All about Ardlings

[ClockworkNinja]

Quote from the playtest: "An ardling has a head resembling that of an animal, typically one with virtuous associations. Depending on the animal, the ardling might also have soft fur, downy feathers, or supple bare skin."

How do you interpret this? A mostly human head with animal ears on top like an Anime catgirl? or a fully animal head from the neck up like an Egyptian god?

Would having a different mouth shape cause trouble when drinking from a cup, or give them an odd lisp when speaking?

Do we even need ardlings? or are they redundant when we already have Aasimar and Shifters?

 

[D1Tremere]

I thought of them basically as Egyptian god versions.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I think the idea from WotC is for it to be intentionally vague, so you can be anything from a full-on Furry to the mildest of Catgirls.

That said reading the text I assumed it was "mostly animal with some human".

They're definitely not redundant. Shifters don't really do the same thing at all, or appeal to the same people. In fact, not many people like Shifters at all (I mean, a few, but not many). Aasimar are what needs to get deleted if anything. They somehow manage to have an even worse name than Aardling which is a hell of an achievement (and I say this as a 2E grog).

 

[MarkB]

I thought of them basically as Egyptian god versions.

Yeah, this is one of the first things I pictured.

 

[beancounter]

I got the impression that they intended 100%

 

[Twiggly the Gnome]

How do you interpret this? A mostly human head with animal ears on top like an Anime catgirl? or a fully animal head from the neck up like an Egyptian god?

I think the intention is that the head is fully zoomorphic, but I guess if you use the mixed race "rules" you can dial it back to whatever degree you want.

Do we even need ardlings? or are they redundant when we already have Aasimar and Shifters?

I think Shifters need a refresh, there's really no reason they should be stuck with one inner beast manifestation, they should be able to switch them out like Eladrin switch seasons. Less Tigra, more Vixen.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I don't know what wotc meant. I know that @HammerMan got me to search 'skunk woman fantasy art' and I think you will find any combo you want now

 

[Corinnguard]

Do we even need Ardlings? Not really. All we really need to do is to expand the number of celestials an Aasimar can be descended from. If 1D&D is going to have Tieflings descending from devils, demons and yugoloths, it only seems fair for the Aasimar to come from angels, archons and guardinals. If you want to look like an animal-headed Aasimar, just have a guardinal ancestor.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I think it's important that ardling player can make their character look like whatever % version they prefer.

 

[Shiroiken]

The decision to do Ardlings rather than Aasimar is astounding to me. Tieflings have been core for 2 editions now, but screw you Aasimar... nobody likes you.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Yeah, I'm in the ''Egyptian gods'' camp so: animal head + human body.

 

[HammerMan]

I don't know what wotc meant. I know that @HammerMan got me to search 'skunk woman fantasy art' and I think you will find any combo you want now

Don’t blame me blame the 14 year old girl that wants to play an anthropomorphic skunk swordswoman. And she wanted a tail and non damaging non climbing claws (so just slightly different fingernails)
I have no idea if this comes from a comic an anime or her own twisted mind.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Don’t blame me blame the 14 year old girl that wants to play an anthropomorphic skunk swordswoman. And she wanted a tail and non damaging non climbing claws (so just slightly different fingernails)
I have no idea if this comes from a comic an anime or her own twisted mind.

did she choose medium or small and what linage? I don't see skunk under suggestions

 

[beancounter]

After the Ardling get's integrated into the game for a while, I'd be curious to see how many people (as a percentage of the total) actually choose to use them over the multitude of other species available.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

The decision to do Ardlings rather than Aasimar is astounding to me. Tieflings have been core for 2 editions now, but screw you Aasimar... nobody likes you.

I don't understand why people keep saying "rather than Aasimar" as if Aasimar are cut. They are in MPMotM, which is the book where you find races that are done 1D&D-style already. They were done FIRST - they're not out of the game.

If you're wondering why they're not in the 2024 PHB, well, they could be, they just don't need playtesting because they're already available. (This is true of the dragonborn, too, so I'm not sure why they threw another version in the playtest, but that's it's own problem).

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I don't see skunk under suggestions

What difference does that make? The suggestions are just that - suggestions. You can make any animal you like.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

they just don't need playtesting because they're already out. (This is true of the dragonborn, too, so I'm not sure why they threw another version in the playtest, but that's it's own problem).

I'm more worried about dragonborn TBH

 

[beancounter]

OT rant - I'm a bit irked that WoTC keeps on adding more and more species to the huge list of choices, yet they won't grandfather half elves or half orcs (in their original "form")

 

[Scribe]

I don't know what wotc meant. I know that @HammerMan got me to search 'skunk woman fantasy art' and I think you will find any combo you want now

 

[GMforPowergamers]

What difference does that make? The suggestions are just that - suggestions. You can make any animal you like.

Cause in the other thread about his playtest he says she is new, like never even heard of D&D before seeing it on stranger things... so she went and did what took me 2 or 3 character creations before I could... made it her own and went without using examples... so I was wondering is all.