log in or register to remove this ad

 

5E Better Leonin

I mean, that's Theros Leonin. Mirrodon Leonin are a bit more on the religious side.
Even in Magic there are differences.

Satyrs are absolute powerhouses in terms of features. Stronger than Yuan Ti level. I'm agreeing that natural weapons are pretty much just flavor abilities at this point but uh, at least the roar scales better than Dragonborn's dragon breath?
Seems satyrs are damn OP.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Whether or not they're as good as manufactured weapons in real life is beside the point. The designers make the conscious decision to put a worthless claw attack in the racial block or replace it with a teleport, hellish rebuke, flying, or any number of other racial features that PC races get. They could have put something generally useful in that space, but they chose to put something that is mostly useless. I have no idea if the satyr is loaded up with great features, but there are certainly PC races where natural weapons seem to be included as if they were useful.
No, they don't. There is no "space". They give it a natural attack because if fit the physicality of the race. It is not "instead of" another feature.
 

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen
They're at least +2 Con, +1 Str which is at least slightly different? But unfortunately its just sort of the niche a lot of these fall into
Huh. Yeah, I guess technically that’s a new combination. Functionally it doesn’t make a difference for standard array or point buy. Might tempt folks to assign rolled stats a liiiiiitle differently I guess. At any rate, it’s still strength and con, which is fine, but been done to death.
 

Even in Magic there are differences.
Yup, but these leonin are theros leonin. Which brings us to another point - Theros PCs can get an extra bonus feat at first level. So, if you really want to create a leonin paladin you can start with +1 str +2 con and +1 cha.
Seems satyrs are damn OP.
Races are not "balanced" in 5e. Satyrs are good, but vuman is still better.
 

Huh. Yeah, I guess technically that’s a new combination. Functionally it doesn’t make a difference for standard array or point buy. Might tempt folks to assign rolled stats a liiiiiitle differently I guess. At any rate, it’s still strength and con, which is fine, but been done to death.
Again, I point to the potential extra +1 Threos PCs can get, which can stack with a +2, allowing a point buy character to start with an 18.
 

Yup, but these leonin are theros leonin. Which brings us to another point - Theros PCs can get an extra bonus feat at first level. So, if you really want to create a leonin paladin you can start with +1 str +2 con and +1 cha.
And these are "better" leonin. From non restrictive canon.
Also that is a can get. A might get. Not an assured get. Playing with the feat cannot be assumed.

Races are not "balanced" in 5e. Satyrs are good, but vuman is still better.
Not saying races have to be balanced. I am saying the saytr gets a lot.
 

And these are "better" leonin. From non restrictive canon.
And this is a Theros book with Theros canon and Theros rules.

But even taken abstractly your "better" leonin are just hairier dragonborn with the same always-paladin fundamental flaw.

A 1d6 natural weapon is just as irrelevant as a d4 natural weapon, you will still be using a sword until disarmed. Just ask the lizardfolk.
 

And this is a Theros book with Theros canon and Theros rules.
Irrelevant. Show me where I said these replace the Theros leonin.

But even taken abstractly your "better" leonin are just hairier dragonborn with the same always-paladin fundamental flaw.
Fits in better with the lion symbology.
Races are not "balanced" in 5e. Remember.

A 1d6 natural weapon is just as irrelevant as a d4 natural weapon, you will still be using a sword until disarmed. Just ask the lizardfolk.
Okay. Great.
 




Charlaquin

Goblin Queen
Again, I point to the potential extra +1 Threos PCs can get, which can stack with a +2, allowing a point buy character to start with an 18.
I don’t have the book yet, so I was unaware of this. That said, I assume this free feat is available to all races, and wouldn’t necessarily be available in a non-Theros game, so it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to factor it into an analysis of the race.

I mean, I'd argue for lion symbology I'd probably do Wis/Str as their stats rather than Con.
That actually seems like a great fit for Leonin to me.
 

I don’t have the book yet, so I was unaware of this. That said, I assume this free feat is available to all races, and wouldn’t necessarily be available in a non-Theros game, so it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to factor it into an analysis of the race.
Depends on your setting philosophy. I tend to see races as specific to a setting, special rules and all, and probably wouldn't allow those races in a different setting.
That actually seems like a great fit for Leonin to me.
Symbolism is in the mind of the beholder. A bully who steals other people's food and then spends most of their time sleeping is a better fit for my concept of "lion".
 

Mecheon

Adventurer
Depends on your setting philosophy. I tend to see races as specific to a setting, special rules and all, and probably wouldn't allow those races in a different setting.
Leonin I can see people limiting because they're very much tied to MtG (But I mean, lion-man is a generic enough concept I wouldn't think most people would mind them being around and they're a lot less impressive than Tabaxi), but satyrs are, well, satyrs. They're in most settings as fey
Symbolism is in the mind of the beholder. A bully who steals other people's food and then spends most of their time sleeping is a better fit for my concept of "lion".
We're talking the symbolic lion. If we were talking actual lions, well, they'd have pluses to intimidate. Also gnolls would have been playable long before them and be far nicer
 

Symbolism is in the mind of the beholder. A bully who steals other people's food and then spends most of their time sleeping is a better fit for my concept of "lion".
Clearly not the symbolism people are talking about. The lion in cultural symbolism. Look that up.
 

Clearly not the symbolism people are talking about. The lion in cultural symbolism. Look that up.
There are lots of different symbolic meanings, depending on your culture. But it's irrelevant - the races are not based on "symbolism" or satyrs would be rapists.
 

There are lots of different symbolic meanings, depending on your culture. But it's irrelevant - the races are not based on "symbolism" or satyrs would be rapists.
Symbolism is there to serve as creative inspiration. Troubling aspects should not be incorporated. This should not be spelt out to you. But do whatever you feel like.
 
Last edited:

DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
I thought the complaint was always that there weren't enough melee characters being played because Dexterity was so good of a stat? So they go and create another race to help inspire people to play melee warriors and now the complaint is that they should have a high Charisma... thereby guaranteeing we'd see a whole new set of Warlock/Sorcerer/Bard multiclasses that make no story sense and are done purely for the mechanical min-maxing of staying in the back and throwing all kinds of weirdly boosted Eldritch Blasts? ;)
 

Fenris-77

Small God of the Dozens
Supporter
There are lots of different symbolic meanings, depending on your culture. But it's irrelevant - the races are not based on "symbolism" or satyrs would be rapists.
So? No one suggested that all races be changed on this basis. This is just one person's opinion of what better represents their vision of what a lion-folk race should look like. Are you suggesting that better realizing what he wants out of the game is badwrongfun somehow? I'm not sure what the value is in telling someone that their reasoning for wanting to change the game to suit their needs is irrelevant.
 

Mythological Figures & Maleficent Monsters

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top