HP bloat was a mistake

>>85877633
OK I have officially seen too many fucking ardling threads to ignore any longer

what the fuck is an ardling

dnd.wizards.com is no help, are there rules for them anywhere?

>>85877673
tiefling but good (descendant of celestial bloodline instead of fiendish bloodline), they are effectively replacing aasimar

>>85877688
But we already had aasimar (and deva)

what the fuck is the point? why is the entire fucking board so obsessed with them?

File: furries.jpg (185 KB, 424x686)

185 KB JPG

>>85877688
Not really, they are more like furry aasimar rather than just replacements.

>>85877751
Sounds like fun in an Egyptian setting.

>>85877781
I said something along those lines to my friends when discussing this, but we both know that that isn't what Ardlings will be used for.

>>85877740
It seems that aasimar are not very popular, both on this board (you see them mentioned less frequently than tieflings or elves or even dwarves and goblins) and in WotC's market research. When something doesn't sell you either scrap it or re-desing in attempt to make it more appealing and than that's what happened.
Why /tg/ cares? Partially because /tg/ deperately latches onto any D&D news the more ridiculous the better (remember endless combat wheelchairs threads?). Partially because the way ardlings are proposed would allow to play them as monstergirls and fursonas (anywhere between 10% and 80% furry) and this place happens to be a lair of degenerates.

>>85877751
which retard put those in alphabetical order instead of L/N/C

>>85877673
A furry race which is spammed by furries here.

>>85877803
When WotC sends their developers, they're not sending their best.

>>85877751
Where is this text from. I am looking for the whole thing, in context. (And not finding it on dnd.wizards.com)

>>85877818
It's unearthed arcana for D&D 6e
https://media.dndbeyond.com/compendium-images/one-dnd/character-origins/CSWCVV0M4B6vX6E1/UA2022-CharacterOrigins.pdf

>>85877828
>https://media.dndbeyond.com/compendium-images/one-dnd/character-origins/CSWCVV0M4B6vX6E1/UA2022-CharacterOrigins.pdf

Fuck yes, finally.

Thank you.

File: d90.png (2.01 MB, 900x1475)

2.01 MB PNG

>>85877804
it has the furry potential but it's not inherently furry, you can play them as Disney characters

>>85877688
Even then, there's no restrictions on being a good tiefling or an evil aasimar. Where's the formian or slaad descendants?

>>85877828
>Determining your origin, you need:
>A race
Makes sense
>A background
Yeah
>A language
What?
Also got to love that common sign language is a standard language. In a pseudo-medieval world where restoration spells exists, there are more deaf people than people who speak the language of their gods, apparently.

>>85877837
Oh this is garbage, i hate this shit. Fly as a bonus action but only X times pr. long rest? Commit to your design you faggots.

>Angels should fly but giving it to player characters is OP so we'll put an artificial limit on it that makes no sense in character

please kill yourself, this kind of garbage design is far worse than any amount of monstergirl furfaggotry.

>>85877845
>Disney characters
Those are furry

File: crit_success.jpg (53 KB, 403x217)

53 KB JPG

Got to love how much arguing this is going to cause.

>>85877847
yeah, alignment inclinations don't really apply to PCs anyway, so on practical terms tieflings end up (Chaotic) Neutral more often than any sort of Evil

>>85877751
>Exalted
I hope WotC gets sued.

File: St Francis of Assisi.jpg (856 KB, 960x540)

856 KB JPG

>>85877882
Sometimes you just need to try no matter the odds.

>>85877882
Is there a limitation for most nearly-impossible tasks other than an insane DC, I wonder. Can I jump to the moon with this? I mean there shouldn't be a hard cap on such a task, just that the range of the jump would make the DC impossibly high to clear. It should just be an acrobatics roll or something, right?

>>85877797
Ok furry.

>>85877920
>Can I jump to the moon with this?
I'm pretty sure you can't have line of sight to the moon (by 5e RAW).

>>85877949
Did they implement a max range to "anything you can see"? For what purpose?

File: 750.jpg (80 KB, 750x920)

80 KB JPG

>>85877968

>>85877688
>they are effectively replacing aasimar
Where are people getting this from

>>85877910
>'ight, which one you started this camp fire in the hotel lobby?
>You think it's easy to get burn marks off the tiles?
>C'mon, fess up! I think I wouldn't notice that big bag of marshmallows you brought in?

>>85877996
Aasimar are not listed among the core races, but the Ardlings are.

>>85878000
that's not quite what's going on in that picture, but close enough

>>85877851
>In a pseudo-medieval world where restoration spells exists
DnD settings almost universally ignore the effect of magic on the society. Mostly because if you go that route you won't be having a pseudo-medieval world for long. If you have enough magic-users around to heal every crippled, blind, and deaf person, you should also have enough magic users to go full Tippyverse and create a magitech-based society.
The general assumption why this isn't the case is that magic is rare enough that the average person has no access to it (a lord or king would be able to get a healer to restore a broken leg, but a random peasant will just have to live with it), but that's also inconsistent with how many PCs and NPCs are spellcasters.

>>85877851
>Also got to love that common sign language is a standard language. In a pseudo-medieval world where restoration spells exists, there are more deaf people than people who speak the language of their gods, apparently.

Therr's other uses for sign language besides just deaf people. Also regenerate is a 7th level spell, common folk wouldn't have access to it.

>>85877633
I've lost count how many new, trendy races have been added and then forgotten in past 20 years, while tieflings still reign supreme.

>>85878003
Aasimar were never core in the first place

>>85877920
The distance you can jump should still be limited by your movement rate (otherwise you could just bypass your normal movement rate by jumping everywhere), which would obviously place the moon way out of your jump distance.
Also, since the text states you only bypass penalties to the roll, it should be something that could be done, even if the odds are very low (and thus have a large negative modifier). If your GM says "sure, you can roll to jump to the moon but there's a huge penalty to the roll" instead of "no, you can't roll to jump to the moon because it's impossible" he's an idiot, because the former implies that he thinks there is a possibility it could be done.

>>85878033
Weren't they core in 4th? (but called Deva)

>>85878091
No, they were not in the first PHB

>>85877633
Mmmmm, makes me hope we get random appearance tables back for Tieflings. More than a few fiends based on the sin of gluttony or other debaucheries or grotesqueries so a tiefling like this may be a canon possibility.

>>85878132
>not in the first PHB
mea culpa, it has been a while

>>85877920
You are not supposed to ask for checks that are impossible, they want rolls to be called only for tasks for which the outcome is uncertain. Going to be fun to adjudicate when you let one player roll for a skill and not another like a dm fiat trained only.

>>85877688
They are furry pleasers because at least one designer is into it. Aasimar and devas aren't in 6.0 and and if Aardlings become core then they will likely not be added to the third or fourth set of player options.

File: ThisWillMakeSJWsSeethe.jpg (311 KB, 1920x1080)

311 KB JPG

>>85877740
>It seems that aasimar are not very popular,
>When something doesn't sell you either scrap it or re-desing in attempt to make it more appealing and than that's what happened.
According to your claim they should have different priorities as to what to remove then.

>>85877633
You've posted this thread before, the last thread had more fat tiefling art though

File: Ardlings.jpg (98 KB, 666x500)

98 KB JPG

>>85877633
>>85877751

>>85878016
I'd imagine the vast majority of spellcasters in society are only 4th - 6th level spellcasters and NPCs of note, by virtue skew more towards extraordinary powerful spellcasters.

>>85877794
>but we both know that that isn't what Ardlings will be used for
Gee, kind of like how Pathfinder Kistune are supposed to be anthropomorphic foxes who can change into humans (and a feral fox sometimes) but most of the weebs on /tg/ think that means “Oh, like the fox-eared humans in my favorite FotM anime trash?”

This will be hilarious. I’m excited to see d20 weebs are going to be losing their minds because of tHoSe EvIl FuRrIeS from now on.

File: devil1.jpg (90 KB, 1115x717)

90 KB JPG

>>85878132
>Mmmmm, makes me hope we get random appearance tables back for Tieflings. More than a few fiends based on the sin of gluttony or other debaucheries or grotesqueries so a tiefling like this may be a canon possibility.

Well I doubt we will, but it's an interesting idea.

>>85877804
>furry race spammed by furries.
This is incorrect. These threads are spammed by one especially autistic anon, trying to validate his rage against DND6e by spammings the parts of it he doesnt like in true 4chan-fashion.
Proof? If it was a furry, they would be bumping the OP posts with questionable furry images. But now the autist has read this post and will update his posting modus operandi.
>Disclaimer: dnd6e looks like shit, and I will avoid it as I did 4e

>>85878865
This is what always gets me about this dumb shit. Why do spergs pretend they’re not coomers just to get mad at other coomers?

>>85878658
what does Variant human mean?

>>85879043
It means a human who gets a +1 to two attributes, a free skill proficiency, and a free feat.

As opposed to 'normal' human, which just gets +1 to all six attributes.

>>85878583
>You are not supposed to ask for checks that are impossible

That just makes the rule redundant faffing about though - if you're only calling for checks that can succeed, they already succeed on a 20, so why have a rule that 20 always succeeds?

The only purpose of such a rule is to give impossible checks a chance to succeed.

>>85878968
>This is what always gets me about this dumb shit. Why do spergs pretend they’re not coomers just to get mad at other coomers?

And here we have a beautiful example of confession through projection.

>>85879233
That wasn’t aimed at the anon being replied to but instead what was being described in the post.

>>85878583
First half is redundant if you don't ask to roll on impossible checks then. The wording implies that you are able to roll on things that you couldn't succeed on.

File: 1658178098466755.jpg (107 KB, 588x800)

107 KB JPG

>>85877633
>tieflings still big with players
they've never actually been "big" people here just get upset when they see one they imagine them being overdone. Seriously you still get more humans and elfs and dwarves than anything else, but one tiefling every other game is "big" apparently.

>>85879384
>Elves and dwarves
Think again >>85878658
Half-elves are arguable, but you don't really see them played near to elves, they are just humans with a different stat-block in my experience

>>85879410
It lists elven and dwarven subraces separately, though. Altogether, dwarves constitute 6.6% of D&D Beyond characters, and elves constitute 13.7%.

>>85879429
Ok, that's just me being blind. Still, 7.5% is quite a large part of players, considering that the largest groups are 22.8% and 13.7%.

File: diswink.webm (2.64 MB, 1000x990)

2.64 MB WEBM

>>85878932

>>85879410
Why would it break them into subclasses? Add them up and look again.

Also you need to put elves and half elves in the same box because depending on edition they can be different or one might not even exist. But to the players it's still the "point eared elf race" no matter what the game thinks the lore should be.

The argument is that they're hardly "big" and that most people on this board who complain about them act like they're filling up every party.

But according to that list when you combine all the variants together then it's over 50% human, elf, or human/elf hybrids. And after that nearly every other race ranges from 6-7% on average, with enough room for error and bias in this source that you can consider them all just as popular.

That's not big, that's just one of a number of options that isn't super rare. You're just as likely to get a gnome or a halfling.

>>85879151
There's a difference between something that's theoretically possible but extremely unlikely (i.e. has a large negative modifier to the roll), and something impossible (no roll can be made). For example it's possible but very difficult to hit a moving target near the maximum range of your bow in bad weather, but it's not possible to hit the moon. Natural 20 represents the "one in a million" chance of succeeding in a task that's theoretically possible but so difficult that the modifier would otherwise make it impossible in a d20-based system. The issue with a d20-based system as opposed to a percentile-based one is that the range of possible dice rolls isn't good for representing theoretically possible but very unlikely results. In a percentile system you can give a roll as low as 1 % chance of success, but when rolling a d20 your options are the roll never being able to succeed even if the outcome should be possible or it succeeding 1/20th of a time.

>>85879549
Nat 20 doesn't naturally represent "any theoretriclaly possible result", it's literally just DM flavor if it means anything more than general success or a little bonus damage. So yeah one in a million, if it seems thematically appropriate, a DM might consider that. Or he might just consider a result that is as likely as 1 in 20 because that's literally what it is.

>>85879581
>Nat 20 doesn't naturally represent "any theoretriclaly possible result",
it literally does under >>85877882
though not in "vanilla" 5e (or earlier editions)

>>85877633
Honestly, Tieflings have become such a huge part of the game's outward look (even if it's mostly negative) I'm pretty damn sure they'll still be around. Just remember that at the end of the day, the community is in control, not Wotc.

>>85879601
it literally doesn't because people don't go "I'm going to catch a bullet in my teeth" and then roll hoping for a nat 20. They rolls to do something plausible, and if the DM thinks they're being unrealistic he can just say they fail without telling them to roll.

You're reading between the lines to come up with the most extreme scenario in order to say the whole thing is flawed. Which is kinda dumb.

>>85879633
>Just remember that at the end of the day, the community is in control, not Wotc.
The shitposters who get triggered by tieflings don't think like that. They act like Wotc are video game devs and any changes will immediately affect every game and not that DMs will take new things under advisement but still continue to run their own games how they want.

Anonymous ## Mod
09/02/22(Fri)11:46:48 No.85879800

Anonymous ## Mod 09/02/22(Fri)11:46:48 No.85879800

This thread was moved to >>>/trash/50626423