Anthropomorphic Animal PCs!

[AngeltheTechrat]

Yes. I was thinking more along the lines of Scooby Doo rather than Azlan when I wrote that. In hindsight playing an intelligent, talking non-anthropomorphic animal that is more than just a funny or cute sidekick could be an interesting challenge.

I tried out playing a unicorn in 3E. It worked in wilderness and dungeon play, but wound up a big obstical in towns when most of the party would enter buildings and such. Plus the matter of not being able to handle his own gear and having to rely on other party members.

I just had to let him go off after we past a point with the "Red Bull" storyline the DM was running. But I later brought him back as the Unicorn Companion for my Fighter/Whitehorn/Beloved of Valarien character. Worked much much better that way, and his personality was already fleshed out and familiar to everyone else, so it was often back-and-forth as to whether the "character" or the "class feature" was dominant.

Anyway, yes.. Playing an intelligent talking character without thumbs can be fun, but be prepaired for a lot of difficulties and dependence on others.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

For the love of -

Again, there's a difference between an anthropomorphic animal and a furry. Is it not designed to be specifically sexualized? Then it's not a furry. Here, have this handy dandy photo for reference:

 

[Akaiku]

Scaven are totally furries. Also, irratating, stupid rats...

Aside from that, Werecreatures are generally win, especially if they have 'free' shapechanging, cause that's just fun. It's wild shape for free and such.

Though, I have played an awakened wolf monk and a friend has played a griphon druid, but really...

Dragonborn seem popular, and they are anthropomorphic dragons, that's like an animal, right? Shifters are picutured as such, as are gnolls. Minoutars? Though, generally the whole "there are anthro races for no reason" justification will not win you many gm oks. Traditionally races need to actually, you know, EXIST to be okay'd.

 

[Scribble]

Scaven are totally furries. Also, irratating, stupid rats...

Aside from that, Werecreatures are generally win, especially if they have 'free' shapechanging, cause that's just fun. It's wild shape for free and such.

Though, I have played an awakened wolf monk and a friend has played a griphon druid, but really...

Dragonborn seem popular, and they are anthropomorphic dragons, that's like an animal, right? Shifters are picutured as such, as are gnolls. Minoutars? Though, generally the whole "there are anthro races for no reason" justification will not win you many gm oks. Traditionally races need to actually, you know, EXIST to be okay'd.

I was mainly thinking of the whole "awakened" idea myself, erather then the half man half animal idea furries seem to inspire.

Animals like a badger, or a rat, that have "hands" so they can sue equipment...

In all ways a normal "animal" but with intelligence like a human.

 

[Akaiku]

I had a wizard who wielded a longsword made of darkness in his mouth when he polymorphed, that was pretty cool. More traditional equipment? Sometimes (often) just seems silly looking. However, in a dnd setting especially, using the "A wizard did it" clause for any magical equipment just works.

Really, it's not that big of a deal as long as whatever handwavium you are applying isn't a bothering drain on the rest of the party.

 

[SKyOdin]

Though, generally the whole "there are anthro races for no reason" justification will not win you many gm oks. Traditionally races need to actually, you know, EXIST to be okay'd.

Okay, I just don't follow this logic. What do you mean by implying that races need a reason to exist? Truth be told, there is no real reason for the presence of Elves, Dwarves, and Halflings in D&D, other than tradition. None of them exist for a specific reason except to create a specific flavor and to let players play something that isn't human. In that sense, there is no reason that a DM who likes the particular flavor of humanoid animals can't add them to his campaign.

As for your comment that races traditionally "need to exist" just seems strange to me. I don't think you are talking about "exist" in a mechanical, has-been-printed-in-a-book sense. What is odd is that elves and dwarves don't exist in the real world. They are creatures of myth and legend. However, so are animals that have been given human qualities. Anthropomorphized animals appear in just about every culture's mythology and folk tales, from the Big Bad Wolf of European folk tale, to the Monkey King of Chinese stories, to the trickster Raven of Native American tales. In my opinion, the lack of anthropomorphized animals traditionally in D&D and D&D based fantasy is an unusual exception.

Personnally, I like the idea of anthropomorphic animals being in D&D. I have to admit that this is in large part due to me being a fan of the Breath of Fire series of videogames.

 

[TwinBahamut]

Intelligent magical animals are one of the few important elements of traditional folklore and fantasy that D&D has never handled very well. I wouldn't mind playing an intelligent wolf character or something.

Actually, when 4E was first released I put a pretty significant amount of effort into designing a group of PC races loosely modeled after the Laguz of the Fire Emblem videogames, the Clans of the Breath of Fire videogames, and the Hanju from the Twelve Kingdoms anime. In other words, a group of races with a mix of human and animal features built around transforming into powerful beasts in order to fight, much like were-creatures or seriously toughened up Hengeyokai. I kept running into difficult design issues though, because 4E is so dependent on weapons and implements, and I wasn't able to think of a good way to overcome that issue. Maybe I should start over and give it another try, now that I am a bit more familiar with how 4E works...

 

[Rechan]

For the love of -

Again, there's a difference between an anthropomorphic animal and a furry. Is it not designed to be specifically sexualized? Then it's not a furry.

Well, I would vehemently disagree with this statement. Despite what many people do with it, the core intention behind "furry" is not "designing an animal to be sexualized".

But I really, really do not want to turn this thread into a "What is furry" argument, or even bring furries into it beyond this. But sex is not the beginning and end of the intention of furry.

 

[Rechan]

Okay, I just don't follow this logic. What do you mean by implying that races need a reason to exist? Truth be told, there is no real reason for the presence of Elves, Dwarves, and Halflings in D&D, other than tradition. None of them exist for a specific reason except to create a specific flavor and to let players play something that isn't human. In that sense, there is no reason that a DM who likes the particular flavor of humanoid animals can't add them to his campaign.

Not to mention that there is usually no reason given for any non-demi human race. Orcs/goblins/kobolds/gnolls/etc.

 

[Rechan]

Intelligent magical animals are one of the few important elements of traditional folklore and fantasy that D&D has never handled very well. I wouldn't mind playing an intelligent wolf character or something.

You know. One place to look for something not-quite Folkloric, but something that's quite doable, is RedX from FF7. A talking animal with a culture, and it adventures with you, fighting with you.

I kept running into difficult design issues though, because 4E is so dependent on weapons and implements, and I wasn't able to think of a good way to overcome that issue. Maybe I should start over and give it another try, now that I am a bit more familiar with how 4E works...

Look at the Druid. The druid can wildshape between its Druid and "Wildshape" form. Some of the powers require the druid to be in the Wildhsape form.

I could easily see a Wildshape-based class that's a full-on defender or striker, instead of a controller (like the druid).

If you don't want to go the Class route, look at the Shifter. Their beast form could very well be just aesthetic, and 'hulking out' would just be the benefits the shifter gets.