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


log in or register to remove this ad




Lojaan

Hero
I disagree on this one strongly. You'd lose a lot of the neat individual stuff that these groups have by themselves. Plus, well, those races have a history. They're not related and don't have anything feywild to 'em. Certainly more viable to have seperate beast-people race than 7 different types of elves
Totally fair if that is how you like your world. I find heaps of different races that are basically human-but-animal to be boring and lazy (Yes I'm looking at you PF2) but that is totally just my preference for my made up worlds.
 

Marandahir

Crown-Forester (he/him)
I like the distinction of Ardlings as humanoid with full-on animal heads and a few vague animal features like vestigial wings, versus Aarakocra, Lizardfolk, and Tabaxi with full on animal forms that are vaguely humanoid as well.

Ardling vs Shifter is a distinction primarily of facial form and origin; Shifters are Weretouched and look like Sabertooth from the X-Men - something in-between human and animal but much more on the human form than the beast form - and Ardlings are Egyptian Gods that look like these attachments. Note the differences from extant D&D species, which lack the very-humanlike bodies. These look like agents of the Gods rather than natural or fey peoples - ex Aarakocra, Lizardfolk, Jackalweres, Yuan-Ti, and Tabaxi, for comparison.
 

Attachments

  • Amonkhet Bird-person 2.png
    Amonkhet Bird-person 2.png
    3 MB · Views: 38
  • Amonkhet Crocodile God.png
    Amonkhet Crocodile God.png
    2 MB · Views: 37
  • Amonkhet Dog-Person.png
    Amonkhet Dog-Person.png
    2.1 MB · Views: 39
  • Amonkhet Snake God.png
    Amonkhet Snake God.png
    2.1 MB · Views: 39
  • Amonkhet Lion God.png
    Amonkhet Lion God.png
    1.1 MB · Views: 43


Marandahir

Crown-Forester (he/him)
I think you will find way more animal people in fey myths and art from around the world than divine but hey. The lines between the two blur a lot
The line is very blurred yes, mostly because we're used to using the terms Fey, Demon, and Devil for any deity that isn't a well-known named god from Semitic, Greco-Roman, Norse, Celtic, Indo-Aryan, Chinese, Japanese, Aztec, Mayan, or Incan stories. Any other culture, any lesser divinity that isn't clearly an Angel variant, and we call them a Fairy or a Demon or something, because we don't know what else to refer to them as and we've only JUST begun to reclaim those listed traditions above from demonization and religious persecution…
 

Lojaan

Hero
I like the distinction of Ardlings as humanoid with full-on animal heads and a few vague animal features like vestigial wings, versus Aarakocra, Lizardfolk, and Tabaxi with full on animal forms that are vaguely humanoid as well.

Ardling vs Shifter is a distinction primarily of facial form and origin; Shifters are Weretouched and look like Sabertooth from the X-Men - something in-between human and animal but much more on the human form than the beast form - and Ardlings are Egyptian Gods that look like these attachments. Note the differences from how Aarakocra/Owlin, Lizardfolk/Dragonborn, and Shifter/Werewolf/Jackalwere/Gnolls look:
Ugh. Let's just make Egyptian gods from real life a playable species. No thank you. Leave the real world religions alone please.

People get the difference in taking a species from myth like saytrs, or elves and making them playable is different to taking the actual gods yeah?
 

Incenjucar

Legend
I think you will find way more animal people in fey myths and art from around the world than divine but hey. The lines between the two blur a lot
Depends on the definitions you use and what you read. The fey is pretty tied to a specific region of the world. Lots of other mythic systems chock full of animal headed people.
 

Remove ads

Top