D&D (2024) 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.