Hobgoblins as a PC Race

[Farland]

The World of Farland published a PC hobgoblin and Orc race this month. Check it out here: http://www.farlandworld.com/new.html

 

[GreenTengu]

The World of Farland published a PC hobgoblin and Orc race this month. Check it out here: http://www.farlandworld.com/new.html

Your hobgoblin also have major issues.

First, "Tactical Mind" is an utterly pointless ability to have. Why on earth would anyone ever want this? How could this rule ever imaginably interact with the game in the way it is presented. The answer is-- it can't. At no point in no game of D&D that has ever or will ever be played has any DM asked a player at any imaginable point to make an Intelligence check involving strategy or tactics. Strategy and tactics, except in the case of the Warlord/Marshal or similar abilities that use the pretense of "tactics" to confer actual bonuses that would otherwise be conferred through magical means, tactics and strategy have always what players brought to the table.

This is not remotely similar to Dwarfs ability to look at stone structures and get a bonus for conferring more information. Regularly throughout all of D&D's history "I look at the object, what can my character glean about it" has always been part of the game. When faced with a battle asking the DM "how can I win this scenario" with the reply "make an Intelligence check" has never and will never be part of it.

The ability to use all martial weapons is fine I suppose, it would be easy to overestimate that ability but frankly it only confers benefit on 2... maybe 3 classes that could remotely benefit from using a weapon they don't automatically have proficiency in. Otherwise it is a fairly standard boring ability.

Having "legion born" and "calvary" born as supposed "subraces" demonstrates you don't remotely grasp the concept of a subrace. Subraces ought to be two completely separate societies that generally do not interact at all-- generally separated by terrain, but possibly bloodline instead. Whether one is in an infantryman or a cavalryman-- that's all part of the same society. Different sectors, maybe you could even argue that whole families take pride in being one or the other-- however, we can easily imagine Wood Elves with ancient traditions of Druidism and another family with ancient traditions of being Sharpshooters (well, we could if Elf lifetimes weren't stupidly impossibly long so that talking about family histories wasn't talking about millenia), they are still part of fundamentally the same society.

And since D&D has never been about mounted combat, this breaks down to...

Subrace you should use unless you are a complete idiot who hasn't a clue how the game works
And the subrace for all you people totally unfamiliar with the rules and don't realize how utterly crap this is.

The Legionborn has an ability that is hands-down, flat-out broken to hell and back at low levels. 2d6 damage on any strike you want every short rest? So basically more damage than you could reasonably expect to get off of a free attack potentially every single battle? Granted, after you use it and before your next short rest you get nothing... but that is a big burst ability that ought to be best saved for classes. A racial generally ought to give you something that just makes a small difference but makes that difference often.

And then... advantage on Intimidation checks? I don't think any race grants advantage on abilities in 5E. They did in the early playtest packages, but now they just grant the skill.


But all that is lightyears ahead of the crap you wrote for the poor sucker who was dumb enough to choose Cavalryborn. So they get a bonus when engaged in... mounted combat, something that flat out doesn't exist in the game and the DM is just totally left up to rule on things however if it comes up.

And then... advantage on a death save every short rest... and if that ability comes into play often enough to matter, your party is totally set up for a TPK anyway and its not going to matter. It'd be fine as part of a package, but if that's the main draw? That's pretty sad.


Look-- its nice that people are thinking of ideas, but in that one entry I see enough problems that you need to erase all progress you have made so far and go back to the drawing board. It's not even salvageable, not even parts of it.
On the other hand, looking at your Goblin and your Orc, it looks like you just straight up copied me for a lot of this. Which, I couldn't possibly care about less... its just that you haven't put much thought at all about how your original stuff remotely impacts the game and whether people would actually want to play these things with how poorly constructed you have made them.

 

[Tewligan]

That was a weird, aggressively rude response.

 

[Farland]

Agreed. Meh. What is it kids say? Haters gonna hate. Oh well. Not everyone plays the game the same.

 

[cmad1977]

Your hobgoblin also have major issues.

First, "Tactical Mind" is an utterly pointless ability to have. Why on earth would anyone ever want this? How could this rule ever imaginably interact with the game in the way it is presented. The answer is-- it can't. At no point in no game of D&D that has ever or will ever be played has any DM asked a player at any imaginable point to make an Intelligence check involving strategy or tactics. Strategy and tactics, except in the case of the Warlord/Marshal or similar abilities that use the pretense of "tactics" to confer actual bonuses that would otherwise be conferred through magical means, tactics and strategy have always what players brought to the table.

This is not remotely similar to Dwarfs ability to look at stone structures and get a bonus for conferring more information. Regularly throughout all of D&D's history "I look at the object, what can my character glean about it" has always been part of the game. When faced with a battle asking the DM "how can I win this scenario" with the reply "make an Intelligence check" has never and will never be part of it.

The ability to use all martial weapons is fine I suppose, it would be easy to overestimate that ability but frankly it only confers benefit on 2... maybe 3 classes that could remotely benefit from using a weapon they don't automatically have proficiency in. Otherwise it is a fairly standard boring ability.

Having "legion born" and "calvary" born as supposed "subraces" demonstrates you don't remotely grasp the concept of a subrace. Subraces ought to be two completely separate societies that generally do not interact at all-- generally separated by terrain, but possibly bloodline instead. Whether one is in an infantryman or a cavalryman-- that's all part of the same society. Different sectors, maybe you could even argue that whole families take pride in being one or the other-- however, we can easily imagine Wood Elves with ancient traditions of Druidism and another family with ancient traditions of being Sharpshooters (well, we could if Elf lifetimes weren't stupidly impossibly long so that talking about family histories wasn't talking about millenia), they are still part of fundamentally the same society.

And since D&D has never been about mounted combat, this breaks down to...

Subrace you should use unless you are a complete idiot who hasn't a clue how the game works
And the subrace for all you people totally unfamiliar with the rules and don't realize how utterly crap this is.

The Legionborn has an ability that is hands-down, flat-out broken to hell and back at low levels. 2d6 damage on any strike you want every short rest? So basically more damage than you could reasonably expect to get off of a free attack potentially every single battle? Granted, after you use it and before your next short rest you get nothing... but that is a big burst ability that ought to be best saved for classes. A racial generally ought to give you something that just makes a small difference but makes that difference often.

And then... advantage on Intimidation checks? I don't think any race grants advantage on abilities in 5E. They did in the early playtest packages, but now they just grant the skill.


But all that is lightyears ahead of the crap you wrote for the poor sucker who was dumb enough to choose Cavalryborn. So they get a bonus when engaged in... mounted combat, something that flat out doesn't exist in the game and the DM is just totally left up to rule on things however if it comes up.

And then... advantage on a death save every short rest... and if that ability comes into play often enough to matter, your party is totally set up for a TPK anyway and its not going to matter. It'd be fine as part of a package, but if that's the main draw? That's pretty sad.


Look-- its nice that people are thinking of ideas, but in that one entry I see enough problems that you need to erase all progress you have made so far and go back to the drawing board. It's not even salvageable, not even parts of it.
On the other hand, looking at your Goblin and your Orc, it looks like you just straight up copied me for a lot of this. Which, I couldn't possibly care about less... its just that you haven't put much thought at all about how your original stuff remotely impacts the game and whether people would actually want to play these things with how poorly constructed you have made them.

This is how you get ants.

 

[bedir than]

Guys, I have to burn my AD&D PHB. It has mounted combat in it and DnD has never been about mounted combat.

 

[Farland]

Haha! Better get on that.

It's also a shame the 5E PHB didn't include a mounted combat-oriented feat. I think they should have. They could have called it Mounted Combatant or something.