Search results

The Warforged name is established, so I'd say keep it as primary simply for brand recognition purposes, but honestly, that's a minor issue. Not noted in the existing 5e tabaxi description(s), but as pointed out earlier in the other Greyhawk thread: Tabaxi and rakasta were always functionally...

So change the name: "Warforged, also known as [insert secondary name here] in some worlds, are a type of sentient construct that..." Done. It's no harder than recognizing that tabaxi and rakasta are essentially the same thing and don't need separate stat blocks, even if they go by different...

It's one of the reasons I'm honestly baffled they weren't included in Monsters of the Multiverse with the changeling and shifter... Kalashtar are firmed hooked into Eberron lore in a way that's hard to disentangle, but for all their Eberron-specific flavoring, the core idea of what warforged...

Honestly, just treat a warforged as a sentient type of lesser golem, which is essentially what they already are. That lets them theoretically exist anywhere that has (or once had, at least) wizards/artificers/etc. capable of creating golems and you can make them as one-of-a-kind or as...

The thing about orcs in Greyhawk, or anywhere else: You can still have orc populations that don't get along with neighboring human/elf/dwarf/etc. populations without them being definitionally evil - just give historical/political reasons for the conflict, like generations-long competition over...

I'm rather fond of what Pathfinder did with their Aphorite (LN) and Ganzi (CN) planetouched, myself. My personal version of the Great Wheel imports a lot from their Great Beyond cosmology.

I've seen the 5e cosmology map. It's a diagram representing a conceptual framework, not a literal physical map you can use to navigate walking from one plane to another. These supposed "crossings" from the Upper Planes to the Feywild and the Lower Planes to the Shadowfell pass through the...

Genasi are of elemental (i.e. inner planar) heritage, which is from the "opposite end" of the cosmology. They have no inherit connection whatsoever to the neutral outer planes.

Pre-4e succubi were demons, 4e made them devils (as part of 4e's cosmology overhaul), then 5e split the difference and made them an independent, "any evil" type of fiend, presumably to keep from invalidating as much as possible of what they had previously written on the subject. They probably...

I know it's probably far too late to completely excise, but the lore ripple effects from the 4e succubi migration really annoy me... "All 'seductive' demons are now devils. Except Graz'zt and Malcanthet, who are still demons, but it's okay, because now we're bending over backwards to note that...

To be sure, though keeping them in the '24 PHB might justify adding in a few new tiefling lineages as well (not that I have anything in particular in mind on that front). Also would help to keep all of the people who will otherwise reflexively complain that "They took away Fallen Aasimar!!!" happy.

More or less what I'm hoping for - repurpose the first-draft ardling's Heavenly/Idyllic/Exalted lineages as new options for the aasimar alongside the existing Protector/Scourge/Fallen "angelic" lineage options.

For what it's worth, the adventure in the new Planescape has a brief appearance by the shadar-kai Farrow, who (like his 2e shadow elf incarnation) is explicitly noted as being from the material plane world of Mystara. Doesn't go into any further detail, but thought it was worth a mention.

I don't think they'd bring back the ardling as a "now you can play a guardinal-themed aasimar", but I could definitely see it popping back up for all the people who want "tabaxi, but dog/deer/[insert animal here]". That's more or less what I mean by "animal person" instead of "celestial...

I happened to like the first draft of the ardling, at least in concept, because I felt it created a distinction between "celestial" (i.e. archon/guardinal/etc.) planetouched and what I'd call "divine" (i.e. angelic) planetouched, which played into one of the very few 4e-isms that I wish they'd...

Says Bastions are in the '24 core rules, not that they're in the PHB. Seems more likely to be an optional system in the DMG to me.