Dragonlance (+) What Would You Want From 5e Dragonlance?

[Sithlord]

The problem is that they are written very... hypocritically. If that's the word I'm looking for.

Kender both fail to understand the concept of personal property, but also generally keep what they stole, instead of just redistributing what they take to whomever they feel needs it more. They should be known as givers, not takers, but they're not. This suggests that they do understand the concept of personal property; they just don't care.

Kender are supposedly fearless, but they lie when confronted about their stealing. The only reason for them to lie is if they fear the consequences of their actions and don't want to get in trouble.

Kender are supposedly innocent and kind, but one of their racial abilities is taunt. They can make fun of people in order to (emotionally) hurt and enrage them. In 5e terms, they'd likely have vicious mockery as a racial cantrip. This is neither innocent nor kind. And they can do this despite the fact they apparently speak too quickly to be easily understood.

For some reason, humans love kender, even though they constantly steal, touch things they shouldn't (due to their curiosity) and make fun of people just to get the riled up. And they can't, or won't, learn not to. And those races who don't love them kender considered to be in the wrong. But would you love an uncontrolled and unrepentant kleptomaniac who won't stop pushing buttons and making fun of people?

Whether or not these traits are hardwired into their fantasy DNA, it makes them, IMO, thoroughly unlikable.

They are only fun in a novel in a old sitcom way. Not at the table.

 

[Mind of tempest]

YEah, I'd be fine with adding some of the newer races like firbolg, but don't add things that explicitly didn't exist before.

firbolg could be irda descendent who decided to be similar to wood elves, through in some sasquatch and Yautja for flavour and they would fit well.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

firbolg could be irda descendent who decided to be similar to wood elves, through in some sasquatch and Yautja for flavour and they would fit well.

yeah or even just come from the fey wood where the companions met a unicorn. Lots of ways to add them in.

 

[Libertad]

Kender are like humor; super-subjective in who can enjoy the content. There are a lot of people who love kender and find their disruptive antics charming. But that humor doesn't hit a lot of people, and given the way they're written can cause a lot of trouble for adventuring groups people like them even less.

Gully dwarves and gnomes also get a lot of flack, but the way they're written isn't going to get the party run out of town as often.

 

[cbwjm]

I love kender and would definitely want them to continue to be a part of the setting. I think most of the problems people have with kender are actually with the players who use them as an excuse to cause grief for the rest of the party but then that's a thing that happens with players of thieves in general.

 

[Alzrius]

Kender both fail to understand the concept of personal property, but also generally keep what they stole, instead of just redistributing what they take to whomever they feel needs it more. They should be known as givers, not takers, but they're not. This suggests that they do understand the concept of personal property; they just don't care.

I always saw this as an issue of them having a very short attention span; they take something they think looks interesting (not realizing that doing so is theft) and then forget they even have it a few minutes later. They're like Dug, from Up:

Kender are supposedly fearless, but they lie when confronted about their stealing. The only reason for them to lie is if they fear the consequences of their actions and don't want to get in trouble.

I don't recall them lying about it when being confronted. Rather, they (truthfully) deny any malicious intent behind their actions.

Kender are supposedly innocent and kind, but one of their racial abilities is taunt. They can make fun of people in order to (emotionally) hurt and enrage them.

I always understood this as being unintentional from an in-character perspective. I mean, there are sometimes when they're deliberately trying to get someone's attention that way, but for the most part it always seemed like this was a power that the player deliberately used even though the character wasn't cognizant of it. So for a kender, it'd be something like "Hey Mister! Why is your head so big? Was it always like that? Does it cause you neck pain? Do you have to special order extra-wide collars for your shirts? Mister? Mister? Hey, listen!" Not realizing that they were driving someone up the wall with their incessant (and loud) questions about their personal defects.

 

[Steampunkette]

So... Kender, to me, always came off strongly as an ADHD Thief Stereotype. Particularly Tasselhoff Burrfoot. He'll take things and the instant they're out of sight he forgets they exist. He may pull them out at a later date and not even remember where he got them, only that he has them.

And on the one hand I can feel that in the core of my soul... and on the other hand I hate the way it makes me feel beyond words. I've "Stolen" so many pens or small fidgety toys and things I've picked up and forgotten to put back... and then had to turn around and go -back- to where I got it from to apologize for forgetting I had picked it up.

And the quips and stuff that piss people off? That, too! As a kid with ADHD I got a lot of flack and had bullies. But you better believe I got good at throwing off cutting remarks to those same insufferable jerknuggets who spent their time harassing me. It let me feel like I had some measure of control over when the violence would start, rather than getting assaulted at some random point after quietly trying to ignore their abuse.

As a kid I thought it was funny and relateable in that way. Now?

Just bad memories and the knowledge that -that- is how people saw me. And how they view other "Spaz Cases" like me.

 

[Faolyn]

I always saw this as an issue of them having a very short attention span; they take something they think looks interesting (not realizing that doing so is theft) and then forget they even have it a few minutes later. They're like Dug, from Up:

I have, like, out-the-wazoo ADHD (Inattentive subtype) which I can't treat with medication. I cannot imagine how an entire race of people with this disorder built in could have survived. They must have a very busy patron god.

I don't recall them lying about it when being confronted. Rather, they (truthfully) deny any malicious intent behind their actions.

Lying doesn't need to be malicious to be a lie.

Anyway, while I don't have any of the main Dragonlance game books, I do have the 2e Dragonlance MC Appendix. In the entry on kender, it reads: If caught red-handed with another's property, they offer an amazing range of excuses: I forgot I had it. I found it. I was afraid someone else would take it. More often than not, kender believe their excuses to be the truth.

So I amend my statement to say "they either lie about it or lie so well that they believe their lies and have lost touch with reality, and thus may qualify for an insanity plea, should they be ever brought to trial." Either way, "compulsive liar" is not a good trait, and yet the paragraph goes on to say that there are no evil kender. Of course, the MC entry says their mostly lawful(!) neutral or chaotic neutral.

Oddly, right above the aforementioned section, the entry says "Kender do not steal for the sake of profit, since they have little concept of value; they are just as happy with a chunk of purple glass as they are with a glittering diamond" while a few paragraphs earlier it also says "In fact, most kender find an enemy occupation to be a tremendous boost to the local economy, since the invaders always bring such interesting things for the kender to 'handle.'" This is what I meant by hypocrisy in their entry. They either look at an occupation as a source of things to steal or a source of wealth, or they don't think they're stealing anything and have no concept of value.

I always understood this as being unintentional from an in-character perspective. I mean, there are sometimes when they're deliberately trying to get someone's attention that way, but for the most part it always seemed like this was a power that the player deliberately used even though the character wasn't cognizant of it. So for a kender, it'd be something like "Hey Mister! Why is your head so big? Was it always like that? Does it cause you neck pain? Do you have to special order extra-wide collars for your shirts? Mister? Mister? Hey, listen!" Not realizing that they were driving someone up the wall with their incessant (and loud) questions about their personal defects.

Also from the entry: "The kender's most effective defense is their ability to enrage opponents by taunting them with verbal abuse. Any creature taunted by a kender for one full round must roll a successful saving throw vs. spell or attack wildly for 1d10 rounds at a -2 penalty to attack rolls and a +2 penalty to Armor Class." As an aside, the entry doesn't say that the creature has to understand the kender's speech. How many languages were there in that setting?

If you consider that kender have to taunt for a full round--meaning, a minute in 2e--I can't imagine that they don't know what they are doing. Maybe they really have lost all touch with reality and doesn't seem to realize that "person or creature goes berserk and tries to kill everyone" often seems to follow "verbally abuse someone for one minute." Understanding correlation and causation is not their strong suit.

Now, I'm fully aware that a lot of the problem with kender is that they're played by people who like having an excuse to mess with their fellow players. I just think that, as I have read them, they are absolutely terrible.

I think it might be possible to redeem them. Have them either not be kleptomaniacs or write that they give away everything they pick up, and sooner rather than later. Have them own up to taking the stuff. Not "I was afraid that someone would take it" but "it didn't look like you needed, so I took it to give to someone who needed it more. If you want it back, here."

 

[Micah Sweet]

I have, like, out-the-wazoo ADHD (Inattentive subtype) which I can't treat with medication. I cannot imagine how an entire race of people with this disorder built in could have survived. They must have a very busy patron god.


Lying doesn't need to be malicious to be a lie.

Anyway, while I don't have any of the main Dragonlance game books, I do have the 2e Dragonlance MC Appendix. In the entry on kender, it reads: If caught red-handed with another's property, they offer an amazing range of excuses: I forgot I had it. I found it. I was afraid someone else would take it. More often than not, kender believe their excuses to be the truth.

So I amend my statement to say "they either lie about it or lie so well that they believe their lies and have lost touch with reality, and thus may qualify for an insanity plea, should they be ever brought to trial." Either way, "compulsive liar" is not a good trait, and yet the paragraph goes on to say that there are no evil kender. Of course, the MC entry says their mostly lawful(!) neutral or chaotic neutral.

Oddly, right above the aforementioned section, the entry says "Kender do not steal for the sake of profit, since they have little concept of value; they are just as happy with a chunk of purple glass as they are with a glittering diamond" while a few paragraphs earlier it also says "In fact, most kender find an enemy occupation to be a tremendous boost to the local economy, since the invaders always bring such interesting things for the kender to 'handle.'" This is what I meant by hypocrisy in their entry. They either look at an occupation as a source of things to steal or a source of wealth, or they don't think they're stealing anything and have no concept of value.


Also from the entry: "The kender's most effective defense is their ability to enrage opponents by taunting them with verbal abuse. Any creature taunted by a kender for one full round must roll a successful saving throw vs. spell or attack wildly for 1d10 rounds at a -2 penalty to attack rolls and a +2 penalty to Armor Class." As an aside, the entry doesn't say that the creature has to understand the kender's speech. How many languages were there in that setting?

If you consider that kender have to taunt for a full round--meaning, a minute in 2e--I can't imagine that they don't know what they are doing. Maybe they really have lost all touch with reality and doesn't seem to realize that "person or creature goes berserk and tries to kill everyone" often seems to follow "verbally abuse someone for one minute." Understanding correlation and causation is not their strong suit.

Now, I'm fully aware that a lot of the problem with kender is that they're played by people who like having an excuse to mess with their fellow players. I just think that, as I have read them, they are absolutely terrible.

I think it might be possible to redeem them. Have them either not be kleptomaniacs or write that they give away everything they pick up, and sooner rather than later. Have them own up to taking the stuff. Not "I was afraid that someone would take it" but "it didn't look like you needed, so I took it to give to someone who needed it more. If you want it back, here."

I don't think we have to rewrite kender (and thus history). Just dont use them in your campaign if you dont like them. I dont see why people want to erase things they can opt out of.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

I think all the ''complicated'' ancestries of DL can easily be done in 5e with a few traits already in the game:

Dwarf (Gully)
Speed: 30
Hardy survivor: Immune to diseases.

Hard to read: You are immune to any effect that allows other creatures to sense your emotions or read your thoughts. Wisdom (Insight) checks made to ascertain your intentions or sincerity have disadvantage.

Scuttle: You c can move through and occupy a space as narrow as 1 ft wide without squeezing.

Unassuming adventurer: Proficiency with Stealth and Improvised weapons.

Critter friend: Through sounds and gestures, you can communicate simple ideas with Small or smaller beasts. You can use a bonus action on your turn to command one such friendly beast within 60 feet of you that can hear you and that isn't currently following the command of someone else. You decide now what action the beast will take and where it will move during its next turn, or you issue a general command that lasts for 1 minute, such as to guard a particular area.

Halfling (Kender)
Speed 35 ft

Nimble fingers: As a bonus action, you can make a Dexterity (Sleight of Hand) check to plant something on someone else, conceal an object on a creature, lift a purse, or take something from a pocket.

Deep pockets: You can use your action to grab an object from your borrowed items stash This object can be no larger than 1 ft on a side and weigh no more than 3 pounds, and its form must be that of a nonmagical object that you have seen worth no more than 10 gp. You can use this feature a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus until you must take a long rest.

Pack rat: You count as one size larger when determining your carrying capacity. Being encumbered never reduces your speed.

Jabbing Quip: When you take the Attack action on your turn, you can replace one attack with an attempt to deceive one humanoid you can see within 30 feet of you that can see and hear you. Make a Charisma (Deception) check contested by the target's Wisdom (Insight) check. If your check succeeds, your movement doesn't provoke opportunity attacks from the target and your attack rolls against it have advantage; both benefits last until the end of your next turn or until you use this ability on a different target. If your check fails, the target can't be deceived by you in this way for 1 hour.


Draconian
Speed: 30 ft

Glide: When you fall and aren't incapacitated, you can subtract up to 100 feet from the fall when calculating falling damage, and you can move up to 2 feet horizontally for every 1 foot you descend.

Natural Armor. When you aren't wearing armor, your AC is 13 + your Dexterity modifier. You can use your natural armor to determine your AC if the armor you wear would leave you with a lower AC. A shield's benefits apply as normal while you use your natural armor.

Hungry Jaws. Your fanged maw is a natural weapon, which you can use to make unarmed strikes. If you hit with it, you deal piercing damage equal to 1d6 + your Strength modifier, instead of the bludgeoning damage normal for an unarmed strike. As a bonus action, you can make a special attack with your bite. If the attack hits, it deals its normal damage, and you gain temporary hit points equal to your Constitution modifier (minimum of 1). You can use this feature a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus until you must take a long rest.

Draconian Origin: Choose one of the following draconian origin's feature:

Kapak's Acid Spit: As an action, you can spray acid from glands in your mouth, targeting one creature or object you can see within 30 feet of you. The target takes 3d10 acid damage unless it succeeds on a Dexterity saving throw against a DC equal to 8 + your Constitution modifier + your proficiency bonus. This damage increases by 1d10 when you reach 11th level (4d10) and 17th level (5d10). You can use this trait a number of times equal to your Constitution modifier (minimum of once), and you regain all expended uses of it when you finish a long rest.

Baaz's Stony Hide: When you take damage, you can use your reaction to roll a d12. Add your Constitution modifier to the number rolled, and reduce the damage by that total. You can use this trait a number of times equal to your Constitution modifier (minimum of once), and you regain all expended uses of it when you finish a long rest.

Bozak's Sorcery: You learn two cantrip of your choice from the sorcerer spell list. Constitution is your spellcasting ability for these spells. In addition, when you fall to 0 hp, you immediately use a cantrip against the creature that dropped you to 0 hp, if they are within range.