D&D (2024) Ardlings, Shifter and Hengeyokai as different variations on animal people

[Kobold Avenger]

They're similar in that they all come from a variety of animals as opposed to a specific ones (like the Tabaxi and Kenku).

Ardlings being from the Beastlands are based more on the conceptual idea of animals, or alternatively be seen as "lets play a full on furry", and they toned down the celestial bit.

Shifters are sort of Lycanthrope/Werewolf-lite, and might be the most tied to the Material Plane of the bunch. I guess they can be seen as "part-time furries" by some.

Hengeyokai which haven't appeared in 5e yet, are more like Spirit Animals who can become Human-like. They're probably Fey, and related enough to the Celtic Pooka/Puca/Puck that they might be the same thing with a different name.

 

[mellored]

I'm fine with them all being sub-races.

But Ardling should be fey.

 

[Incenjucar]

As I stated elsewhere, since they decided to lean into the animal side to give more space to aasimar, they should provide a fully-animal option, possibly just letting them pick up a second animal feature instead of the flexible cantrip. I also see value in letting them pick arcane and primal instead of divine. The divine sort can be the most common and core, and give us a reason to dress them in rad ancient Egyptian getups, while also covering a lot of other bases at once.

 

[Mecheon]

Hengeyokai which haven't appeared in 5e yet, are more like Spirit Animals who can become Human-like. They're probably Fey, and related enough to the Celtic Pooka/Puca/Puck that they might be the same thing with a different name.

I mean, Hengeyokai are an incredibly toned down version of just a general thing in Japanese myth where an animal that lives long enough can gain human form. They're kitstune, tanuki, all that fun stuff

Which is why I'm not keen on Hengeyokai coming back as I'd much rather a dedicated one for those options

 

[Incenjucar]

I feel a good, and realistic practice is to start with a flexible generic option where possible and then get more detailed if popularity allows. There was a time when the elf of the month club made sense, but still good to start with just an elf or three.

 

[Charlaquin]

I still don’t like the Celestial angle. Just let animal-people be animal-people. It’s fantasy, there doesn’t need to be a mystical reason for it.

 

[Lojaan]

I second that ardlings should be fey, and I would add that Owlin, Harengon, Tortle, Leonin, Loxodon, and yes even Tabaxi and Bullywug, should be rolled into ardling. For species that have a lot of separate lore or history (like Bullywug, Giff and Tabaxi) you can have it that they migrated from the Feywild so long ago that although they were originally ardling, they are now considered their own thing.

Then you make some clear distinctions between fey (ardling), lycanthrope (shifter), monstrous (minotaur, dragonborn, thri-kreen) origins and just species that are 'natural' but non-human like lizardmen, who are not actually combination of humans and lizards, and are just called that because of their appearance.

Or you can make them ardlings too /shrug

Basically I am really loving having an option that I can point people to when they say I want to play a cat/mouse/fox/bunny person.

 

[Incenjucar]

The celestial angle ties them to guardinals and various mythical figures from around the world, and of course the Beast Lords which are very old D&D lore.

 

[Charlaquin]

The celestial angle ties them to guardinals and various mythical figures from around the world, and of course the Beast Lords which are very old D&D lore.

Yeah, but I think the ven diagram of people who care about that and people who want to play a furry is very nearly two circles.

 

[Incenjucar]

Yeah, but I think the ven diagram of people who care about that and people who want to play a furry is very nearly two circles.

Maybe, but there are a LOT of them.