D&D 5E Preview Witchlight's New Rabbit People

You can take a look at the harengons, a rabbit-themed race in the upcoming Wild Beyond the Witchlight, over at D&D Beyond.

Harengons are medium or small humanoids with a bonus to initiative, Dexterity saving throws, and a 'rabbit hop' which lets them jump up to five times their proficiency bonus without provoking opportunity attacks.

Creature Type. You are a Humanoid.

Size. You are Medium or Small. You choose the size when you select this race.

Speed. Your walking speed is 30 feet.

Hare-Trigger. You can add your proficiency bonus to your initiative rolls.

Leporine Senses. You have proficiency in the Perception skill.

Lucky Footwork. When you fail a Dexterity saving throw, you can use your reaction to roll a d4 and add it to the save, potentially turning the failure into a success. You can’t use this reaction if you’re prone or your speed is 0.

Rabbit Hop. As a bonus action, you can jump a number of feet equal to five times your proficiency bonus, without provoking opportunity attacks. You can use this trait only if your speed is greater than 0. You can use it a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus, and you regain all expended uses when you finish a long rest.

When you create a harengon or fairy using the rules from The Wild Beyond the Witchlight, you can choose to increase one ability score by 2 and another by 1, or choose to increase three different scores by 1. Further, you know Common and will choose one other language to learn.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

I really thought floating ASIs were no good and I have no need for rabbit people.

that said, I like that D&D is customizable. We use a lot of Tasha’s and not every bit.

might buy this book for a fun read, but probably would not use the rabbits. This approach works for me.

of course you never know when an option will suddenly appeal…I used to think tieflings were a little goofy and hated crazy inventor gnomes. Out of the blue this year however I decided a tiefling artificer could be…fun?

keep the options coming and keep adding campaign and sourcebooks we can use or ignore!

if all the races were in the phb it would be a different thing. We still have a humanocentric world if we create it! Let the dm know your preferences or find like minded groups.

it’s always worked for me. And my next character is going to be an artificer reflavored. Was sauron an artificer of sorts?

the elven smiths?

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I don't think it is the standard anymore... for a segment of players.

For the base of the game, was my point. And it's probably not the standard for the majority of players anymore.

 

[Scott Christian]

define it again as we might just have lost it over the pages.

Rabbit folk, no matter the name, are okay. If you defend it with traditional elements, such as mythos, even better. But they are unique. A lone stand off in a world of elves, humans, dwarves, gnomes, etc. DMs will plug them in as NPCs, villains, etc. That is just one view.

Another is there is a hovel, town, city, or kingdom of rabbit folk. They are prominent in the campaign. They are interesting and have their own culture and habits and religion and traditions and rituals.

Then there is the third, a player is a rabbit folk. He is that because he likes the mechanics or RP possibilities. Nowhere in the campaign blinks an eye because the elephant, rabbit, horse, and demon walks in. It's as if it happens every day.

Then there is the fourth, a player is a rabbit folk. He is that because he likes the mechanics. Nowhere in the campaign blinks an eye because the elephant, rabbit, horse, and demon walks in. It's as if it happens every day, but it really makes no sense. The DM doesn't have the world built this way. But you know what? It doesn't matter. They are what they are - play on.

Those are the four styles as I see it.

 

[Scott Christian]

That's only part of my confusion. I'm still puzzled about anthropomorphic rabbits being considered silly or laughable, but anthropomorphic bulls, lizards, snakes, etc. aren't. I'm having trouble seeing the difference.

That is part of the point. It really depends on the campaign.

 

[Scott Christian]

And I don't think there's any evidence that "one of these creatures, in the source material, would live in a swamp or is a curse that lives all alone in some mystical forest". That's just plain made up, there's no support for that argument.

There's also no reason why Rabbitfolk couldn't have their own villages or even kingdoms. Why would Rabbitfolk be less inclined towards civilization building than any other race, especially the other animalfolk races? Why would a Tortle or Aarakocra be capable of building a village or kingdom, and not a Harengon? Wait a moment. Don't answer that, because I already have the answer: there is no reason or justification for this mindset. None.

I have to ask: What are you talking about?

That is one viewpoint from a specific campaign. If you do not understand this, then please email me directly. I will try to explain. But the point I was trying to make is exceptionally clear.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

That is part of the point. It really depends on the campaign.

What "point"? No one ever said Harengon should exist in every setting. They're literally only in an Alice in Wonderland-style adventure that takes place in the Feywild. Everyone knows campaign dependent.

 

[Scott Christian]

For the base of the game, was my point. And it's probably not the standard for the majority of players anymore.

Majority will be debatable for many years... especially when the TTRPG loses its swagger, and we go back to old sales profits. But for now, and in the past, and in the future, who knows? Not me.

 

[Scott Christian]

What "point"? No one ever said Harengon should exist in every setting. They're literally only in an Alice in Wonderland-style adventure that takes place in the Feywild. Everyone knows campaign dependent.

You say this as if you actually believe the statement is true. If it is pointed out statistically that it is different, will you "untrue" it?

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

You say this as if you actually believe the statement is true. If it is pointed out statistically that it is different, will you "untrue" it?

Dude. Can you turn down the hostility a bit? What did I ever do to warrant this level of condescension and mockery?!

Yes, I do say that statement as if it were true because I sincerely believe that it is true. When did anyone ever in this thread say that Harengon should be in every setting and aren't campaign-dependent? When did anyone ever start forcing others to use races that they don't like?

Also, when did you ever get statistics for public opinion on a race this new? I mean, the book isn't even officially out yet.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Majority will be debatable for many years... especially when the TTRPG loses its swagger, and we go back to old sales profits. But for now, and in the past, and in the future, who knows? Not me.

WotC - 2020 Was The Best Year Ever For Dungeons & Dragons

https://www.forbes.com/sites/robwieland/2021/05/19/2020-was-the-best-year-ever-for-dungeons--dragons/?sh=167372b54f37 Full article in the link.

www.enworld.org

54% of players are younger than 30. I think it's quite clear that the oldschool way of playing is not in the majority anymore.

 

[Fenris-77]

I think D&D can now officially run a furry campaign if you onw enough supplements. Bunny people, cat people, bear people, it's got it all.

Mechanically, adding proficiency to Init is cool. Rabbit Assassins could be a common sight.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

bear people

We don't have Bear people yet.

 

[Fenris-77]

We don't have Bear people yet.

I should have mentioned I was considering 3rd party stuff. Bear people are in the Midgard books from Kobold press.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I should have mentioned I was considering 3rd party stuff. Bear people are in the Midgard books from Kobold press.

Ah, I have that book. Never really used it, though.

(On a tangent: One of my NPCs from my Eberron campaign is a baby Werepanda (Werebear) that the PCs met in Xen'drik. It was just sitting there eating bamboo, and the players eventually went back to adopt him.)

 

[Scott Christian]

WotC - 2020 Was The Best Year Ever For Dungeons & Dragons

https://www.forbes.com/sites/robwieland/2021/05/19/2020-was-the-best-year-ever-for-dungeons--dragons/?sh=167372b54f37 Full article in the link.

www.enworld.org

54% of players are younger than 30. I think it's quite clear that the oldschool way of playing is not in the majority anymore.

I have no doubt an older player doesn't rest their head in the majority. But things change. I have said it a thousand times. D&D shifts on culture, not the other way around. So if the culture suddenly sprawls to a Conan aesthetic, D&D will shift that way too. It doesn't matter if you define it "new" or "old school" or "furrie" or "apocalyptic." It's just the swing of popularity and culture. It is all good, no matter the swing.

 

[Scott Christian]

Dude. Can you turn down the hostility a bit? What did I ever do to warrant this level of condescension and mockery?!

Yes, I do say that statement as if it were true because I sincerely believe that it is true. When did anyone ever in this thread say that Harengon should be in every setting and aren't campaign-dependent? When did anyone ever start forcing others to use races that they don't like?

Also, when did you ever get statistics for public opinion on a race this new? I mean, the book isn't even officially out yet.

What hostility? This is what I said:
"You say this as if you actually believe the statement is true. If it is pointed out statistically that it is different, will you "untrue" it?"

I am sorry, and I am being serious - what in there is hostile? All I said is races might be dependent on setting. And then said those that argue over race often view it as an end-all be-all, instead of as part of a setting. That's it. There is no hostility in my comments. If you read them as such, please explain.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

What hostility? This is what I said:
"You say this as if you actually believe the statement is true. If it is pointed out statistically that it is different, will you "untrue" it?"

I am sorry, and I am being serious - what in there is hostile? All I said is races might be dependent on setting. And then said those that argue over race often view it as an end-all be-all, instead of as part of a setting. That's it. There is no hostility in my comments. If you read them as such, please explain.

1. "You say this as if you actually believe the statement is true" is mocking and condescending. A non-hostile response would be something akin to "I disagree, for the following reasons".
2. "If it is pointed out statistically that it is different, will you 'untrue' it" is a hostile distrustment of my sincerity and accusing me of arguing in bad faith.

How the f**k would that not be taken as hostile?

 

[Stormonu]

Fitzing around on heroforge, came up with this ... a haregon hagborn (hexblood)? Or perhaps a haregon warlock of the archfey?

 

[bedir than]

D&D shifts on culture, not the other way around.

As long as you don't think TV, books, movies, comics, and gaming are part of culture, you could be correct.

I would argue that D&D created a cultural shift that purists were unable to stop. D&D definitely lead to an entire genre of video gaming, popular TV shows, massive booklines and more. The culture of D&D is echoed in memes by non-players of the game ever single day with alignment charts and attributes based on faces. The culture of D&D is even echoed by the elder GenXs running tech companies now.

 

[Khelon Testudo]

Whatever do you mean? We only have Turtle/Tortoise-folk, Dragonfolk (Dragonborn and Kobolds), Lizard-folk, Goatfolk (Satyrs), Birdfolk (Aarakocra, Owlins, and Kenku), Sasquatch-folk (Bugbears), Catfolk (Tabaxi and Leonin), Fishfolk (Locathah and I guess Tritons count), Snakefolk (Yuan-Ti Purebloods), Lycanthrope-folk (Shifters), Horsefolk (Centaurs), Elephantfolk (Loxodons), Cowfolk (Minotaurs and maybe Exandria Firbolg), Squid-Crab-folk (Simic Hybrids), and Frogfolk (Grung, Grippli, and Bullywugs, though the last two aren't playable)! We obviously need more!

(I mean, I could get behind some more Bug-folk; like Grasshopperfolk, Dragonflyfolk, Bee/Waspfolk, Ladybug-folk, and playable Thri-Kreen, but that's about all we need, IMO. Well, that and Fox-folk/Kitsune. Oh, Echidna/Platypusfolk could work, too! And Lupins.)

If you want platypus folk, there are minis on Etsy.
Also moth-folk.