Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Unearthed Arcana: Gothic Lineages & New Race/Culture Distinction
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="JEB" data-source="post: 8204226" data-attributes="member: 10148"><p>Sure, as long as you're fine with NPCs that have no racial traits, and only represent completely generic individuals. If you want a NPC to have racial traits - say, to be a dwarf commoner rather than a generic commoner - the Monster Manual and DMG both suggest you add racial traits, which include ASI that matches (or very very nearly matches) the PHB versions under the core rules. But you don't have to, if you just want a commoner that doesn't represent any particular race (thus allowing them to represent a humanoid of "any race", as it literally states in the statblock).</p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't think they've ever released errata for older books to include material that's been featured in later books. Seems like that would be arguably giving things away for free if they did.</p><p></p><p></p><p>The ability score differences aren't particularly relevant, because the scores you see could have still had the ASI applied to them. Specialist NPCs aren't required to start with all 10s, and in fact probably won't, both for flavor reasons and so they can make sure they have the right attack bonuses, DCs, etc.</p><p></p><p>As for the other missing racial features, the Nilbog isn't exactly a normal goblin, so its lack of standard goblin features is easy to explain. The others suggest a difference for those specific NPC builds, but not a suggestion that a typical hobgoblin or kobold NPC, such as a commoner, wouldn't normally have those default features. You can't use exceptions to prove rules.</p><p></p><p>Flipping this around, care to explain why the orc NPCs in Volo's all <em>do</em> have darkvision, the Aggressive trait, and Intimidation proficiency? (Excepting the Nurtured One of Yurtrus, which is basically a mutant.)</p><p></p><p></p><p>Sure, if you're building a creature that isn't a typical member of the species. That's different from building a commoner that has the racial traits of a PHB race.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes, that is basically what I've been pointing out. They provide one approach to having NPCs reflect racial traits, and that approach points to the PHB or DMG traits. Which means that by the core rules, a NPC will have the same traits (or nearly identical traits) as the PHB race, to include ASI. You can always build an exception, but by definition, those aren't typical members of the species.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Mordenkainen's being even more recent than Volo's, of course. Also, the existence of different types of eladrin with different abilities actually goes back to 2E.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Really, you're suggesting that I'm not honestly suggesting that you could count the dragonborn varieties as subraces? (Personally, I probably would, since they actually have physiological differences - they're actually better suited to the term "subrace" than many of the other subraces.)</p><p></p><p>And sure, all ten of those dragonborn variants have the same default ASIs. If we accept those as subraces, that demonstrates how "there are subraces!" would not be an excuse to claim an entire species wouldn't have typical members, such that defaults couldn't be suggested.</p><p></p><p></p><p>The only nonhuman version of a standard NPC statblock we have in an official source that I'm aware of is the lizardfolk commoner, which 1) came out in 2019 and 2) doesn't really support either argument. The other two (goblin commoner and kobold commoner) are only on D&D Beyond and, as I pointed out, could be mistakes on D&D Beyond's part.</p><p></p><p>As for NPC statblocks not based on generic NPCs, those aren't typical members of the race and, as I pointed out previously, also do often have traits matching the race's defaults. And they don't really have a bearing on what a typical member of the species might be like as far as ASIs, since ability scores can vary.</p><p></p><p>Besides, I've been primarily talking about what their intention was as far as the core rules, not what might have came later. (I already granted it's possible they had changed their mind as early as Volo's; I just also pointed out that it's very possible they didn't.) As far as PHB races, I'm not aware of any examples of complete statblocks for race-specific versions of generic NPCs. In fact, every time we see a "drow commoner" or the like in the vast majority of books, they never tell you how to depict them. So they must assume you'd follow the guidelines in the Monster Manual for NPCs... which suggest applying racial traits (which include ASIs) when you want them to reflect a character race.</p><p></p><p></p><p>And you can keep believing what you want, even in the face of the evidence provided in the core rules.</p><p></p><p>I mean, we can keep going on this, but at this point it seems more worthwhile to agree to disagree.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JEB, post: 8204226, member: 10148"] Sure, as long as you're fine with NPCs that have no racial traits, and only represent completely generic individuals. If you want a NPC to have racial traits - say, to be a dwarf commoner rather than a generic commoner - the Monster Manual and DMG both suggest you add racial traits, which include ASI that matches (or very very nearly matches) the PHB versions under the core rules. But you don't have to, if you just want a commoner that doesn't represent any particular race (thus allowing them to represent a humanoid of "any race", as it literally states in the statblock). I don't think they've ever released errata for older books to include material that's been featured in later books. Seems like that would be arguably giving things away for free if they did. The ability score differences aren't particularly relevant, because the scores you see could have still had the ASI applied to them. Specialist NPCs aren't required to start with all 10s, and in fact probably won't, both for flavor reasons and so they can make sure they have the right attack bonuses, DCs, etc. As for the other missing racial features, the Nilbog isn't exactly a normal goblin, so its lack of standard goblin features is easy to explain. The others suggest a difference for those specific NPC builds, but not a suggestion that a typical hobgoblin or kobold NPC, such as a commoner, wouldn't normally have those default features. You can't use exceptions to prove rules. Flipping this around, care to explain why the orc NPCs in Volo's all [I]do[/I] have darkvision, the Aggressive trait, and Intimidation proficiency? (Excepting the Nurtured One of Yurtrus, which is basically a mutant.) Sure, if you're building a creature that isn't a typical member of the species. That's different from building a commoner that has the racial traits of a PHB race. Yes, that is basically what I've been pointing out. They provide one approach to having NPCs reflect racial traits, and that approach points to the PHB or DMG traits. Which means that by the core rules, a NPC will have the same traits (or nearly identical traits) as the PHB race, to include ASI. You can always build an exception, but by definition, those aren't typical members of the species. Mordenkainen's being even more recent than Volo's, of course. Also, the existence of different types of eladrin with different abilities actually goes back to 2E. Really, you're suggesting that I'm not honestly suggesting that you could count the dragonborn varieties as subraces? (Personally, I probably would, since they actually have physiological differences - they're actually better suited to the term "subrace" than many of the other subraces.) And sure, all ten of those dragonborn variants have the same default ASIs. If we accept those as subraces, that demonstrates how "there are subraces!" would not be an excuse to claim an entire species wouldn't have typical members, such that defaults couldn't be suggested. The only nonhuman version of a standard NPC statblock we have in an official source that I'm aware of is the lizardfolk commoner, which 1) came out in 2019 and 2) doesn't really support either argument. The other two (goblin commoner and kobold commoner) are only on D&D Beyond and, as I pointed out, could be mistakes on D&D Beyond's part. As for NPC statblocks not based on generic NPCs, those aren't typical members of the race and, as I pointed out previously, also do often have traits matching the race's defaults. And they don't really have a bearing on what a typical member of the species might be like as far as ASIs, since ability scores can vary. Besides, I've been primarily talking about what their intention was as far as the core rules, not what might have came later. (I already granted it's possible they had changed their mind as early as Volo's; I just also pointed out that it's very possible they didn't.) As far as PHB races, I'm not aware of any examples of complete statblocks for race-specific versions of generic NPCs. In fact, every time we see a "drow commoner" or the like in the vast majority of books, they never tell you how to depict them. So they must assume you'd follow the guidelines in the Monster Manual for NPCs... which suggest applying racial traits (which include ASIs) when you want them to reflect a character race. And you can keep believing what you want, even in the face of the evidence provided in the core rules. I mean, we can keep going on this, but at this point it seems more worthwhile to agree to disagree. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Unearthed Arcana: Gothic Lineages & New Race/Culture Distinction
Top