log in or register to remove this ad

 

D&D 5E New Unearthed Arcana: Folk of the Feywild!

Wander into the magical realm of the Feywild with our latest Unearthed Arcana: Folk of the Feywild!

Your character can be a member of one of the new D&D races: fairy, hobgoblin of the Feywild, owlfolk, or rabbitfolk. Which will you choose?

Playtest now:

45029A1A-E1B6-4BBD-93DB-33A363112735.jpeg
 
Last edited by a moderator:

log in or register to remove this ad

iltharanos

Explorer
Oh, I forgot about those avens. Aerie Mystics is an owlfolk, for one, though. Still, those races are often just bird-folk; often as not they look like eagles as owls. Warden of Evos Isle is an owl on the right, but I think that's an eagle on the left. Simiarly Aerie Mystics are owls, but Aven Trailblazers are eagles.

I've read White Plume Mountain, and the other Greyhawk Classics that finish the story of Escalla and Justicar. Without spoiling anything, I think the size of Escalla was due to her eventual role in the story more than the canon of the lore. Either way, I don't discount the idea that pixies or sprites are smaller than this race, nor argue that the MM is comprehensive. I'm just saying that, based on the artistic depictions on cards, faeries in MTG are closer to the 1 foot mark than the 3 foot mark. Brazen Borrower from Throne of Eldraine certainly doesn't look that big, though the vast number of faerie cards don't have a very good frame of reference.
Yeah, they definitely vary the heads of the aven. In Amonkhet you had a lot of ibis-headed aven, so basically bird people like you said, with the variations likely for thematic and artistic reasons.

For sure with faeries vs. pixies in the Escalla storyline. Like others have already pointed out the real reason they probably statted fairies as bigger than pixies and sprites is so they could keep them small size and not have to deal with tiny size characters.
I always wonder how anthro settings handle food. Like, do Fox people eat Rabbit people?
It's the Pluto and Goofy problem all over again, lol!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Remathilis

Legend
Disappointed they still dont provide for Tiny sized PCs

Or a Large sized one:(

It really comes down to reach and equipment. Weapons for large races do extra damage, while tiny-sized weapons do 1 point of damage (rarely, 1d4). Further, mundane gear is sized for mediums (and occasionally smalls) so rules for large/tiny armor, clothes, backpacks, etc. Lastly, the reach on large creatures OAs makes them superior in combat.

While it would make a lot of sense to have large minotaurs and tiny fairies, the game really isn't set up well to handle them.
 

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen
I always wonder how anthro settings handle food. Like, do Fox people eat Rabbit people?
It varies. Many of these settings have regular animals as well as anthropomorphic ones, and in such settings it's usually considered socially acceptable to eat the former, and not the latter. If there are non-anthropomorphic counterparts to the various anthro-folk, it is sometimes considered taboo to eat non-anthro animals that have an anthro counterpart, but not always.

In settings where all animals are anthropomorphic, it's almost always the case that predators either eat prey, or historically ate prey, but social advancement has rendered it unnecessary. In the former case, the stories tend to focus on prey protagonists surviving in a harsh world where predators are functionally monsters. I've observed that these stories also tend to go lighter on the anthropomorphization, essentially treating the characters as animals that talk. Good examples of this type of story include The Secret of NIMH and Redwall. In the latter case, the stories usually revolve around the social tension between predators and prey, and they often feature predators illegally eating prey as antagonists. Good examples are Zootopia and Beastars.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Well, we already have satyrs, centaurs, eladrin, firbolgs, changelings, forest and rock gnomes ;), and the new Hexblood;. Shifters, kenku, genasi, triton, and goliaths can also have a fey feel to them. If you made the duegar less Underdark-y, their enlarge/reduce and invisibility make them into perfect spriggans. And depending on how you view them, warforged and the new Reborn could be the result of fey magic: make them into individually-animated wooden or wax statues or tick-tocks rather than mass-produced weapons of war or people who died and were brought back to a semblance of life. You could easily reskin halflings as mousefolk.

I could definitely go for a few more fey, though. I've long wanted hengeyokai/pooka. The only "problems" are that they should be dual-typed beasts/humanoids, and it doesn't seem like people like the dual-typing that much. And their main form should be the often-Tiny beast form, not the humanoid form. And you know how much WotC doesn't like Tiny PCs.
Puca are a key race in my own system, being the main “mortal Fey” race.
Maybe the magic isn't that strong and can't lift too much beyond their base weight? Personally, I'd say heavy armor and/or being some level of encumbered.
But if they can fly in medium armor and with extra weight that doesn’t quite hit encumbrance, the heavy armor restriction makes no sense.
I could make sense of saying you can’t fly if you are carrying more than half your encumbrance, or something like that, but fairies don’t even have body mechanics to worry about. They’re just magically zooming around, changing size (1 inch openings), using full sized weapons. They clearly aren’t at all natural.
Flight was limited to up to medium armour in Season 9. If you want fly in heavy armour cast Flay
Nimble flight dex save limited to your proficiency bonus. I like limits on strange races. And the DC makes this critter immune to fall damage.
...
I don’t understand. Why should races you find strange (and animal races are more common in fantasy than most D&D races, so strange is an odd choice of words) have extra restrictions?

also season
r, some small folk have less speed and others don’t.. Okay I should adding PC small races should be limited to 25 feet. Or all pc races limited 30.
No. I’m sorry, but just no. Races shouldn’t be limited like that in design.
And could you not inter space your questions.
I can’t follow multiple points without doing so. I’m not bothered if you want to reply all in one block, but I can’t meaningfully engage with your post without replying to each point I want to address individually.
 

It really comes down to reach and equipment. Weapons for large races do extra damage, while tiny-sized weapons do 1 point of damage (rarely, 1d4). Further, mundane gear is sized for mediums (and occasionally smalls) so rules for large/tiny armor, clothes, backpacks, etc. Lastly, the reach on large creatures OAs makes them superior in combat.

While it would make a lot of sense to have large minotaurs and tiny fairies, the game really isn't set up well to handle them.
Note that most of this isn't necessarily true in 5e: weapon damage by size only kicks oin for large creatures and even that's technically just a monster design guideline, since the rule does not apply to enlarged creatures. Small weapons do the same damage, and size does not affect reach by any rule.

For a game where pc's would expect to use found armor and weapons, the sizes might be an issue, but I haven't seen that a lot in 5e outside of magic weapons - and those are often tailored to the pc or magically re-size-able.
 


Parmandur

Book-Friend
Oh, I forgot about those avens. Aerie Mystics is an owlfolk, for one, though. Still, those races are often just bird-folk; often as not they look like eagles as owls. Warden of Evos Isle is an owl on the right, but I think that's an eagle on the left. Simiarly Aerie Mystics are owls, but Aven Trailblazers are eagles.

I've read White Plume Mountain, and the other Greyhawk Classics that finish the story of Escalla and Justicar. Without spoiling anything, I think the size of Escalla was due to her eventual role in the story more than the canon of the lore. Either way, I don't discount the idea that pixies or sprites are smaller than this race, nor argue that the MM is comprehensive. I'm just saying that, based on the artistic depictions on cards, faeries in MTG are closer to the 1 foot mark than the 3 foot mark. Brazen Borrower from Throne of Eldraine certainly doesn't look that big, though the vast number of faerie cards don't have a very good frame of reference.



Ah, that's true. I did forget about future sets. Strixhaven is supposed to have "strixfolk" which are owls. You can see one on Quandrix Command. Can't really tell if they're four-limbed or six-limbed.

I dunno about Kwain. It might be a card eliminated from a future set as easily as a past set, certainly, but I don't know that there will be rabbitfolk. At least I haven't seen any material with them so far.
The Lorehold Command picture also has a smaller looking Owl-based Aven, who has six limbs:

1615592473128.png


This UA says "Owlfolk," but I could see them just calling it "Aven" in the final form.
 

dave2008

Legend
It really comes down to reach and equipment. Weapons for large races do extra damage, while tiny-sized weapons do 1 point of damage (rarely, 1d4). Further, mundane gear is sized for mediums (and occasionally smalls) so rules for large/tiny armor, clothes, backpacks, etc. Lastly, the reach on large creatures OAs makes them superior in combat.

While it would make a lot of sense to have large minotaurs and tiny fairies, the game really isn't set up well to handle them.
Yes, but those are not big issues to me. Also, in 5e, most Large creatures have the same reach as Medium ones:

1615594613462.png
 
Last edited:

see

Pedantic Grognard
How the hell you go through that list and see identical traits like the Jump, Glides and Proficiencies.
Um, yeah, see, if people are designing owl-based lineages, they tend to give them the characteristics of owls (flying, seeing at night, stealthiness). See:

Takara (Homebrew on D&D Beyond, from 2018)
Size: Medium
Speed 25 ft., fly 30
Darkvision 60 ft., can discern colors
Proficiency and Expertise in Stealth
Obsession ( Choose a humanoid race that your Takara is obsessed with, once chosen you may add your proficiency bonus on Insight checks regarding this race (does not stack with expertise) and you may add your Wisdom modifier to damage rolls (once per action) against this race.)

Owl Kin (3.5 Homebrew on D&D Wiki, 2009)
Base land speed is 25 feet: Fly 40 (Moderate Maneuverability)
Silent Wings: When flying, an Owl Kin gets +2 to move silently, so long as they are wearing light or no armor.
Perch: Owl Kin have talons for feet, thus allowing them to grip branches and the like easily. An Owl Kin gets a +2 to their balance check on anything small enough for them to wrap their talons around, but can still be knocked off by normal means.
Darkvision: Owl Kin can see in the dark up to 60 feet. Darkvision is black and white only, but it is otherwise like normal sight.
Light Sensitivity: Owl Kin are dazzled in bright sunlight or within the radius of a daylight spell.
Two Natural weapons Talons 1d4
Owl Type - Depending on which type of Owl the Owl Kin closest appears like determines some abilities
  • Barn - gain Hide In Plain Sight
  • Horned - gain a +6 to Intimidate
  • Snowy - gain +5 Resist/cold
 


Yes, but those are not big issues to me. Also, in 5e, most Large creatures have the same reach as Medium ones:

View attachment 134129
Their attack reach is the same, going into the next grid square, but by virtue of being a Large-sized creature they take up a 10' by 10' area on a grid, or four 5' by 5' squares, compared to Medium and Small creatures that only take up one 5' by 5' square. So Large creatures can threaten twelve grid squares around them, compared to Medium and Small creatures who can only threaten eight at a time.
 

Tonguez

A suffusion of yellow
It really comes down to reach and equipment. Weapons for large races do extra damage, while tiny-sized weapons do 1 point of damage (rarely, 1d4). Further, mundane gear is sized for mediums (and occasionally smalls) so rules for large/tiny armor, clothes, backpacks, etc. Lastly, the reach on large creatures OAs makes them superior in combat.

While it would make a lot of sense to have large minotaurs and tiny fairies, the game really isn't set up well to handle them.

While I can see why it may be an issue for large characters getting extra reach I think balancing the game around combat viability is bad design. When a player chooses a tiny race they are explicitly accepting that the race will be ineffective in direct combat and will instead be looking at other ways to engage - be it with use of spells/poison or using stealth and evasion. Its the challenge of exploring a world from a tiny perspective that appeals.
 

tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
While I can see why it may be an issue for large characters getting extra reach I think balancing the game around combat viability is bad design. When a player chooses a tiny race they are explicitly accepting that the race will be ineffective in direct combat and will instead be looking at other ways to engage - be it with use of spells/poison or using stealth and evasion. Its the challenge of exploring a world from a tiny perspective that appeals.
no it has another very valid reason. There are a number of ways that size can be adjusted
1615605897848.png
A one minute concentration spell that adds +1d4 to attacks plus advantage on a virtually unused save is pretty bad. The concentration & short duration even makes sure you probably can't get much use out of aura spells that would leverage those extra adjacent squares while there are very few things a martial can even meaningfully do as a result of those extra squares without contrived situations that assume the otherwise poor spell got prepped for that contrived situation. Elemental weapon is one level higher & gives +1d+1 & +1 to attack for an hour
 



JEB

Hero
I=My money's on them calling it the "Anniversary Edition" and it being just 5e with revisions.
That certainly sounds like a plausible spin on the revised 5E, yeah. Overhaul the core races to match the new approach, integrate the new Tasha's class features, de-emphasize or outright remove alignment, rewrite lore to delete any potentially objectionable content, and some other general adjustments here and there. Making it a celebratory edition also provides an excuse to move some non-core options into the core if they want (i.e. orcs). Then they can let the older core rulebooks, and any other rulebooks that strongly backed the old 5E paradigm (like Volo's), lapse out of print, where they no longer present a PR problem.

It really comes down to reach and equipment. Weapons for large races do extra damage, while tiny-sized weapons do 1 point of damage (rarely, 1d4). Further, mundane gear is sized for mediums (and occasionally smalls) so rules for large/tiny armor, clothes, backpacks, etc. Lastly, the reach on large creatures OAs makes them superior in combat.

While it would make a lot of sense to have large minotaurs and tiny fairies, the game really isn't set up well to handle them.
Funny enough, very early in 5E, they didn't seem to have an issue with different sizes for PC races: Mearls rattled off stats for a half-ogre race on Twitter, for example. My guess is when it came time to start implementing such stuff officially, and actually began playtesting, the results led them to conclude that it was too hard to balance any race that deviated too much from the core. Hence the various workarounds (stretchy bugbear arms, large races being compressed to a very tall medium for PC versions, etc.).

There were other ways they could have made it work, though, like those noted upthread (such as comparing to enlarge/reduce). They could have also given Tiny races some extra features to compensate for their innate weakness; for larger size creatures, they could have built more races like the deep gnome, with a weaker base creature and more powerful stuff (large size, increased ASIs for size) only available as feats.

It's just disappointing they never tried to go beyond medium/small, because it leaves some older-edition monstrous PC options, like pixies, giants, and dragons, firmly in the realm of unofficial or homebrew material.
 

JEB

Hero
While I can see why it may be an issue for large characters getting extra reach I think balancing the game around combat viability is bad design. When a player chooses a tiny race they are explicitly accepting that the race will be ineffective in direct combat and will instead be looking at other ways to engage - be it with use of spells/poison or using stealth and evasion. Its the challenge of exploring a world from a tiny perspective that appeals.
I think a balancing act like you suggest would be viable, but I don't think Wizards is in the business of giving playable races disadvantages anymore, balanced or not.
 

oreofox

Explorer
I can’t follow multiple points without doing so. I’m not bothered if you want to reply all in one block, but I can’t meaningfully engage with your post without replying to each point I want to address individually.

I think maybe you quoting like this pings their alerts for each one? That might be Jasper's problem with your replies. I am not entirely sure as I haven't experienced such, but that would be my guess.


As for the topic at hand: Having a more fey hobgoblin might be great. Honestly, the base hobgoblin never sat well with me, and their "save face" ability was poorly named. Having it based on reciprocity, with the bonus being based on your helpful allies, it fits better for me.

I am meh on the fairy race.

The owl and rabbits I probably wouldn't use, as I already have a mashup kenku/arakkocra race, though I might tear the owl apart and mash it in with the other 2 birds (I named them Corvax, though they can appear as any bird, not just corvid birds). I also already have rat people, though at the moment they are just reskinned halflings with more rat flavoring. I might see about incorporating some of the rabbit's features into my rats.

I could see a group of PCs being 4 tortle monks with a rabbit fighter fighting humans in purple suits, with stronger leaders (a minotaur reskinned into a rhino, and possibly a giff turned into a warthog, though I never really looked into the giff. The giff was added into 5e, right? Even if just a monster?) I could see that as a fun minicampaign or one-shot if everyone involved was up for it.
 

Am I the only one not concerned about the flying? Let 'em have heavy armor, they're either owls (And therefore heavy fliers) or fairies, which are magical. Mind I've never been worried about flight historically

I personally do also love the whole bringing goblins back to their fey routes as I do love goblins being more fey. Also, rabbitfolk totally live on the moon. Its just, where they live.
 

Am I the only one not concerned about the flying? Let 'em have heavy armor, they're either owls (And therefore heavy fliers) or fairies, which are magical. Mind I've never been worried about flight historically
The Hsiao Fey Owls from Basic's Creature Crucible series has official art where its wearing armor that seems Medium or Heavy.

So Owls in Heavy Armor doesn't bother me one bit.
 

Visit Our Sponsor

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top