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.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Both rules are relevent. Rabbit Hop is a specific rule. The word "jump" used in Bestial Soul is not a keyword.

No one but you thinks the idea of “keywords” is relevant, though. No idea of the Barbarian ability modifying rabbit hop relies on the idea of keywords.

Yes, THEY can. Because they are not a specific special power. Jump spell and Bestial Soul are abilities that specifically modify those jumping rules.

Not really. They modify any jump, which rabbit hop is.

Rabbit Hop is not "jumping".

Yes, it is. It literally is a racial ability that lets you jump as a bonus action. The wording of rules matters in 5e, and just like how a racial ability that says it is magical won’t work in a beholders anti-magic cone, a ability that describes jumping is modified by things that modify jumping, unless they specifically say otherwise.

It's rules are completely separate to the jumping rules.

This is entirely unsupported by the rules text.

When a Harengan jumps it uses the rules for jumping. when it uses Rabbit Hop it uses the rules for Rabbit Hop. Harengan have no racial abilities that modify jumping.

They have an ability to that allows them to jump with a specified range. That isn’t “modify[ing] jumping”, it’s just…jumping.

No it's not. If a rule is written after, the author would put in "this doesn't apply to X" when it doesn't apply to X. If it is written before "doesn't apply to X" is implied. In order to analyse text for authorial intent you need to know the context.

No. The rules text is the rules text. You are creating a personal house rule based on an assumption about how a rule would have been written, with no actual basis in anything but your own opinion. There is no reason to beleive that they would have written the beast Barbarian differently with harengon had been published first.

I don't care, you can make up any rules you like, I'm just pointing out how the 5e rules work, since you seemed to be uncertain. Intuitively, it would make sense for the Jump spell to multiply the range of Rabbit Hop by three, and I would probably allow it, but that's called house rules.

No, that’s RAW.

there's absolutely a tonal shift between lizardfolks and rabbitfolks

No, there isn’t.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I think the purpose of snark is negative reinforcement for the observers, rather than the recipient. On the internet, the arguments are usually performative to sway the other readers of the argument because the participants' positions are assumed to be (and usually are) immutable.

Well, that, and what Umbran is saying isn’t even actually true. Snark can absolutely be effective and persuasive.

 

[Umbran]

I think the purpose of snark is negative reinforcement for the observers, rather than the recipient. On the internet, the arguments are usually performative to sway the other readers of the argument because the participants' positions are assumed to be (and usually are) immutable.

Even then, the vast majority of folks walk into the situation with some leaning or other. If they identify more with the target, you turn them off to what you're saying. If they agree with your position, you aren't giving them anything new. The snark is thus not about communication, but about social positioning and dominance.

And, you know, with red text already in the thread, maybe arguing in support of social dominance plays... is not what one would call a wise idea.

 

[Nikosandros]

Well, that, and what Umbran is saying isn’t even actually true. Snark can absolutely be effective and persuasive.

Honest question: where you ever persuaded to change an opinion by someone being snarky at you?

 

[Bill Zebub]

Honest question: where you ever persuaded to change an opinion by someone being snarky at you?

I've been thinking about this (given that it was my snark that has been called out). I don't think I've ever been persuaded by snark alone to change a position, but I do think there have been times where I've been jolted into realizing that an assumption I comfortably hold is not, in fact, shared by everybody, which in turn causes me to be more attentive and thoughtful, which can eventually lead to a change in position. Or, at least, an understanding of other positions. Would I have gotten there without that initial jolt? Hard to say.

And, yes, there is a difference between writing a column in which you are really just preaching to the choir in order to sell subscriptions (in which case snark is an effective tool) and engaging in a discussion in a community. Or, in what you hope is a community.

 

[Mind of tempest]

Don't put words into my mouth, thanks.

@Scott Christian at least said "I THINK Bird Of Play is PROBABLY saying"...... and he was also right. He nailed it. I'm sorry, but a world with an entire civilization of rabbitfolks is silly to me. Suspension of disbelief is funny like this, you may think elves and dwarves are a-ok but somehow you draw the line at anthro-rabbits.

You? You didn't say "I think Bird Of Play"..... you decided what -I- wanted to say. And, guess what? You were wrong.

I think rabbitfolks are dumb and ill-fitted to D&D. You know the thing about wererats/werewolves/werefoxes/weretigers etc.? They're not an entire race with towns and stuff, they're a special event.

If we got wererabbits, I would be ok with it.

You might reasonably say "but even old editions had lizardfolks and such!". Yep. But 1) what makes you think I ever used them in my campaigns?; 2) there's absolutely a tonal shift between lizardfolks and rabbitfolks, and let's not pretend we're not seeing it.

I don't want to go into this subject anymore. I just don't like rabbitfolks as a race in my D&D. I just don't like anime-themed mmorpg either. You can't police what I like, otherwise the one doing the gatekeeping is the one not accepting that some people might not like your stuff.

have you tried apathy toward the rabbit folk like I am towards the halflings?

 

[Bird Of Play]

have you tried apathy toward the rabbit folk like I am towards the halflings?

Personally, I've fused gnomes and halflings into a single race. It works wonders!

 

[Bird Of Play]

No, there isn’t.

Yes, there is, and I have a hard time believing you really cannot see that.
Do you also think a killer bunny does the same effect of a killer snake?

 

[J.Quondam]

Personally, I've fused gnomes and halflings into a single race. It works wonders!

So... like little ettins?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Yes, there is, and I have a hard time believing you really cannot see that.
Do you also think a killer bunny does the same effect of a killer snake?

actual animals aren't the same thing as a animal people.