Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Veltharis ap Rylix" data-source="post: 9417075" data-attributes="member: 66357">I'm not especially disappointed with the aasimar we got, per se, but I would have liked a set of lineage options paralleling the new tiefling.One of the main reasons I liked the first draft of the ardling, at least in concept, is because it created a distinction between "celestial" and "angelic/divine" planetouched, which played into one of the few 4e-isms I wish they'd kept - namely that angels as a creature category aren't overtly tied to alignment (with all angels being some variation of good unless they've fallen), but instead are simply servants of the gods independent of alignment (with the "fallen" designation reserved for those who have turned against or otherwise lost the favor their divine patron).Obviously, ardling as a wide-range celestial planetouched gave way to ardling specifically as anthropomorphic animal-person by their second appearance in the playtest, and they didn't make the cut for the PHB regardless, so if the Heavenly/Idyllic/Exalted lineage options were going to be preserved, it would have fallen to the aasimar to do so.Alas, they did not, and WotC stuck to a mild revision to the existing MotM aasimar - which is fine, specifically for characters that play into the divine/angelic planetouched angle, but leaves the broader celestial planetouched umbrella distinctly underserved.</blockquote>