D&D 5E Goliaths WebDM Misses the Mark, but Sparks My Curiosity

[doctorbadwolf]

Depending on whether or not you want spellcasting, I'd go with:
Goliath Rune Knight Fighter Str/Int/Wis
Take your extra feat to take Keen Mind and Skilled: History, Diplomacy, Religion

Or

Battlesmith Artificer, with Sage or Performer background, casting with woodcarver/mason/leatherworking tools
You are a runecarver with a Defender whose a spiritbeast-possessed runic construct.
Carve runes and totems to enhance your party's items

I like that a lot.

 

[Garthanos]

From the fore mentioned Chronicles of Thomas Covenant - Note the reference to story telling.

Giant

Giants are a race of extremely long lived humanoids of unusual height and strength. Giants are known for their stone lore (similar to but not identical with that of the Stonedownors), their skill at seamanship, and their love of story-telling. A common Giantish interjection is, "Stone and Sea!"...

unbeliever.fandom.com

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I wanted to counter with the fact that they have Powerful Build which makes them stronger than Half-orcs inherently. But since Bugbear's and Firbolgs, and Orcs (both regular and Eberron) and Loxodon's all get it, that argument falls a bit flat.

The biggest weakness in that ability is I haven't yet come across a game that use encumbrance. (I also think Eberron orcs feel weak compared to half orcs - sure they can carry more but the half human can hit harder and take more punishment).

That said... what game mechanic SHOULD they get that would make them feel more of the fluff "big/strong"?

In 5e Half Orcs do a good job of it. My suggestion would be, if the table doesn't like half orcs, transplant half orc game mechanics onto the goliath fluff.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Is there some other metric I should be basing it upon?

IF I take the commoner statblock everything is 10's, which still gives the average Goliath a strength of 12. To be lower than a 10 they need to have a starting score lower than an 8. However, under the character creation rules of both point buy and standard array, Telling me that a score of 7 or less is probably incredibly rare.

Sure, it isn't exactly a scientific, statistical analysis, but it is close enough to give us an idea. If the Goliaths expel the "weakest" members of their tribe who cannot keep up, then they are likely expelling members with a strength of about 10, which is average human. Except, Goliaths all have proficiency in athletics and Powerful Build which treats them as large for carrying. That tells me that a weak Goliath is likely able to carry twice the equipment and supplies that a human would carry, and be able to climb and move through the mountains similiarly to a hobbyist mountain climber or survivalist.

And sure, nothing says they value only strength, but considering they value "athletic competitions" and abandon the weak, then the two biggest would be Strength and Constitution. The mental stats are not highly valued, because (whether this was 5e, 3.X or what) I remember reading that Goliath tribes usually suffer from a lack of leadership, because their fear of aging leads to their elders generally committing suicide by monster. So, physicality trumps everything else as presented in the RAW culture. Sure, you can have a wise leader, as long as they are also strong. And you can have a great craftsperson, as long as they are also strong.

As for Klingons, I have never actually watched much Star Trek, but considering the time period the TV show was made in, the "warrior culture" things I do know, and the visual designs I'm aware of. Yeah, it probably is dark as pitch if examined properly.

You shouldn't be referencing stats as if they're "real thing" that others in the universe make decisions based on, at all. They're not. An elephant in the D&D universe can't actually reliably survive an 30,000' fall, but it can if you use the mechanics.

You're making wild and unsupported leaps of logic.

You leap from "they like athletic competitions" to "they abandon people with low stats", which is completely irrational and non-logical.

You leap from "the leaders dying means they have leadership issues" to "they don't care about mental stats", which is again completely irrational. It's indeed counter-rational. If anything, that would they did value smart people because they didn't have as many of them and they didn't last as long as they do with other races. They would also probably value child-carers higher than some races for similar reasons (lack of grandparents to assist with child-care).

As for Klingons, well, no. You could argue "dark", but "very dark"? Nah. They're not as bad as many real human cultures. I mean the Romans, for god's sake, regarded positively by most people, are pitch-black compared to Klingons, and abyss-black compared to Goliaths (as were the real Spartans - hell, they make the Romans look like good guys).

In 5e Half Orcs do a good job of it. My suggestion would be, if the table doesn't like half orcs, transplant half orc game mechanics onto the goliath fluff.

Really?

Half-Orcs have precisely one mechanic that even arguably reflects size/strength - rolling an extra die on a crit.

They don't have Powerful Build, and their Relentless Endurance feature is relatively similar to the Goliath feature and doesn't really reflect size. Other than that they have Intimidation, which has nothing to do with size/strength in D&D (sadly, but that's a whole other discussion), but not Athletics, which arguably does. Literally their only other feature is Darkvision.

I mean, fair play if that's your preference, but it's hard to square with the arguments you've appeared to make, for me.

They don’t?

Their wingspan is certainly much greater than their height.

I suppose it depends on the artist, but as per 5E, Bugbears are 6-8' tall. The main 5E race art shows them with arms maybe 15% longer than a typical, proportionate human:

Legacy Content

Legacy Content Dungeons & Dragons is a game that is constantly evolving. This means that we may revisit older content in order to i...

www.dndbeyond.com

For one to have a reach fully 5' longer than a human, able to literally reach across squares, it would need arms, well, about 4-5' longer than a human (allowing for a bit of D&D flex). So I'd say a 6' Bugbear would need arms so long that his hands literally touched the ground standing up straight. An 8' one would need arms down to below his knees (assuming human proportions - typically they have longer torsos, which means lower knees, to be fair).

Looking on Google, assuming all Bugbears ate 8' tall, I'd say maybe 20% of Bugbear art, tops, has them with appropriately long arms (even accounting for broad shoulders adding to reach). 0% if we assume they're 6' or 7' tall.

It doesn't actually matter, because it's D&D, and the ability is meant to emphasize something about Bugbears, and realistic reach is something D&D has never been particularly interested in.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Half-Orcs have precisely one mechanic that even arguably reflects size/strength - rolling an extra die on a crit.

One more than Goliaths.

They don't have Powerful Build

Which is meaningless without encumbrance.

, and their Relentless Endurance feature is relatively similar to the Goliath feature and doesn't really reflect size.

It reflects toughness, and is vastly superior to the goliath's ability to burn a reaction in order to ignore a small amount of damage.

Other than that they have Intimidation, which has nothing to do with size/strength in D&D (sadly, but that's a whole other discussion), but not Athletics

So swap them - you will probably end up with both anyway.

Literally their only other feature is Darkvision.

Swap it for Powerful Build. Darkvision is the more useful ability though.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

One more than Goliaths.


Which is meaningless without encumbrance.



It reflects toughness, and is vastly superior to the goliaths ability to burn a reaction in order to ignore a small amount of damage.



So swap them - you will probably end up with both anyway.


Swap it for Powerful Build. Darkvision is the more useful ability.

I know the Goliath at my main table would definitely take the above options

I don't agree that Powerful Build is meaningless without routinely using encumbrance. PCs often attempt to move very heavy objects in my experience, and those have weights and so on. We don't routinely use encumbrance but Powerful Build has let the Goliath get away with stuff like carrying four people (strapped to his back) down a 150' vertical cliff-face. Admittedly literally the next session the Dragonborn Paladin realized he could own a griffon...

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Yeah, I tend to go for a "make an Athletics check" when someone tries to lift the heavy portcullis, because I dunno how much it weighs! But some adventures do use the "combined strength of 40" approach. Powerful Build doesn't explicitly apply in such situations, but I would rule it as doing so.

 

[Garthanos]

Yeah, but I also feel like a lore bard just doesn’t feel right for them. Maybe Valor.

But I think maybe I’d want a scholarly Druid subclass?

Or just like...a Storyteller Bard? Not sure what that would even be, but...idk.

I can picture them summoning the winds into their sails with long chanting songs as they sail the oceans and competing in storytelling exercises where finding the oldest story to match the situation best is the winner. In 4e I might give them a racial feat which matches deva memories of a thousand lifetimes but I like to give that to reincarnators and long lived races.

 

[Chaosmancer]

The biggest weakness in that ability is I haven't yet come across a game that use encumbrance. (I also think Eberron orcs feel weak compared to half orcs - sure they can carry more but the half human can hit harder and take more punishment).

Yeah, Half-Orcs being far stronger than full orcs is a problem. My solution came long before I saw the orc statblock though. I got rid of half-orcs and just made them all orcs. I might need to change something later, but most people seem happy just playing an orc in the first place.

You shouldn't be referencing stats as if they're "real thing" that others in the universe make decisions based on, at all. They're not. An elephant in the D&D universe can't actually reliably survive an 30,000' fall, but it can if you use the mechanics.

You're making wild and unsupported leaps of logic.

Really? Sooo, +2 Strength is absolutely meaningless in universe? Goliath are not, on the average, stronger than most other races?

Because, that +2 STR +1 Con was something you pointed out as making them fit the "Big and Strong" archetype, but if that is meaningless then Humans and Elves fit that archetype just as well. After all they can be tall, and Strength means nothing in universe so they don't need it.

Except, you aren't going to accept that. So, that strength score has to mean something. And if it means something, we can use it as a benchmark. Again, I'm not using these as absolute statistical certainties, just as "good enough" estimates. And, since we have literally no other way to make these deteminations, it is as good as it gets.

Also, I removed the falling cap from damage, because I thought it was a stupid rule. It is really only meant to make gameplay move faster, but I've got a dice rolling app for those situations. So, since that drop would be 3,000d6 and an average of 10,500 damage I can safely say nothing would survive that fall.

You leap from "they like athletic competitions" to "they abandon people with low stats", which is completely irrational and non-logical.

That seems illogical because you are misreading what I said. To quote myself and bold the important part: "And sure, nothing says they value only strength, but considering they value "athletic competitions" and abandon the weak, then the two biggest would be Strength and Constitution."

You see, I don't need to make any logical leap to have them abandoning the weak. That is the lore we are given, they do that. They also are big into athletic competitions and shows of strength.

(A) Abandon the weak + (B) cultural dedication to feats of strength = those with low strength are probably the weak mentioned in part A.

Granted, someone who is fleet of foot, or purpose just has an unusually high amount of endurance is probably equally accepted and praised, but the majority of the culture seems focused on strength.

You leap from "the leaders dying means they have leadership issues" to "they don't care about mental stats", which is again completely irrational. It's indeed counter-rational. If anything, that would they did value smart people because they didn't have as many of them and they didn't last as long as they do with other races. They would also probably value child-carers higher than some races for similar reasons (lack of grandparents to assist with child-care).

See, you would think that, but this is where we get into problems. See, the leadership thing, as I said, was something I read in a Goliath write-up. In fact, I just pulled up the DnDBeyond site, and it is right there in the write-up "... goliath tribes suffer from a chronic lack of the experience offered by long- term leaders. They hope for innate wisdom in their leadership, for they can rarely count on a wisdom grown with age. "

So, while they hope for wise leadership, they do not cultivate it. A Goliath is expected to surpass their past deeds, to keep up with the tribe no matter what. So, a wise elder who killed a dragon is expected to go and kill a bigger dragon, and will likely die. But that is expected of them, and it is not seen that they should hold back and survive to lend their wisdom to the tribe. A member with high Intelligence who is weak of body, if they cannot keep up, will be abandoned. Their Intelligence is not valued highly enough to counteract their physical frailty.

Heck, the only reason we can even assume any childcare is because WoTC was careful to say "Among goliaths, any adult who can’t contribute to the tribe is expelled. " and we think that by saying Adult, we are in safe territory. But, remember, in the Medieval times, "Adult" could be as young as 13. And since the write up also includes: "Their hearts are infused with the cold regard of their frigid realm, leaving each goliath with the responsibility to earn a place in the tribe or die trying." you are very likely to end up less with "child care" and more with "child training" like with Sparta. Where male children were not fed and expected to steal and eventually kill for their food. And if caught, were beaten bloody and left without food. After all, they must be strong, and the strong do not rely on others.

As for Klingons, well, no. You could argue "dark", but "very dark"? Nah. They're not as bad as many real human cultures. I mean the Romans, for god's sake, regarded positively by most people, are pitch-black compared to Klingons, and abyss-black compared to Goliaths (as were the real Spartans - hell, they make the Romans look like good guys).

Again, I know nothing about Klingons other than what could be gleaned by cultural osmosis. And, since I made reference to Sparta, you can assume I hold relatively similiar opinions about them.

And, I think you are making a logical fallacy along this line. You seem to think that I do not view Romans and Spartans and other ancient societies in the same light I am looking at Goliaths in. But, the fact is, it is because of my knowledge of those cultures and how they acted that I can look upon Goliaths the way I do. Because the language and values harken back to those dark spots in human culture, I can see where the path of Goliath RAW culture easily leads.

 

[Don Durito]

+2 Strength is the little bit of illusion there to help make the role-playing.

A halfking barbarian will beat a goliath 40% of the time. +2 Strength should remind you not to roll the dice unless for some reason that possibility would be fun (ie. the Halfling is the PC).