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

 

[Faolyn]

They didn't say they changed their minds. They said it wasn't their intention at all, and that's just not true.

It's very possible that they didn't want to include it from the start, but felt they had to because of Tradition or even because of Upper Management.

 

[Micah Sweet]

P

It's very possible that they didn't want to include it from the start, but felt they had to because of Tradition or even because of Upper Management.

Possible. But if they can be influenced by Tradition or Upper Management, they can surely be influenced by Social Media Pressure.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I don't think there is much point in trying to guess what the designers 'really want to do'. First off, we don't know, secondly they're human like most of us, and their opinions are influenced by all sorts of things, thirdly it is a team with a bunch of people with varying opinions, and I'm sure that similar debates that happen here happen in the design studio as well.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Yeah, I really dislike racial features that make you pretty darn good at...this one thing that actually might never come up.

My issue with the criticism of powerful build is that it ignores the fact that you don't need to roll to move a boulder if it's within your carrying capacity, or lift/drag weight limit.

It means that the goliath can keep a tunnel entrance open, roll a boulder off someone, carry two dying companions, pull the cart when the horse gets an arrow in the neck, etc, without rolling. And when they do have to roll, Natural Athlete is there to make sure they're good at it.

IMO, it's exactly the sort of trait the game should have more of.

Although i will say it should also increase their range with thrown weapons.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

And they removed penalties because they didn't want to penalize "bad" race/class combinations too much.
Probably they underestimated how much value people put in a 16 main stat.

Of course it was stated, that humans got +1 to all stat so they excel at any class. But being not excellent does not mean it was not intended as a valid choice for a race/class combination.

This. It's pretty obvious that they underestimated the perception of importance of a maxed out main stat. Which makes sense, because PCs do not need it in 5e.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

This. It's pretty obvious that they underestimated the perception of importance of a maxed out main stat. Which makes sense, because PCs do not need it in 5e.

This is pretty accurate, but it is heavily dependent on which class you choose. Classes like the Druid, Wizard, or Bard don't need to max out their main stat right away, because they have useful abilities that aren't entirely dependent on getting a good number on a d20, but the Paladin and Artificer, for example, are pretty heavily dependent on having a good score in their main stat (Paladins for Aura of Protection, Spell Save DC, the amount of spells that they can prepare, Artificers for attack rolls/Spell Save DC, Flash of Genius, using their tools, and preparing spells).

A Wizard can get by with just a +2 for Intelligence, because they can cast a ton of spells that don't require Intelligence (Magic Missile, Find Familiar and other rituals, Misty Step/Dimension Door, etc), but there are classes that are much more dependent on having a better score in their main stat.

 

[Remathilis]

This is pretty accurate, but it is heavily dependent on which class you choose. Classes like the Druid, Wizard, or Bard don't need to max out their main stat right away, because they have useful abilities that aren't entirely dependent on getting a good number on a d20, but the Paladin and Artificer, for example, are pretty heavily dependent on having a good score in their main stat (Paladins for Aura of Protection, Spell Save DC, the amount of spells that they can prepare, Artificers for attack rolls/Spell Save DC, Flash of Genius, using their tools, and preparing spells).

A Wizard can get by with just a +2 for Intelligence, because they can cast a ton of spells that don't require Intelligence (Magic Missile, Find Familiar and other rituals, Misty Step/Dimension Door, etc), but there are classes that are much more dependent on having a better score in their main stat.

In Ye Olde Days of Basic (B/X or BECMI) ability scores had nearly no impact on your chosen class, save for bonus XP if it was high enough. Dexterity gave no bonus to thief skills, Intelligence didn't affect a magic-users ability to learn or cast spells, and Wisdom granted no additional spellcasting to Clerics. Only fighters got use out of a high Strength beyond bonus XP (as Str was still a bonus to hit/damage) but it was a very small bonus (Max +3) and technically, everyone benefited from high strength since outside bows and missile weapons, there was no other repeatable method of attack (no finesse weapons, no cantrips, no alternative ability score attacks). The net effect of this was for the years playing Basic, high ability scores weren't viewed as needed, only a perk. As long as you met the minimum requirements, it didn't matter a giant amount if the mage had a 9 or 17 Int. It wasn't until we moved to AD&D (where modifiers began at 15 and directly affected class features) that high ability scores became "the norm".

WotC seems to be moving away from "ability score based" design and towards Proficiency bonus/static bonus design. Abilities that might have been "Wisdom mod uses per long rest" are becoming "proficiency mod bonuses per long rest" and I think that's a direct attempt to dissuade the "necessity" of high ability scores (especially secondary ones) and the desire to max out main stats by 8th level. Clearly, 5e would have to change a LOT more to fix the problem, but I wouldn't be all too surprised if more class features (as well as the core race racial features) are less tied to ability score mod and more tied to either proficiency bonus or just given a flat number of uses. Things like Flash of Insight or a paladin's Aura of Protection removing the Int/Cha modifier for a flat or PB-based one.

 

[Mordhau]

My issue with the criticism of powerful build is that it ignores the fact that you don't need to roll to move a boulder if it's within your carrying capacity, or lift/drag weight limit.

It means that the goliath can keep a tunnel entrance open, roll a boulder off someone, carry two dying companions, pull the cart when the horse gets an arrow in the neck, etc, without rolling. And when they do have to roll, Natural Athlete is there to make sure they're good at it.

IMO, it's exactly the sort of trait the game should have more of.

Although i will say it should also increase their range with thrown weapons.

As I said earlier, the point is not really whether Powerful Build is good or bad, it's that it's supposed to work as part of an overall package.

A Strength 20 Goliath has a huge carrying capacity. 600lbs or 272 kgs. (Although we shouldn't use that to determine what they can lift - the world deadlift record is 501 kg (1,104.5 lbs). However a Strength 8 Goliath has a carrying capacity of 240lbs the same as a Strength 16 character. (Once you get your Goliath to Str 12 he's categorically the Strongest in the party - assuming noone else with powerful build, but probably not by all that much, and this really strikes me as a distinction that needs to be reasonably significant to be meaningful. It's not all that helpful if there's only a narrow range of things that you can lift that the Halfling can't, even if you can beat all the other characters in a deadlift competition - although that's far from guarenteed, it depends on whether the DM calls for a die roll.)

Now powerful build might be still be useful, but in this instance it's not really doing much to highlight the Goliath's size and strength in the game.

This is what I pointing out earlier. The design of the Goliath as a package assumes the character is going into a Strength based Melee class (and the fluff of the Goliath has always been, "this is the race for Barbarians"). If you're a high Strength Barbarian then Powerful build is cumulatively more useful. It fades away the lower your Strength. This is why I don't buy that the designers didn't realise that the ASIs would influence what classes people would pick, I think it was clearly a matter of design. (They had all of 4e to observe the same effect of the design and the resulting patterns of behaviour, including the requests for new races to fill gaps, so I think they knew.)

The removal of the ASI bonses leaves some of the races feeling half-cooked - the bonuses are not meant to work alone, they're meant to work as part of a package. I think merely removing one part of that leaves some of the design half-baked.

I don't know what the best solution is here. I wish there was some way to give certain races minimum ability scores that didn't also screw them for classes that don't need that ability, but I can't think of a particularly good way to do that without some race based dice rolling method, (I don't know maybe something like assign a 15 to Str, roll 46Dk3 four times and 3d6 once. Assign as desired to ability scores other than Strength. If you have a higher score than 15 you may choose to place that in Strength and use the 15 for a different score).

 

[doctorbadwolf]

This is pretty accurate, but it is heavily dependent on which class you choose. Classes like the Druid, Wizard, or Bard don't need to max out their main stat right away, because they have useful abilities that aren't entirely dependent on getting a good number on a d20, but the Paladin and Artificer, for example, are pretty heavily dependent on having a good score in their main stat (Paladins for Aura of Protection, Spell Save DC, the amount of spells that they can prepare, Artificers for attack rolls/Spell Save DC, Flash of Genius, using their tools, and preparing spells).

A Wizard can get by with just a +2 for Intelligence, because they can cast a ton of spells that don't require Intelligence (Magic Missile, Find Familiar and other rituals, Misty Step/Dimension Door, etc), but there are classes that are much more dependent on having a better score in their main stat.

They can all get by with a +2, though. A Paladin with a 14 Str and Cha is still hitting plenty often and adding smites, and has buff spells for when that’s a better use of slots. Giving everyone a +2 to saves is still very good, and giving +5 is generally overkill.

They could make 15 the chargen cap regardless of where you put your ASIs, and no class would break.

edit: I’m not saying it’s unreasonable to feel that pressure toward optimization. One reason that my game has few numerical modifiers at all is that I’ve seen it help people not feel that pressure as strongly.

 

[Mordhau]

They can all get by with a +2, though. A Paladin with a 14 Str and Cha is still hitting plenty often and adding smites, and has buff spells for when that’s a better use of slots. Giving everyone a +2 to saves is still very good, and giving +5 is generally overkill.

They could make 15 the chargen cap regardless of where you put your ASIs, and no class would break.

edit: I’m not saying it’s unreasonable to feel that pressure toward optimization. One reason that my game has few numerical modifiers at all is that I’ve seen it help people not feel that pressure as strongly.

Yeah, but I think that far from underestimating it, the design is actually making use of that pressure toward optimisation. I can't find a quote now, but I seem to remember an interview with Mearls about 4e, where he said that it was an explicit goal they had to reinforce character types that were considered "iconic."

This is why a Dwarf Fighter in 4e is an absolutely awesome defender/tank character, to the point of perhaps being a little overpowered. It was a correction from 3e when if you asked someone what was the best tank you would have got answer like Half Dragon/Aasimar/Paladin 3/Cleric1 /Soul of the Radiant Sun4 /Sacred Fist 3 etc, which can leave the guy who just wants to play a simple Dwarf Fighter and be really tough feeling somewhat overwhelmed.

5e seems to have been designed with the same thinking in mind.