D&D 5E Kender are a core race?

[Majoru Oakheart]

Whereas I think the entire point of kender is that they are innocents with no sense of fear, concern, greed, or selfishness. Kender don't understand stealing because they can't be stolen from. Asking presumes the possibility of denial. A kender wouldn't deny someone what they need, so they don't realize other people would.

That may be true but putting someone who doesn't understand that property can belong to other people in the middle of a civilization that carefully guards and protects their property is...problematic.

Though to be fair, the books make it fairly clear(both the RPG books and the novels) that it isn't JUST that they don't understand that property belongs to people but that they are super curious and like to collect things. Which is also....problematic.

It also makes it fairly clear that their inability to understand property isn't a societal thing but an actual racial trait so that no matter how many times it is explained to them, they will never understand it.

In addition to this, there's a reason people have fear. It keeps them alive. There was a number of times in the books when Tass thought some things that would be considered outright stupid by humans due to his lack of fear. He nearly got himself killed at least 20 or 30 times in the books simply because he didn't care if he lived or died. In fact, the excuses why he DIDN'T perform the actions in question seemed to be "But I don't feel like it right now"...which always seemed like code for "the author doesn't feel like writing him out of the story at this particular second even though it would make the most sense for a character without fear".

Their entire racial description from beginning to end reads to me as a race that couldn't possibly survive for longer than a decade without their entire race stepping off cliffs just to see what it felt like or not eating for a week because all of their food went mysteriously missing and hunger was something they were curious about anyways.

Also, the right way to play a kender is whatever is interesting and enjoyable. You run the game; the game doesn't run you.

The entire point of fantasy races since their creation was "These people are like humans...EXCEPT X". Dwarves are just like humans EXCEPT they are shorter, like to wear beards, living in caves, mining, blacksmithing, beer, and are grumpy all the time. You could play a Dwarf without all these traits...but then they are simply short humans. It removes everything that make them a unique race.

Kender are defined by their racial traits...so but not portraying them you are simply not being a Kender. It removes the POINT of being a kender instead of a halfling, elf, or human.

Unfortunately, their racial traits are defined as "Suicidal kleptomanics with no manners or tact who can't even understand they've done anything wrong." It's a lot like bringing a 2 year old with you wherever you go. Just like it's not a good idea to bring a 2 year old into a dungeon filled with dangerous monsters and traps or to a royal ball...it isn't a good idea to bring a Kender either.

 

[Mistwell]

Kender work just fine as a PC race...in a party composed entirely of Kender. In fact I would be happy to play such a game, it would be a blast!

 

[Nellisir]

Kender are defined by their racial traits...so but not portraying them you are simply not being a Kender. It removes the POINT of being a kender instead of a halfling, elf, or human.

OK, I think we're at the agree to disagree stage. I believe that there's a middle ground; that it's possible to play kender as kender without being an outright jerk about it. It sounds like you're about the same place with kender that I'm at with drow, to wit to play one properly, your character has to kill everyone else. (Or enslave them, that's good too.)

As far as the books...well, it's been twenty years or so since I've read The Gospel of Kender, but if there's a race that benefits from deus ex machina, isn't it kender? You might also look up the related concept of eucatastrophe in consideration of this quote, which appears in the deus ex machina page: "... eucatastrophe is not merely a convenience, but is an established part of a fictive world in which hope ultimately prevails"

(I don't actually hate drow, but I do think they're overused.)

 

[DEFCON 1]

OK, I think we're at the agree to disagree stage. I believe that there's a middle ground; that it's possible to play kender as kender without being an outright jerk about it. It sounds like you're about the same place with kender that I'm at with drow, to wit to play one properly, your character has to kill everyone else. (Or enslave them, that's good too.)

Therein lies the rub on just about every single possibly controversial thing you can include in the game-- kender, Save or Die, ultra-powerful magic items etc.

In the hands of a smart, experienced, well-meaning roleplayer whose primary desire is to play "for the group"... any of those kinds of things won't break the game. They can control the impulses to possibly be a real jerk... even knowing when to play "against type" or "against logic" in order to avoid it (a la the kender who doesn't steal everything or the drow who doesn't want to enslave every single other person.)

But the fact is... it oftentimes feels like those kinds of players are few and far between.

As a result... our natural impulse is to expect a player to start f-ing with any of those things, and thus it colors our expectations, our playstyles, and our opinions on the worth of said items. Many of us have been burned so many times that we don't even want to consider seeing those things included, merely because we think (justly or unjustly) that they cause more problems than they're worth because players just can't help but being asswipes.

So while some players will insist that Save or Die has a place in the game because they feel like their table knows how to navigate around its possible gamebreaking... there are plenty of other players who cannot see anything except a whirlpool that will suck everything down with it. And neither group is wrong.

Thus it comes down to what is really most important in WotC's eyes to give to players. The option of these possible game-breakers as-is... or scaling them back a bit to a more palatable medium?

 

[Cybit]

did I miss something? where did we find out Kender was in the core PHB?

 

[Kobold Stew]

It's in the Races section of the last playtest document, under "Unsual Races" which is where Gnomes, Half-Elves, and Half-Orcs have also been placed (and Dragonborn, Teifling, and Warforged). .

We may not "know" but it's right to be concerned when they are being treated on a par with other races that have been PHB races in the past.

 

[Cybit]

It's in the Races section of the last playtest document, under "Unsual Races" which is where Gnomes, Half-Elves, and Half-Orcs have also been placed (and Dragonborn, Teifling, and Warforged). .

We may not "know" but it's right to be concerned when they are being treated on a par with other races that have been PHB races in the past.

Oh, that one? I wouldn't worry about it - they just wanted to get some feedback about the class. Unless something radically changes, I'm pretty sure it will go in a Dragonlance specific book. It specifies that Kender are unique to Krynn and Warforged unique to Eberron. The reason half-orc and some of the others are in "unusual" races as well is due to their relative population scarcity both amongst adventurers and in general.

Unusual Races is intended to cover three general spheres

1) Setting specific races (kender, warforged, etc)
2) Unusual parentage / origin (tiefling, half-anything, dragonborn, aasimar if there is one, etc)
3) Races that do not generally integrate with normal society (gnomes, drow)

The idea being, for people who've never played D&D, these are races that are less common for typical fantasy tropes / they are setting specific, and thus want to give both the DM and players heads up on those facts.

Y'all are worrying for no reason methinks - they just wanted to get some testing in of the kender.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

That may be true but putting someone who doesn't understand that property can belong to other people in the middle of a civilization that carefully guards and protects their property is...problematic.

Though to be fair, the books make it fairly clear(both the RPG books and the novels) that it isn't JUST that they don't understand that property belongs to people but that they are super curious and like to collect things. Which is also....problematic.

It also makes it fairly clear that their inability to understand property isn't a societal thing but an actual racial trait so that no matter how many times it is explained to them, they will never understand it.

In addition to this, there's a reason people have fear. It keeps them alive. There was a number of times in the books when Tass thought some things that would be considered outright stupid by humans due to his lack of fear. He nearly got himself killed at least 20 or 30 times in the books simply because he didn't care if he lived or died. In fact, the excuses why he DIDN'T perform the actions in question seemed to be "But I don't feel like it right now"...which always seemed like code for "the author doesn't feel like writing him out of the story at this particular second even though it would make the most sense for a character without fear".

Their entire racial description from beginning to end reads to me as a race that couldn't possibly survive for longer than a decade without their entire race stepping off cliffs just to see what it felt like or not eating for a week because all of their food went mysteriously missing and hunger was something they were curious about anyways.


The entire point of fantasy races since their creation was "These people are like humans...EXCEPT X". Dwarves are just like humans EXCEPT they are shorter, like to wear beards, living in caves, mining, blacksmithing, beer, and are grumpy all the time. You could play a Dwarf without all these traits...but then they are simply short humans. It removes everything that make them a unique race.

Kender are defined by their racial traits...so but not portraying them you are simply not being a Kender. It removes the POINT of being a kender instead of a halfling, elf, or human.

Unfortunately, their racial traits are defined as "Suicidal kleptomanics with no manners or tact who can't even understand they've done anything wrong." It's a lot like bringing a 2 year old with you wherever you go. Just like it's not a good idea to bring a 2 year old into a dungeon filled with dangerous monsters and traps or to a royal ball...it isn't a good idea to bring a Kender either.

100% why they need a retool or be NPC only

 

[Ichneumon]

I very much doubt that kender will be in the PHB. How many people would actually be upset if they weren't there? The same as would fit into a rapidly imploding phone box, I'd say. So reserving them for a Dragonlance product is a perfectly safe choice for WotC.

In past DL products, kender have been presented as an alternative halfling. It's never been the norm to put halflings and kender into the same setting, due to their conceptual similarity. (lightfoot halflings in 5e are also presented as small creatures with wanderlust). Therefore, I'd expect DMs who want both races in their setting to include them as an active choice, which can be done if kender are in a DL product. If kender are in the PHB, then the default standard game campaign includes them both, forcing DMs to make a reactive choice to remove them. I think WotC would want to minimise the number of unnecessary reactive choices that DMs have to make.

 

[willvr]

In the hands of a smart, experienced, well-meaning roleplayer whose primary desire is to play "for the group"... any of those kinds of things won't break the game. They can control the impulses to possibly be a real jerk... even knowing when to play "against type" or "against logic" in order to avoid it (a la the kender who doesn't steal everything or the drow who doesn't want to enslave every single other person.)

But the fact is... it oftentimes feels like those kinds of players are few and far between.

As a result... our natural impulse is to expect a player to start f-ing with any of those things, and thus it colors our expectations, our playstyles, and our opinions on the worth of said items. Many of us have been burned so many times that we don't even want to consider seeing those things included, merely because we think (justly or unjustly) that they cause more problems than they're worth because players just can't help but being asswipes.

So while some players will insist that Save or Die has a place in the game because they feel like their table knows how to navigate around its possible gamebreaking... there are plenty of other players who cannot see anything except a whirlpool that will suck everything down with it. And neither group is wrong.

You, sir, are my hero.

I will endeavour to agree to disagree more based on this post. I still don't think kender are gamebreaking - for me and my group.

But acknowledge they may be for other groups.