Dragonlance What do you think of the Kender?

[Demetrios1453]

Kender rogue stares quizzically at a hoopak with no clue what it is

Yeah, that's an immediate house rule. Simply saying that kender rogues have proficiency with it is more of a class thing than racial.

 

[Neonchameleon]

What do you think? I think it's OK but it's a bit watered down. I don't know what the right solution for the 'kleptomania' thing was, but I'm not sure cutting it out altogether would have been my choice.

There were only three options on the table:

1. Water it down
2. Give it another identity entirely
3. Take off and nuke Kendermore from orbit; it's the only way to be sure.

And I'm pretty sure they weren't going to nuke Kendermore however much cheering there would be from anyone who'd suffered the misfortune to see someone play a Kender as you were directed to play the worst race in D&D history. Meanwhile option two was tried in Unearthed Arcana and a significant number of people objected to the Fey Kender who could magically pull things out of their bags.

So with original Kender being widely reviled by most of those who cared and the main strong alternative they offered being objected to by many water was tthey decided water wasn't a bad choice. And 5e is about not bad choices.

 

[jasper]

So no darkvision. And still an insulting little kid. But they lost the greedy what is your pockets is in my pockets now thing. So, it is now a race I would not shoot on sight.

 

[AnotherGuy]

So no darkvision. And still an insulting little kid. But they lost the greedy what is your pockets is in my pockets now thing. So, it is now a race I would not shoot on sight.

So you admit it. You're a racist!

 

[Shadowdweller00]

Kender are a blight upon the world of gaming. The most noxious and heinous character idea ever created - in part because they're just short of being so actively obscene or cringe as to be self-censoring. Oh wait, you meant this incarnation of the kender? Sorry, haven't had a chance to notice over the genocide.

 

[Faolyn]

The change to Fearless was unnecessary, IMO. I don't know why WotC is so afraid of giving characters actual immunities. Also, I'm amused by all the "usable x times per day" abilities returning in 5e, after being soundly rejected in previous editions ("why can my character only perform his Vorpal Tornado attack once per day?").

Every time a race or archetype came up with immunity rather than resistance, reddit would go wild saying it was OP. So many people said yuan-ti purebloods were insta-banned at their table for their immunity to poison and the poisoned condition. So I'd guess WotC is listening to them.

 

[humble minion]

I kinda wish the taunt ability had been a racial feat, but WotC doesn’t seem to be doing those any more.

 

[Retreater]

How do they compare to gully dwarves (the best thing to come out of Dragonlance.)

 

[James Gasik]

Every time a race or archetype came up with immunity rather than resistance, reddit would go wild saying it was OP. So many people said yuan-ti purebloods were insta-banned at their table for their immunity to poison and the poisoned condition. So I'd guess WotC is listening to them.

Immunity to the Poisoned condition does come up a lot, because WotC likes to use it for things that don't have anything to do with poison (like the Stench of Troglodytes), and was the real value of the Yuan-Ti, as poison damage itself seems fairly uncommon, and enough DM's argued about what magic resistance actually worked on that it wasn't nearly as good as one might suppose.

But honestly, I don't really see how, in a game with all kinds of different types of damage and negative effects, how a race being immune to one thing is really a problem. I much prefer that over conditional modifiers that may or may not actually come up in game. But it seems that WotC would rather immunities come from class abilities than race.

There is something to be said about racial abilities that are made redundant by class abilities, thus making people want to avoid certain race/class combinations, I suppose, but we already have that with Halflings and Kender with Paladins, or Goblin Rogues.

 

[Shadowdweller00]

Immunity to the Poisoned condition does come up a lot, because WotC likes to use it for things that don't have anything to do with poison (like the Stench of Troglodytes), and was the real value of the Yuan-Ti, as poison damage itself seems fairly uncommon, and enough DM's argued about what magic resistance actually worked on that it wasn't nearly as good as one might suppose.

Poison damage is the most common energy type, barring large numbers of NPC mages. Or at least most common per enemy type.

 

[Umbran]

So you admit it. You're a racist!

Mod Note:
I hope you found the payoff for that to be totally worth it, because it'd earned you a ticket out of this thread.

 

[Zardnaar]

Ban Kender!!!!

 

[Mecheon]

Eh. They're Dragonlance's Kender. They're servicable. Ticks all the boxes and does what it needs to without doing anything unique or interesting

I think I liked the more fey-ish flavour of the earlier revisions. Yeah, I get it doesn't mesh with Dragonlance's history but like.... Kender are blatently Fey and it tied them into that archetype to make them a bit more widely usuable in other places

 

[Faolyn]

But honestly, I don't really see how, in a game with all kinds of different types of damage and negative effects, how a race being immune to one thing is really a problem. I much prefer that over conditional modifiers that may or may not actually come up in game. But it seems that WotC would rather immunities come from class abilities than race.

Well, you know what they say: a lot of class features wouldn't make the cut if they were playtested today. Barbarians getting a d12 hit die? Paladin smites? Heck no!

 

[ECMO3]

Overall I like them, some positives (+) one negative (-). Some specifics:

1. kleptomania ++ : Needed to go!

2. no Darkvision + : I hate the idea that every race needs Darkvision. They didn't have it 40 years ago and don't need it now:

3. Fearless + : Pleasent surprise. The original Kender were totally immune and we knew WOTC was not going to do that. The advantage and 1 legendary is a good compromise. You have advantage and then on top of that most monster frighten effects are of the variety "if you save you can not be affected for that day" .... so in play I think this will be pretty close to immunity:

4. Kender Aptitude neutral: It needed a boost mechancically

5. Speed 30' + : As expected

6. Hoopak -- : The Hoopak is a disaster. First off it needs to be a racial weapon, second it is AWFUL mechanically. Two handed weapon that does a poor 1d6 damage (and 1d4 as a missile). It is not heavy so you can't use GWM with it and it is a melee weapon so you can't use Sharpshooter when you make a ranged attack. You might be able to get away with a Hoopak on a Wizard, Cleric or Rogue where the damage won't be so important, however since it is a martial proficiency only martials will be able to use it and they will be seriously nerfed compared to someone who could do 1d10 damage or 1d8 damage with a shield.

For SODQ I think I am going to play a Kender Conquest Paladin with the Nuitari high sorcery initiate background. Start with a 17 Charisma, Pick up Hex, Dissonant Whispers at 1st level, Tasha's Mind Whip at 4th and then get Shadow Touched with cause Fear as my other 4th level feat and boost Charisma to 18. Add in some Paladin spells and I will have a nice Gish. I might take a 2-level wizard dip for War Magic too for a few more spell slots and initiative boost. Unfortunately he will not be using a Hoopak, I really looked at it and I just don't think I can make it work.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I've only ever had players play lovable and charming Kenders. I feel sorry for anyone who's experience was different. I've had much worse experience with "lawful good" Paladins (obnoxious tyrants) and chaotic neutral rogues (robbing and stabbing other PCs "for fun").

Kender? Nah. Always a charm. YMMV, clearly.

 

[mach1.9pants]

I've only ever had players play lovable and charming Kenders. I feel sorry for anyone who's experience was different. I've had much worse experience with "lawful good" Paladins (obnoxious tyrants) and chaotic neutral rogues (robbing and stabbing other PCs "for fun").

Kender? Nah. Always a charm. YMMV, clearly.

I agree entirely, is a player problem, not a PC problem if kender are played to annoy other players.

Interestingly the Black Robes can use their Hit Dice to cause more damage with their spells, which I think it's cool

 

[Stormonu]

Yup, and any player that wants to play one is at risk of being banned too.

Have fun your way. They're welcome in my game, as long as they don't steal from the PCs (I don't let any PC do that).

As for mechanics I think they're fine. Not boxing them into being rogues is a good thing. Besides, for me, its the RP where they can shine.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Dull, lifeless design pursuing simplicity regardless of the cost to the experience.

In other words, it's a perfect fit for 5e.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I'm definitely a fan of classic kender, including the theft part. So I don't expect the new versions to reflect the type that resonates more with me (since for ages the kleptomania of the kender has been a bone of contention for many players and GMs).