Dragonlance What do you think of the Kender?


log in or register to remove this ad

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.
 



Shadowdweller00

Adventurer
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.
 
Last edited:

Faolyn

(she/her)
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.
 



James Gasik

We don't talk about Pun-Pun
Supporter
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

Adventurer
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.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top