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.

greg-rutkowski-monsters-of-the-multiverse-1920.jpg



 

log in or register to remove this ad

Cadence

Legend
Supporter
Pretty much.

tldr; The expected value under the situation I think you're agreeing to is 11.8125, not 10.5

-----------------------

In the table below, #Con out of 216 is the number out of 216 rolls that would end up with each consitution. So there is a 21/216 chance of rolling an 8, for example.

The columns C through T indicate if the class is allowed based on that roll. With a con of 8 you can be a Cleric, not a Dwarf, an Elf if Int is 9+, a Fighter, not a Halfling, a Magic-User, or a Thief.


1643642597320.png



Case 1:
Consider selecting the class randomly from all of those allowed. For a Con below 9, a Dwarf can never be selected. For a Con of 9 or higher, the chance of picking a Dwarf is 27/175 (Each of the C, D, F, M, and T can happen all of the time, while the E and H need to have a 9+ in a specified other skill, so the chance of that happening is 20/27. So the chance of a Dwarf is 1/(5+2*(20/27))=1/(175/27)=27/175.

Now consider rolling 1400 characters. The expected number of Dwarves for each Con of 9 or higher is calculated by taking 1400*(#/216)*(27/175). This is in the column labeled #Dwarf out of 1400. (It is 0 for below 9, because there aren't any).

There are a total of 160 Dwarves rolled out of the 1400 characters.

The expected value (mean) of the Cons is:
(25/160)*9+(27/160)*10+(27/160)*11+(25/160)*12+(21/160)*13+(15/160)*14+
(10/160)*15+(6/160)*16+(3/160)*17+(1/160)*18
which is 1890/160 = 11+13/16 = 11.8125.

Case 2:
Consider choosing to play a Dwarf whenever it is allowed. In that case column J becomes the number of Dwarves out of 216 rolled. There are still 160 Dwarves, and the math for the expected value doesn't change.

Case 3:
Rerolling until you get a 9+ on Con. The numbers in column J out of 160 are the chance that you get the Con for that row, and the math for the expected value doesn't change.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

It is still additive to strength, and has no bearing on other aspects of applied muscle power, like, say, an arm wrestling contest (where the length of the competitors arms alluded to above would also be a factor.

How would you (any of you) narrate said contest with a halfling victory? Actually curious, as this sort of thing comes up.
It is easy. The goliath trys to push you down, but due to your massive muscles he just can't push you down to the table. And then you grin and push him back.
Easy. Actually there are a few movies where the smaller seemingly less muscular guy wins in arm wrestling.

Actually I found something that might help imagining it.
 

Cadence

Legend
Supporter
It is easy. The goliath trys to push you down, but due to your massive muscles he just can't push you down to the table. And then you grin and push him back.
Easy. Actually there are a few movies where the smaller seemingly less muscular guy wins in arm wrestling.

Actually I found something that might help imagining it.

Darn you physics and leverage!


When this thread repeats in a year I'll have to pick something different as an example :)
 



Why?
I think the whole package is a perfect match for losing ASI. You can enforce natural strong and big character without touching a score that has too many gaming implications.
You can do it but you have to do it.

I went through the issues with the current desgin in much more detail in an earlier post.
 

Where is your stats about race class synergie without ASI?
In the row marked 'human'.

To make a real good statistical case you need the comparison between those two.
You might do correlation, but you never know if there is a hidden factor you missed. (Maybe pictures of Goliaths are more influencing than the ASI).
Maybe they are. That the design as a whole (which includes but is not limited to ASIs), is influencing race class synergies was precisely the point that I was making.

Also. What are you actually even arguing against here? It's not the basic thesis of the post you quoted.

Do you disagree that mechanics drive behaviour? And if so do you believe that removing ASIs in order to free up player choices was unnecessary? (Because mechanics don't drive behaviour).
 
Last edited:



Humans are as close as we can get to perfect example of what we get when there is no synergies driving people toward any particular class.
No. They are not other races. We need a sample of what other traits of races might also affect your decision. Otherwise you won´t be able to assess how important stat bonuses are as an independant factor.
 

Remove ads

Latest threads

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top