Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dualazi" data-source="post: 6898704" data-attributes="member: 6855537">Correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t the SCAG have more subraces for elves and dwarves? I hope we’re not going down that abysmal road again but we might just be. Even if we’re not, I don’t think we need to try a different flavor of the same poison with the exotic races.I would be way more accepting if they were part of an Oriental Adventures type supplement and intended as a method of converting or replacing Aarokocra. As it stands, then yeah, As I and Leatherhead said, this reeks of just giving people an AL bird people option.You mean the single most significant aspect about them? Yeah. In your homebrew maybe people can casually tell at a glance the difference between the two, but outside of spelljammer I’d guess that all other major humanoid groups (humans/dwarves/elves/orcs) are just going to focus on the bird-appearance more than any cultural or mechanical elements that might be present. They're bird-men. I don't think ink should be wasted on two iterations of bird-men at this time.No, but a Wolf race would definitely make a dog/hyena (yes I know they descended from cats, it doesn’t matter) race redundant, as would a panther race and a tiger race.This makes about as much sense as saying we shouldn’t have elves and humans because they both have 2 legs and can fight. An orc and a minotaur look nothing at all alike at a glance. Having a Minotaur race and a Bull race *would* be extraneous, and is much closer to the given example of Aarokocra and Kenku.</blockquote>

Verification