these are dwarves who have, to varying degrees, either given into their darker impulses or been forced deeper into the morass of morality. This could include things such as Duergar & Derro.

You get the idea. It's a vague and rough idea, but perhaps a different lens through which to view dwarves might lead to fleshing them out in a different way.

 

[Micah Sweet]

While I'm not necessarily a fan of adding more Elemental sub-species (because 5e24 already has a lot,) I think there may be a way to lean Dwarves into the WoTC vision in a different way: start from the perspective of Mag8c the Gathering's mana colors.

•Dwarves tend to be associated with mountains, so Red would be their primary.

•Other sub-species, cultures, and etc could branch out from that and ponder what that primary ("Red") culture might look like (and how it might change) when mixed with other colors of mana.

•Red/White - mountains tempered by plains might produce something similar to what we're "Hill Dwarves." Less Isolationist; More Rural; Generally Good Natured

•Red/Green - This might be more of a subculture within Mountain Dwarf society. These are dwarves who embrace their mythic connection to earth & stone. They understand that Dwarven industriousness needs to be balanced against caring for Mother Earth and Father Stone, for an anvil is of no use if there are no resources to smith.

•Red/Black - these are dwarves who have, to varying degrees, either given into their darker impulses or been forced deeper into the morass of morality. This could include things such as Duergar & Derro.

You get the idea. It's a vague and rough idea, but perhaps a different lens through which to view dwarves might lead to fleshing them out in a different way.

That's a cool idea on its own. No need to attach it to the concept of "leaning dwarves into the WotC way".

 

[Minigiant]

Yet they remain more interesting with a cultural component, and make no sense if they're the only species without one.

Sure

But the point is that the species is interesting beef before you add the culture. Culture is an addition.

The problem was with species like dwarves Halflings does actual species themselves are boring and barely fantastic. The culture is the interesting part. However if the world builder or dungeon master wants to change their culture then the game has to strip the culture out of this race in order to allow the dungeon master or world builder to put the culture back on.

The issue really is that 5e dwarves are linked to old setting where they aren't fantastic and 90% of what's interesting about them in those settings is their culture. So species like dwarf and halfling have to remain humanlike physically and mental.

And humans don't get subspecies.

 

[mellored]

Hill Dwarves get +1 HP per level

Mountain Dwarves can change any one saving throw into a Con saving throw once per long rest.

Doesn't really give them a lore difference.

 

[Marandahir]

The fact that we're down to 1 version of mountain dwarves but still have (at least) 3 variations of elves is annoying.

As far as specifics? Give me a few days until I have access to the new PHB since I'm not sure we have all the specifics unless I missed it. But at the moment they seem like they really lost out on just about everything that made them fun to play. Maybe bonus weapon proficiency or fighting style, not sure.

That's because, while Our Elves are Different, Our Dwarves are All the Same. Just be glad we don't have playable Trolls in D&D.

 

[Minigiant]

Doesn't really give them a lore difference.

Does in my world.

Mountain Dwarves have limited magic resistance but it drains their natural toughness.

Hill dwarves lose their magic resistance and the chains that comes with it.