Kobold as a playable race in 5e. Which stats?

[The Shadowdove]

I don't know if this has been done yet,

but I'd like to know what the racial stats of a kobold might be in 5e.

One of my players has decided to become the dragonborn paladin's servant when he joins the table.

His plan is to be a bard who sings about his master's heroic deeds.

If you could enlighten me with your d&d smarts, I'd be much appreciated!

-Dove

[Myzz]

from monster manual:

STR (7), DEX (15), CON (9), INT (8), WIS (7), CHA (8)

60ft darkvision
Languages: Common, Draconic
speed = 30ft
sunlight sensitivity = disadvantage on attack rolls as well as perception checks that rely on sight while in the sunlight.
Pact tactics = advantage on attacks as long as ally is w/n 5ft of same target.

weapons = dagger and sling...

give him those stats, no bonuses... AND yes I realise he has lots of negatives... but he is a Kobold...

Give him Outlander background or Urchin

For a bit better version... Go Winged Kobold (DEX 16) with 30ft fly speed
and/or give him Naturally Stealthy from the Lightfoot Halfling
and/or Draconic Resistance (pick an ancestry but no breath weapon)

This is all assuming your other PC's are regular non evil guys out to get the bad guys... if their evil I would open the background list to whatever except maybe noble. (most normals wouldnt let him into any of the other backgrounds, or allow him to utilize them such as entertainer or guild artisan or acolyte. But those all work if your discussing within evil societies where being a kobold isnt such a hinderance).

[Gwendol]

There is a list of monsters statted out as PC races in the DMG. I'm AFB, so can't tell if the kobold is in it but I'll check.

[Hyena]

Take halfling stats, replace "halfling" with kobold everywhere. Here's his kobold.

[Callin]

No PC Race should ever have a minus to a stat in 5th. Dont use the NPC stats as anything other than a guide. So +2 dex and either +1 con or cha. To show them being good sorcerors or rogues. Keep the other things (personslly I would ditch sunlight sensitivity and pack tactics and give him either a bonus to stealth or free prof in stealth)

Edit- the above comment is also very viable.

[MrSinister]

Take halfling stats, replace "halfling" with kobold everywhere. Here's his kobold.

there you go... just add the Outlander or Hermit background for flavor and be done with it. For all it's faults, 4e taught me that reskinning available stuff is usually the best way to go.

[Feldarove]

Also AFB, but the kobold is like -4 str, -2 int I think.

I would agree that just go with something similar to halfling if you want to play a race that doesn't absolutely suck.

I don't understand why they make Kobolds totally suck in this edition. Everyone knows Meepo was darn near a demi-god.

[OldTrees1]

+2 Dex, +1 Int or Cha
Add kobold racial traits to taste

alternatively
+2 Dex, +1 Int, +1 Cha
Add fewer kobold racial traits to taste

[The Shadowdove]

Rock on, lots of advice!

Thanks a dozen peeps.

I'll keep checking in to see what else pops up.

[Myzz]

+1 Int or Cha? really?

not charisma since the stat expresses the ability to interact with "people" in the world. No kobold would have a bonus to that, unless you were playing in a world where they are common and were having those interactions on a frequent basis.

CON is the second highest stat on a normal Kobold, so if you want to let a Kobold play as an equal to all other player races, then by all means just add +2 Dex, and +1 Int. I do not think that gives the character the feel of a Kobold however, and with ASI's he only going to get better anyways. If you dont want a PC to have negatives bring up all kobold neg stats to 10. perhaps con to 12...

and I included pact tactics only to show a complete listing of what a Kobold has in MM

[Inevitability]

Take halfling stats, replace "halfling" with kobold everywhere. Here's his kobold.

I did this. It worked out pretty well.

[cobaltstarfire]

+1 Int or Cha? really?

not charisma since the stat expresses the ability to interact with "people" in the world. No kobold would have a bonus to that, unless you were playing in a world where they are common and were having those interactions on a frequent basis.



Kobolds have been established for several editions to have sorcerer as a favored class, and charisma is just force of personality/likeability. Given how devoted Kobolds can be to those who are close to them, they sound pretty charismatic to me.

[Sindeloke]

+1 Int or Cha? really?

not charisma since the stat expresses the ability to interact with "people" in the world. No kobold would have a bonus to that, unless you were playing in a world where they are common and were having those interactions on a frequent basis.

Charisma has nothing to do with your social skill. The ability to interact with people is a mere side-effect of Charisma. Charisma is force of personality. If you have high Charisma, you're confident, forceful and memorable. People love or fear you and want you to like them. Paladins don't tell demons to shut up and sit down because they have people skills. They do it by sheer overwhelming holy power fueled by their incredible conviction and strength of character.

I mean. Kobolds don't necessarily have that either. But that's because they're timid little weasel-lizards who would rather follow than lead. What community they live in has nothing to do with that.

[Person_Man]

I hate ability score modifiers. People should play whatever race that best fits their character, and/or choose the race with the most useful racial abilities for their build. The ability score bonuses make many otherwise viable race/class combinations a very suboptimal choice.

[Joe the Rat]

+2 Dex, +1 Cha for stat mod. Fits the fluff, and works decently for a Bard.
Darkvision, Sunlight Sensitivity. Don't shy away from this. Drow get it too.
Move 30'. This is part of what Sunlight sensitivity is paying for.
Pack tactics... consider that effectively would allow a kobold rogue to get sneak attack damage when his "flanking" buddy is right beside him. This one's a little iffy, but if it's just for the bard character...
Languages: Draconic, Common.
Proficiencies: Mining tools. Stealth is not unreasonable as an add-on.

Hmm... what else can we add? (pick and choose to round out your abilities)
Trap Sense. Double Proficiency on all trap related rolls, even if you aren't normally proficient. Modeled on Stone Cunning. This is probably more useful than Stone Cunning, but you are eating that sunlight sensitivity thing.
Nimble move - a la Halflings (move through any M+ sized creatures space). If you take this, definitely drop pack tactics.
Poison resistance - reasonably thematic, another Halfling trait.
"He's just a kobold" - enemies see you as a lesser threat. Not sure how to crunch that.
"Run Away!" Disengage as Bonus Action?

Also,if Sunlight Sensitivity becomes too much of an issue, Sunglasses are a possibility. Bonus points for going all Velma with them.

[Myzz]

If you have high Charisma, you're confident, forceful and memorable. People love or fear you and want you to like them.

I mean. Kobolds don't necessarily have that either. But that's because they're timid little weasel-lizards who would rather follow than lead.

Exactly a very good reason not to give a Kobold a +1 Cha.

Sorcerer-like abilities does not equate a good charisma, which is probably why they were not very good at it.

Being a devoted and obsessive over somoene else does not mean you have good charisma, in fact it means those you fawn over have significantly better than you. And implies you lack the confident, forceful and memorable character/personality...


To OP, glad you found something that works.

[YossarianLives]

Also AFB, but the kobold is like -4 str, -2 int I think.

I would agree that just go with something similar to halfling if you want to play a race that doesn't absolutely suck.

I don't understand why they make Kobolds totally suck in this edition. Everyone knows Meepo was darn near a demi-god.
To be fair kobolds have been terrible in every other edition of D&D, except for 4th.

[Once a Fool]

Whence comes the obsession with turning kobolds into sorcerers?

Most kobolds encountered are going to be sneaks who stab and shoot things and set traps. Just because their spellcasters might tend toward sorcery doesn't mean that's the class they are best suited for.

[OldTrees1]

Whence comes the obsession with turning kobolds into sorcerers?

Most kobolds encountered are going to be sneaks who stab and shoot things and set traps. Just because their spellcasters might tend toward sorcery doesn't mean that's the class they are best suited for.

I believe the obsession with their spellcasters being sorcerers comes from their racial draconic similarities. Also at +2 Dex, their primary class is getting a better showing than their sorcerous secondary class.

[Joe the Rat]

It's the whole "related to dragons" thing.

But keep in mind Charisma doesn't necessarily mean charming and likeable. You may just be generally adept at negotiation and manipulation, and have a solid (or possibly over-important) sense of self.

[Envyus]

To be fair kobolds have been terrible in every other edition of D&D, except for 4th.

Well 3.5 gave them a lot of buffs later on that made they pretty much the best.


Anyway here is what a Kobold gets as an NPC made from scratch


-4 Str, +2 Dex Pack Tactics, Sunlight Sensitivity; Small size; darkvision 60ft.; speaks Common and Draconic Adjusting them as a PC Race I would give them +1 Cha -2 Str instead of -4 and the feat Trap sense.

[cobaltstarfire]

It's the whole "related to dragons" thing.

But keep in mind Charisma doesn't necessarily mean charming and likeable. You may just be generally adept at negotiation and manipulation, and have a solid (or possibly over-important) sense of self.

Yeah 3.5 kobolds at least have that really strong sense of self.

I also don't think being cowardly or brave really has anything to do with charisma. I think it's fair to give Kobolds +2 dex +1 any stat depending on the kobold...even Str. Adventurers are supposed to be special after all.

That might be a fun character to make, a kobold with some weird genetic defect that has made him(relatively) huge...and as ripped as the ones in the 5e monster manual.

[jkat718]

I also don't think being cowardly or brave really has anything to do with charisma.

Because Morale is a WIS save, it looks like a penalty to Wisdom would equate to being cowardly.

[Once a Fool]

I believe the obsession with their spellcasters being sorcerers comes from their racial draconic similarities.


It's the whole "related to dragons" thing.


So, for merely a third of their existence. Prior to 3e, they had no connection to dragons; they weren't even reptiles.

But then, "sorcerer" was just another way of saying "magic-user."

[Gwendol]

According to the DMG p 282 kobolds should start with -4 STR, +2 DEX, pack tactics, sunlight sensitivity, small size, and speak common and draconic.

[Blacky the Blackball]

Take halfling stats, replace "halfling" with kobold everywhere. Here's his kobold.

Or, if you prefer your kobolds to be underground dwelling trapsmiths rather than sneaks, replace "rock gnome" with "kobold" instead.

[Joe the Rat]

So, for merely a third of their existence. Prior to 3e, they had no connection to dragons; they weren't even reptiles.

But then, "sorcerer" was just another way of saying "magic-user."
They've been scaly and egg-laying since AD&D1. Now I'm all about scaly =/= reptile, but this seems to be a recurring theme.

I'd make them monotremes.

[DireSickFish]

Stats+2Dex +1 Cha
30ft base move speed
Naturally armored Kobolds scaly armor gives them a natural AC when not wearing armor give them 13 + Dex armor when wearing no armor.(flavorful but not very strong)
Dragon Blooded Dragon blood runs through every kobolds veins and gives them access to sorcerer power. They get a lvl1 sorcerer spell 1/long rest.(potentially strong and very flavorful)
Miner Proficiency in mining tools, kobolds are known to make dragons lairs and mine for there dragon masters treasure.(Flavorful)


I honestly feel like that isn't enough the way PC races are working in 5th ed. Maybe pull a mountain dwarf and give +2dex +2cha instead of having to think of more unique abilities. I think sunlight sensitivity is very harsh, and that pac tactics is way to strong an ability to give a PC from race. Kobolds are traditionally sorcerers and rogues, so much like the half orc I adopted a dragon sorcerer ability into the base class. Problem is that unlike the half orc ability this does not stack in any way with the Sorcerer class hmm.

I do like the prospect of giving them one first level spell a short rest, not to powerful plenty of choice. I could see also giving them Acrobatics proficiency due to there small size and ability to get though obstacles.

That or just use hafling like everyone else is saying.

[Myzz]

Just to be clear the character concept is:

playable Kobold Minion of PC Dragonborn Pally...

I have no issue with doing that, but keep in mind that isnt a Player Character, thats a character being played by a player... specifically a minion of one of the lowest races...

To make said minion into a race equivalent of an actual PC (please note the capitalization), is preposterous.

Definately talk to the player before implementing any of the above options to get the feel of what he wants for the character. If he wants to be on par with all other races and your good with it, then by all means use any of the fine above examples. If he wants it to be more like an actual Kobold minion, then do NOT use any of those race equalizing options.

Kobold played by a character should have at most
STR (10) Dex (16) Con (12) Wis (11) Int (11) Cha (11)

give feats/skills/abilities if you feel a need to compensate for these low numbers. But the strongest, most wise and intelligent, charismatic Kobold should not be on par with the superior races PC equivalents. Because the strongest, most clever, and healthy Kobolds are the ones the PC's encounter in the MM... the ones that dont meet those standards are dead...

Upping the stats to non-Negative puts that Kobold WAAAAY above the best kobold you will ever see. AND your going to give him ASI's anyways!

[Myzz]

Maybe create a new Feat/Race feature


Non-Threat:
If a hostile creature makes an attack against you when a different creature within range or 10 ft from you is hostile to the attacker, it will voluntarily move to attack that target instead of you even if doing so would provoke an attack of opportunity.

the within range or 10ft is to have anyone attacking the kobold at range choose a different target that is within range and the 10ft is if the attacker is within melee range it will move to attack a new target but isnt going to go that far.

[Hyena]

Myzz, you seem to have a real grudge against kobolds.

[DireSickFish]

Just to be clear the character concept is:

playable Kobold Minion of PC Dragonborn Pally...

I have no issue with doing that, but keep in mind that isnt a Player Character, thats a character being played by a player... specifically a minion of one of the lowest races...

To make said minion into a race equivalent of an actual PC (please note the capitalization), is preposterous.

Definately talk to the player before implementing any of the above options to get the feel of what he wants for the character. If he wants to be on par with all other races and your good with it, then by all means use any of the fine above examples. If he wants it to be more like an actual Kobold minion, then do NOT use any of those race equalizing options.

Kobold played by a character should have at most
STR (10) Dex (16) Con (12) Wis (11) Int (11) Cha (11)

give feats/skills/abilities if you feel a need to compensate for these low numbers. But the strongest, most wise and intelligent, charismatic Kobold should not be on par with the superior races PC equivalents. Because the strongest, most clever, and healthy Kobolds are the ones the PC's encounter in the MM... the ones that dont meet those standards are dead...

Upping the stats to non-Negative puts that Kobold WAAAAY above the best kobold you will ever see. AND your going to give him ASI's anyways!

The concept of one PC being bossed around or a servant to another does not make them lower or less powerful. The noble with a bodyguard is a fine example of one PC taking orders from another and neither of them being less powerful mechanically. Following another's lead or doing "demeaning" tasks does not make you weaker than other PC by any stretch of the imagination.

And the monster kobolds you see in the MM are the rank and file, the mooks. PC's are far and above the average. Deekin Scalesinger was a powerful hero, but he always looked up to the protagonist. He underestimated his own power but was actually very strong and charismatic.

5e also has put focus on making sure that races a PC takes are balanced againt each other, give flavorful mechanical benefits, and explicitly (in the DMG) do not have to follow what is presented in the MM.

[Rogue Shadows]

I'm going to go against the grain here and say that you should use the stats straight out of the DMG:

Ability Score Adjustments: -4 Strength, +2 Dexterity
Size: Small
Speed: Base walking speed 30 ft.
Darkvision 60 ft.
Sunlight Sensitivity: You have disadvantage on attack rolls and o Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight when you, the target of your attack, or whatever you are trying to perceive is in direct sunlight.
Pack Tactics: The kobold has advantage on an attack roll against a creature if at least one of the kobold’s allies is within 5 feet of the creature and the ally isn’t incapacitated.
Languages: Common and Draconic

Yes, the character will be notably weaker than his fellow party members. It's a kobold, isn't that the point?

[Myzz]

I'm going to go against the grain here and say that you should use the stats straight out of the DMG:

Ability Score Adjustments: -4 Strength, +2 Dexterity
Size: Small
Speed: Base walking speed 30 ft.
Darkvision 60 ft.
Sunlight Sensitivity: You have disadvantage on attack rolls and o Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight when you, the target of your attack, or whatever you are trying to perceive is in direct sunlight.
Pack Tactics: +1 to attack bonus
Languages: Common and Draconic

Yes, the character will be notably weaker than his fellow party members. It's a kobold, isn't that the point?

100%

Note the numbers I gave are inline with this via pointbuy (27)

[Myzz]

Myzz, you seem to have a real grudge against kobolds.

not really... but if you give PC a lesser race as a character it should remain a lesser race...

and Kobolds are lesser races...

If I wanted to play a Beetle Bard that used his wings to strum a tune, would you give me the same stats as every other PC? I sure hope not.

realizing that 10 is average for humans... a Kobold (or any lesser race), that significantly exceeds those is unheard of.

Just because your example extremely rare kobold was charismatic does not mean he had above a 12 charisma, thats godly by kobold standards. A PC Kobold would be above and beyond Kobold standards, not above and beyond human standards...

and as i noted the numbers I gave are consistant with the DMG and point buy at 27... realistically it should be fewer points, maybe 23...

[cobaltstarfire]

Just because your example extremely rare kobold was charismatic does not mean he had above a 12 charisma, thats godly by kobold standards. A PC Kobold would be above and beyond Kobold standards, not above and beyond human standards...



I'm pretty sure Deekins Charisma was more than 12, particularly if you instruct him to work on being a bard rather than a rogue, no idea on Meepo since I never played the module he's in. Where are you getting that it's "godly" for a Kobold to have a decent or even high charisma from anyway, sounds like just arbitrary presupposition on your part.

[Rogue Shadows]

I'm pretty sure Deekins Charisma was more than 12, particularly if you instruct him to work on being a bard rather than a rogue, no idea on Meepo since I never played the module he's in. Where are you getting that it's "godly" for a Kobold to have a decent or even high charisma from anyway, sounds like just arbitrary presupposition on your part.

Damnit, I don't have NWN installed on my computer at the moment so I can't check...but you're right, Deekin's charisma was more than 12, and actually I think it was something like 16 or 17 or so. It was good by anyone's standards.

Meepo shows up in the 3.5 adventure Fantastic Locations: Dragondown Grotto (I know that's not his first appearance, but it's the only one for which I have stats for him) His stats there are Str 14, Dex 14, Con 12, Int 10, Wis 8, Cha 13; without racial modifiers he'd have Str 18, Dex 12, Con 14, and the same mental stat scores. Given that he's a single-classed 8th level Fighter who should be using Charisma as his dump stat, I'd say that Meepo showcases that it's not terribly uncommon for kobolds to have a decent Charisma, by human standards.

Edit: On a lark I checked the stats for a basic kobold in Baldur's Gate; it's straight 9s all the way down. But then I checked the basic hobgoblin and found that they, too, have straight 9s all the way down. So that's not helpful.

Also, I can't speak as to 1st and 2nd Edition, but from 3rd Edition on kobolds should not have a penalty to their Charisma (and they didn't in 3rd), due to how strongly associated with the Sorcerer class they are.

[The Shadowdove]

I love how much discussion came out of this topic so far.

I decided to go with :

+2 dex
+1 cha, as suggested. It just makes sense to me.
Light sensitivity
30 movement speed
Pact tactics(from monster manual)
Nimble movement (like halfling due to size)


Considering a -2 or -4 strength

Also considering an ability that allows disengage as a bonus option.



Let me know what you think!!


-Dove

[DireSickFish]

I love how much discussion came out of this topic so far.

I decided to go with :

+2 dex
+1 cha, as suggested. It just makes sense to me.
Light sensitivity
30 movement speed
Pact tactics(from monster manual)
Nimble movement (like halfling due to size)


Considering a -2 or -4 strength

Also considering an ability that allows disengage as a bonus option.



Let me know what you think!!


-Dove

I wouldn't go with a negative to a stat as odds are if they want it to be a dump stat it will be an 8 anyway, and if they need it for something having a max of only 15 is already a hindrance.

Pact tactics is a very strong ability but should be balanced out a bit by light sensitivity. Racial abilities also tend to be stronger int his edition than I like to think. Seems workable.

[Myzz]

I love how much discussion came out of this topic so far.

I decided to go with :

+2 dex
+1 cha, as suggested. It just makes sense to me.
Light sensitivity
30 movement speed
Pact tactics(from monster manual)
Nimble movement (like halfling due to size)


Considering a -2 or -4 strength

Also considering an ability that allows disengage as a bonus option.



Let me know what you think!!


-Dove

glad that you found what your looking for and hope yall have fun

[Callin]

No negative Str and dont do the Disengage Bonus Action. Thats the Goblins Shtick.

[Envyus]

I'm going to go against the grain here and say that you should use the stats straight out of the DMG:

Ability Score Adjustments: -4 Strength, +2 Dexterity
Size: Small
Speed: Base walking speed 30 ft.
Darkvision 60 ft.
Sunlight Sensitivity: You have disadvantage on attack rolls and o Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight when you, the target of your attack, or whatever you are trying to perceive is in direct sunlight.
Pack Tactics: +1 to attack bonus
Languages: Common and Draconic

Yes, the character will be notably weaker than his fellow party members. It's a kobold, isn't that the point?

Pack Tactics does not give +1 to attack. That is just what effects it has when you are determining the CR of a monster

This is what Pack Tactics does


Pack Tactics. The kobold has advantage on an attack roll against a creature if at least one of the kobold’s allies is within 5 feet of the creature and the ally isn’t incapacitated.

[The Shadowdove]

Still feels like its missing 1 thing.

The halfling, for example, gets :

+2 dex
Lucky
Nimbleness
a stat bonus from its choice of subtype
And a different ability from its subtype

The second subtype ability seems to be what it's lacking maybe?

Should I just do the stealth one that halfling has.. Makes sense.

I think this is also why I'd considered a disengage as bonus action kind of ability.


I just want something that's balanced.

[DireSickFish]

Wouldn't do disengage as a bonus action as that is the Goblins shtick. You could do this as the "magic" kobold and give them a cantrip from the sorcerer school, or a first lvl spell 1/day. Proficiency on athletics would be a solid addition. Kobolds can be stealthy but I don't think giving them the hafling ability makes sense. Giving them a resistance based on color is an option and has president with the dragonborn. I don't think they need more as pack tactics can be very strong (if you expand it to friendly allies and not just kobolds, not sure which way you are going with that).

If you want multiple variants or subclasses of kobold you could do.

Dragonblood Kobold
+1 Cha
Gain one 1st levle sorcerer spell once per long rest.

Trap-smith Kobold
+1Con
Damage Resistance: Poison

Oh make sure you include darkvision 60ft as they have sunlight sensitivity! Don't want them blind in all environments.

[Rogue Shadows]

Pack Tactics does not give +1 to attack. That is just what effects it has when you are determining the CR of a monster

This is what Pack Tactics does

Ah, whoops. I shall edit that in. I like pack tactics. Access to that alone would be worth taking the kobold race, regardless of the Strength penalty, which means nothing when everyone has Better Weapon Finesse by default.

[Gnomes2169]

I'm going to go against the grain here and say that you should use the stats straight out of the DMG:

Ability Score Adjustments: -4 Strength, +2 Dexterity
Size: Small
Speed: Base walking speed 30 ft.
Darkvision 60 ft.
Sunlight Sensitivity: You have disadvantage on attack rolls and o Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight when you, the target of your attack, or whatever you are trying to perceive is in direct sunlight.
Pack Tactics: +1 to attack bonus
Languages: Common and Draconic

Yes, the character will be notably weaker than his fellow party members. It's a kobold, isn't that the point?


100%

Note the numbers I gave are inline with this via pointbuy (27)

So just for the record, you both support half elves being forced to have their +1's in dex and int, mountain dwarves get a +2 to wis, multiple races not getting various flavor abilities (high elves don't get cantrips, wood elves don't get their hide in the forest thing, hill dwarves don't have medium armor prof, mountain dwarves don't have +1 hp/ level, gnomes get none of their nice things, half orcs don't get their crit thing, halflings are apparently only lucky, nimble and brave, but don't have the option to be resilient to poison, etc, etc, etc)... Oh, and humans apparently don't exist. At all.

As stated before, the races listed in the DMG are not meant to be for PC's. They are only there to give flavor to the NPC humanoids in the back of the Monster Manual, and are as such either stronger or weaker than actual meant-for-PC-races in the player handbook. So I will strongly advise that you ignore the "chart o' mook flavoring" in the back of the DMG when designing races and instead focus on what makes the kobold a Kobold. This does include adding a few features to make it not-suck. :smalltongue:



My suggestion is this:

Kobold
-Attributes: +2 dex, +1 int or cha (brainybolds and cutebolds for the win! :smalltongue:)
-Size: Small
-Move speed: 25' overland
-Sight: Darkvision 60'
-Meek and unimposing: You have advantage on deception checks made to convince a creature that you are not a threat. Additionally, you have disadvantage on all intimidation checks.
-Scavenger: You have advantage on investigation and perception checks made to locate hidden objects and secret doors. Additionally, you can find secret doors and tunnels with your passive perception or passive investigation (assuming they meet or exceed the DC to do so).
-Sunlight sensitivity: You have disadvantage on attack rolls and o Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight when you, the target of your attack, or whatever you are trying to perceive is in direct sunlight.
-Pack tactics: You have advantage on attack rolls made against creatures adjacent to an ally.
-languages: Common, Draconic

This gives the resident cutebold (note to self, need to stop using that like it's a real word...) kobold the normal koboldy things, while still keeping the cowardly, defenseless scavenger theme so associated with kobolds strong. It's probably what I would use if a player asked to be a kobold. (One already asked to be a yuan-ti pureblood, which I modded and gave to him, so I'm pretty easy going as far as monster-race PC's go. Take that as you wish.)

Edit: fixed Darkvision. I don't know where 120' came from.

[Rogue Shadows]

So just for the record, you both support half elves being forced to have their +1's in dex and int, mountain dwarves get a +2 to wis, multiple races not getting various flavor abilities (high elves don't get cantrips, wood elves don't get their hide in the forest thing, hill dwarves don't have medium armor prof, mountain dwarves don't have +1 hp/ level, gnomes get none of their nice things, half orcs don't get their crit thing, halflings are apparently only lucky, nimble and brave, but don't have the option to be resilient to poison, etc, etc, etc)... Oh, and humans apparently don't exist. At all.

What? No. When did I imply any of this? I'm only talking about the kobold and the racial traits I'd hand to a player who wanted to build one (or a player who wanted one as an NPC sidekick, as the case may be). Did I miss something in this thread? I mostly came in blind, only really reading the OP and then just skimming the rest.

I just think that if you're gonna play a kobold then you should play a kobold. Part of being a kobold means that you're frailer and weaker in comparison to the common races. Much as how if you're a drow, then you're gonna have to deal with sunlight sensitivity.

-4 Strength doesn't even mean much in the edition because everyone has Better Weapon Finesse automatically, and if the kobold absolutely must be Kobold the Barbarian, well, that's what the gauntlets of ogre power and belt of giant strength is for.

-2 Constitution translates out to a mere 1 less hit point per level then someone else in the same class with the same Constitution score, -20 overall. Whoop-de-doo.

[Gnomes2169]

What? No. When did I imply any of this? I'm only talking about the kobold and the racial traits I'd hand to a player who wanted to build one (or a player who wanted one as an NPC sidekick, as the case may be). Did I miss something in this thread? I mostly came in blind, only really reading the OP and then just skimming the rest.

I just think that if you're gonna play a kobold then you should play a kobold. Part of being a kobold means that you're frailer and weaker in comparison to the common races. Much as how if you're a drow, then you're gonna have to deal with sunlight sensitivity.

-4 Strength doesn't even mean much in the edition because everyone has Better Weapon Finesse automatically, and if the kobold absolutely must be Kobold the Barbarian, well, that's what the gauntlets of ogre power and belt of giant strength is for.

-2 Constitution translates out to a mere 1 less hit point per level then someone else in the same class with the same Constitution score, -20 overall. Whoop-de-doo.

The point I was trying to make is that the DMG examples are not meant for player use. (Imagine there are, like, fifty flashing red arrows pointing at the italicized thing... My special effects department budget got cut last week, so italics are all I have man.) The races given that appear in the player handbook do not match the DMG races, so why should a PC from monstrous race match the same inacurate and purposefully unbalanced chart when the known humanoid stats do not?

That's why I suggest ignoring that part of the DMG when it comes to PC's. It just isn't fun for the players if one member of the party is awful, and isn't fun for everyone else if one is too powerful.

As for the stat penalties... Having a -4 str puts you in the 1-shot range for a shadow if you start out with anything less than 11 str. As well, you become more vulnerable to saving throws that target str (having a -3 instead of a -1 is sort of a big deal in that case), and if you happen to not have a finness weapon on hand or simply want to use a weapon that deals more than 1d8+dex damage on a hit, then a -4 str ensures that you will not get a bonus to your hit or damage if you use point buy.

And in this edition, every single class likes constitution. Enemies hit more often, death effects that hit your con score and maximum hit point reduction saves are both most commonly targetted at constitution. As well, that bonus HP? Kiiiiinda important. The wizard/ sorc starts with 6+con hp at level 1. If they decide to dump con to 10, then (ironically enough) a kobold has a 25% chance to 1-shot them with a dagger or rock. If they decide to play it a little more safe and put, say, a 14 in con, then they cannot be insta-gibbed by a random kobold. Note, I chose a cr 1/8 critter here, something CR 1 (giant snake) will deal a bit more damage... Which is where having a good con essentially just means that you won't instantly die to a single bite. A con penalty is honestly the closest thing you can get to "hard mode, on." Especially since 5e player races are specifically designed to not have stat penalties.

Races should be viable. It's a simple design principal, but one I feel should be said and adhered to. It doesn't matter if they are kobolds, dragons or humans, PC races should be able to be compared to one another without there being a clear "best/ worst at all things" showing up. Enforcing an attribute penalty when no other player race has one (especially one as harsh as a -4, which turned away people in 3.5 where you could make up for it easier due to numbers bloat) immediately drops a race into a shallow grave, and then smacking them with small size (no heavy weapons ever, 25' move speed, no bonuses to make up for it) and sunlight sensitivity (hahaha oh god this hurts so much...) on top clubs them over the head with the tombstone and drives the nail in the coffin. It would honestly just be easier to tell your player, "No, you cannot play a kobold in my campaign..."

[Rogue Shadows]

The point I was trying to make is that the DMG examples are not meant for player use. (Imagine there are, like, fifty flashing red arrows pointing at the italicized thing... My special effects department budget got cut last week, so italics are all I have man.) The races given that appear in the player handbook do not match the DMG races, so why should a PC from monstrous race match the same inaccurate and purposefully unbalanced chart when the known humanoid stats do not?

Because it's all we have to go on in absence of system transparency. Seriously, I'm not the moron at Wizards of the Coast who decided that players and monsters should be built using completely separate systems back in 4th Edition, and I'm definitely not the moron who decided to keep that idea for 5th Edition. The player/monster transparency was one of the things I liked most about 3rd Edition, and I want to hew as close to it as possible, whenever possible.

Mostly, it boils down to a problem of logic. Using your kobold as an example, why don't NPC kobolds have Meek and Unimposing or Scavenging, but player kobolds do? This doesn't hold true for other examples in the Monster Manual. Drow there have all the same traits as PC drow, for example - fey ancestry, sunlight sensitivity, innate magic, and so on.


Having a -4 str puts you in the 1-shot range for a shadow if you start out with anything less than 11 str.

So then do as a wizard or rogue or Dex-focused Fighter in this situation would do and don't get hit. Keeping the character alive is a job for the player, not the DM.

Seriously, Races of the Kobold Sorcerer Dragon addressed this issue exactly. Hang on...


If the biggest hurdle a kobold faces is her lack of strength, then that’s no obstacle at all. The moment a kobold accepts her physical weakness, the more powerful she can become through means other than brute force [...] If lack of physical strength is still a mental obstacle for you, consider these numbers. While +2 Dexterity, –4 Strength, and –2 Constitution look like an insurmountable deficit, you can apply the elite array of ability scores to a kobold sorcerer to get Strength 8 (from 12), Dexterity 15 (from 13), Constitution 12 (from 14), Intelligence 10, Wisdom 8, and Charisma 15. [...] Charisma and Dexterity are both good. Low Wisdom means a lower Will save, but this disadvantage is minor, since Will is a good save for sorcerers. The low Strength score is only a problem for damage—the kobold’s Small size cancels the penalty such a low score would normally apply on attack rolls. Carrying items is no problem. Kobold equipment weighs half as much as normal gear from the Player’s Handbook, while kobolds can carry three-quarters of what a Medium creature can.

In every edition, every class has loved Constitution. But a paltry -2 to Constitution hasn't ever stopped anyone before, and it shouldn't now.

[Forrestfire]

It is not in D&D 5e's design philosophy to have negative mods on PC races.

I'm not sure what's so hard to understand about that.

The point of the way ability scores work is to let people play any class as any race, rather than pigeonholing specific races to specific classes. This is a good thing. If you care at all about balance and fairness, then the answer here is to make a race that is similar in power to the PC races. If you're considering making a race that is straight-up inferior to any of the similar races in the PHB, then you should step back and realize that this is first and foremost a game. People play to have fun. Being penalized because the DM has it in his head that NPC stats should be identical to (the generally unique and special) PCs' is not fun. Being forced to use something that is worse in many ways to just using a standard race and refluffing it not fun.

If, in your games, you dislike players playing kobolds that much (because I cannot fathom a possible reason why you'd support breaking from 5e's established design in such a negative way), then just say no to the player.

[Rogue Shadows]

It is not in D&D 5e's design philosophy to have negative mods on PC races.

I don't care.


The point of the way ability scores work is to let people play any class as any race, rather than pigeonholing specific races to specific classes.

Nothing's preventing a kobold from being any class it wants to be. -4 to Strength is almost wholly irrelevant in an edition that provides magic items that reset your Strength to a completely different score and where everyone has Better Weapon Finesse anyway; and -2 to Constitution translates out to a paltry -1 hp/level as compared to someone who'd otherwise have an identical stat, and a mere 5% drop in any Constitution ability checks or saves.

Hell, if you want then I'm even willing to hew closer to the 5E theme and drop the Con penalty to -1 and the Str penalty to -2, while keeping the Dex bonus at +2. If we do that, then if you want to get entirely mechanical and use the default array...

Human Paladin: Str 16 (15+1), Con 15 (14+1). ASIs at 4th, 8th, 12th, and 16th raise each of these to 20 and 19 respectively. The human can spend his 19th ASI on Con to raise it to 20, or get a feat.
Kobold Paladn: Dex 16 (14+2), Con 14 (15-1). ASIs at 4th, 8th, 12th, and 16th raise each of these to 20 and 18 respectively. The kobold can spend his 19th ASI on Con to raise it to 20, or get a feat.

There you go. Mechanically speaking there is no difference between an 18 and a 19 Constitution. The only difference between the two is that the human can spend his last ASI to get +1 Con and +1 something else, while the kobold has to spend his last ASI to get +2 Con. Either way they're not getting a feat, though, and it helps to mechanically represent that a kobold who wants to be as tough as one of those humanoid scuzz-suckers has to seriously work at it.

The entire point of a kobold is that you're small and weak and frail as compared to your counterpart in the mammalian races, and so have to rely on things other than brute strength to solve problems. If a player doesn't want to play that then he doesn't actually want to play a kobold and, as a consequence, he shall not.


This is a good thing. If you care at all about balance and fairness,

I also care about accuracy, and transparency between players and NPCs. Maybe that makes me a crazy person, but it also makes me happy. If a player came up to me asking to play an ogre, I wouldn't shrink the ogre to Medium-size and give it a mere +2 Strength: it would be Large, and all that that entails, and get an absurd Strength bonus, and everything that entails. If the player who's character can crush skulls like grapes complains that it's no fun that the same character can't fit through doors, then maybe he shouldn't be playing an ogre.

Seriously. You ever play a drow PC before? It sucks in this edition. It sucks worse than it ever has. In 3rd Edition you got a paltry -1 to attack rolls, saves, and checks when in bright light, and were dazzled for 1 round if suddenly exposed to it. Bad but not terrible and almost entirely irrelevant by level 5, let alone higher levels. In this edition you get disadvantage to basically anything you attempt ever when in bright light. But do you hear me complaining about it? No. Should anyone complain about it? Hell no. Because if you're playing a drow then you have sunlight sensitivity and you learn to deal with it.

And if you're playing a kobold then you have to learn to deal with being small and weak and frail. If you're playing an ogre then you're gonna have to learn to live with sitting outside in the rain, or at best in the barn, when everyone else is in the small country inn. If you're playing a merfolk then you're gonna have to learn to live with a sucky base land speed, and if you're playing a rakshasa then you're gonna have to deal with losing all actions whenever someone casts dancing lights. And so on, and so forth.

[Forrestfire]

So... Out of honest curiosity, do you penalize the Strength scores of halflings, as well? What about half-orcs' intelligence scores?

[Rogue Shadows]

So... Out of honest curiosity, do you penalize the Strength scores of halflings, as well? What about half-orcs' intelligence scores?

No, because those have already been published. Kobold racial stats haven't. I will say, however, that I am disappointed by the lack of ability score penalties for each standard race, even if it was just a -1 (which, as we have already determined, isn't really a penalty at all, since the difference between an even and odd number with the same modifier is nil for everything except Strength, and it's easy to set things up to essentially completely mitigate the penalty).

[Forrestfire]

I'm... honestly confused, then. What happened to:

I don't care.

Why should it matter if they're already published, if you feel that they should get ability penalties? Surely in the interest of accuracy to the fluff, it'd be better to houserule them in :smallconfused:

Isn't a lot of the point of 5e that it's rules-light enough to implement houserules quite easily? Maybe I'm biased, but I find inconsistently-applied bad houserules to be even worse than normal bad houserules. At least if you're consistent, the players know what to expect.

[Rogue Shadows]

Why should it matter if they're already published, if you feel that they should get ability penalties? Surely in the interest of accuracy to the fluff, it'd be better to houserule them in :smallconfused:

Convincing players to change something that's an established part of the game already and doesn't appear to be impacting it negatively is much, much harder than convincing a player who wants to play a kobold to accept that he'll have to, y'know, play a kobold, and all that that entails, especially when I can turn to the DMG and show a clear basis for whatever homebrew version of the kobold I cook up. Whatever Wizard of the Coast's design philosophy was with regards to 5E became wholly irrelevant as soon as it was actually on the market and open to players to house-rule and homebrew as they see fit, but that doesn't change that each individual DM has a specific group of players that he or she has to cater to and know how to work with.

Similar as with Magic: the Gathering. Emrakul, the Aeons Torn (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=193452) and other Eldrazi creatures are perfectly legal in the Commander format, but amongst my friends we have a gentleman's agreement not to run Eldrazi creatures under any circumstance. Noncreature Eldrazi spells are still on the table, though.

Now then, in all seriousness, let's turn this around. If a player came up to you and wanted to play an ogre, would you really not make it Large despite the penalties that that carries with it, and would you really limit him to +2 Strength? If a player wants to play a merfolk, do you give him a base land speed of 30 feet? If a player wants to play a drow do you eliminate sunlight sensitivity?

[Rogue Shadows]

Incidentally, this is Rogue Shadows' final version of the kobold race, which I am unilaterally deciding is the official version until Wizards of the Coast publishes otherwise.

Ability Score Adjustments. +2 Dexterity, -2 Strength, -1 Constitution. Kobolds are agile, but weak and frail.
Age. Kobolds age faster than humans, reaching maturity at 11 years of age. They can also live longer, often to 120 years of age or more.
Size. Kobolds average between 3 and 4 feet in height, and rarely weigh more than 100 pounds. Your size is Small.
Speed. Your base walking speed is 30 feet. Despite their small size, kobolds are quick on their feet.
Darkvision. Accustomed to life underground, you have superior vision in dark and dim conditions. You can see in dim light within 60 feet of you as if it were bright light, and in darkness as if it were dim light. You can’t discern color in darkness, only shades of gray.
Sunlight sensitivity. You have disadvantage on attack rolls and Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight if you or your target are in sunlight.
Pack tactics. You have advantage on attack rolls against a creature if at least one of your allies is within 5 feet of that creature and isn't incapacitated.
Languages. You begin play knowing how to speak, read, and write Common and Draconic. You specifically speak the Kobold dialect of Draconic, which is simpler in form. While perfectly capable of communicating advanced ideas, Kobold Draconic sounds rough and simple to anyone who speaks True Draconic. Similarly, while you can speak, read, and write True Draconic, the locution sounds superfluously grandiose and the literature reads as gratuitously ostentatious.

[The Shadowdove]

I can understand the physical weakness, as in strength. But why less con than a halfling? They seem to be of similar build. If not hardier?

[Rogue Shadows]

I can understand the physical weakness, as in strength. But why less con than a halfling? They seem to be of similar build. If not hardier?

Kobolds are the cannon fodder's cannon fodder in D&D. They're the guys you send in when throwing goblins at the party seems wasteful. And plus it's just part of their fluff since forever: they're small, weak, and frail.

This does not necessarily make them any less dangerous when played intelligently, (http://www.tuckerskobolds.com/) of course. Which is part of the fun of being a kobold: seemingly everything is stacked against you. Make them pay for it.

[Forrestfire]

If I had someone ask to play an ogre, I'd likely give them something like this:

Ogre

+2 Strength, +1 Con
40ft move speed
Large and In Charge: An ogre is Large size, taking up more space than a smaller being. In combat, his area of control is a 10-foot square if using a grid. His size also allows him to use larger weapons than normal, or normal Heavy weapons in a single hand. A large-sized weapon deals increased damage by one die step (1d4 -> 1d6 -> 1d8 -> 1d10 -> 2d6 -> 2d8). In addition, an ogre has advantage on Strength checks to break objects.
Darkvision 60ft
Languages: Common and Giant


+2 strength means that if you're using an array or point-buy, you can match the normal ogre when you hit level 4 (around the point you're full strength for an ogre) by spending an ability increase. Overall, Large doesn't mean much in 5e other than using bigger weapons and grappling little things better, and I'd probably give them access to an ogre greatclub or javelins if they wanted. The movement speed is good, but easily replicated with Longstrider. Dual-wielding with a heavy weapon and a light weapon could be neat, though.

The important thing here is that a lack of, say, -6 to intelligence, -4 to wisdom, and -4 to charisma means that if someone wants to play an ogre with decent mental stats, they're fine. The PCs are unique, they can be special without disrupting the setting. The goal of homebrewing, for me, is to end with an option that is both fun to use and balanced against other options. "Fun to use," for me (and most of the people I've played with), means "can be used for a multitude of possible concepts rather than just a few."

Similarly, I am in support of Kobolds (and Halflings) without penalties to strength because if someone wants to play a little guy who is exceedingly strong, that's not a problem, that's probably something awesome. It leads to fun roleplaying opportunities, and has a good chance of creating a memorable character.

For Drow, I don't see a reason to change their Light Sensitivity, because it's rarely going to be in play for a lot of times. Unless your setting always has nice weather, direct sunlight is kinda hard to find, and there's always the option of wearing sunglasses and heavy, covering clothing, using a parasol (if a mage or a suitably badass fighter), or finding some sort of neat magic item to dissipate sunlight.

If a player wanted to play a Merfolk and it wasn't an aquatic campaign, I would likely work with them to come up with a decent fluff reason for having a movement speed that doesn't disrupt the game. A (relatively) slow-moving broom of flying, maybe a magic spell that lets them hover at the movement rate of a Small creature, magitech legs, a trick to move like a snake or flop very fast... There are plenty of options.

Nitpick: Emrakul is banned. Shame that you ignore all the eldrazi, though, since a lot of the non-Titan ones are pretty neat. Heck, even the non-banned Titans are pretty nice to have around, since they're one of the best countermeasures to an easy-win condition for decks that are actual problems in EDH.

[Rogue Shadows]

Similarly, I am in support of Kobolds (and Halflings) without penalties to strength because if someone wants to play a little guy who is exceedingly strong, that's not a problem, that's probably something awesome. It leads to fun roleplaying opportunities, and has a good chance of creating a memorable character.

Sure it is. But someone who's three feet tall has to work harder at being strong than someone who's six feet tall. Overcoming a -2 Strength penalty to nevertheless end up with 20 Strength is way more meaningful than having as easy a time as anyone else reaching 20 Strength.

Your ogre makes me sad, by the way. That's not an ogre, it's a half-orc with gigantism.


Nitpick: Emrakul is banned. Shame that you ignore all the eldrazi, though, since a lot of the non-Titan ones are pretty neat.

My bad on not knowing the technical legality of Emrakul in Commander; in fairness I don't need to since we've agreed not to play with it anyway. More specifically it's actually anything with Annihilator, which we find to be too powerful a keyword in our meta.


"Fun to use," for me (and most of the people I've played with), means "can be used for a multitude of possible concepts rather than just a few."

You don't have to have a positive ability score adjustment total for that, though. Especially as your ability score adjustments from race eventually get swallowed up as you gain levels; as I demonstrated above, a Kobold Paladin 20 and a Human Paladin 20 don't have to be very different at all.

[Forrestfire]

In that case, how would you approach turning a 7-hit-die monster into something playable at level 1 without unbalancing the game? :smallconfused:

... Also, given that Orcs have 16 strength and 16 con to Ogres' 19 and 16, "a half-orc with gigantism" is a pretty good description of an Ogre.

And fair enough on the Eldrazi. Not for everyone, I guess. Although it'd be a bit odd if your meta involved other high-power things while keeping the Eldrazi out. Kinda like if someone complained about stuff like counterspells but not about removal, y'know? Just kinda weird and inconsistent.

[Rogue Shadows]

In that case, how would you approach turning a 7-hit-die monster into something playable at level 1 without unbalancing the game? :smallconfused:

Honestly, I don't know, thanks to a lack of transparency between PCs and monsters making it extremely difficult to figure out how I'd handle racial hit die. He'd have considerably more than +2 Strength, though. +5 or +6, maybe.

I'd probably just decide that it's not balanced to have an ogre PC at level 1. No one likes level adjustment but for some character concepts something like it is just necessary, or else we run into bizarre, contrived scenarios like ogres with +2 strength or merfolk with, coincidentally, exactly the magic item they need to keep up with the party.

[Forrestfire]

At level 1? Why not just encourage the player to put a high score in Strength at the start, and to get ability increases to "catch up" with normal ogres during the levels they're underleveled? I feel like you're trying to fit a square peg into a round hole here, in your attempt to make a mid-high hit die monster into a 1 hit die character.

To each his own, I guess. I, personally, am a great fan of statting monsters and PCs differently. It makes the game infinitely easier on the DM, and opens up design space for things that are necessary to make encounters work without being forced to balance them around the chance that PCs might access them.

Also, I'm not sure why it's bizarre or contrived for a PC (a unique individual, with abilities that most people do not have, and someone who is actively putting their life in danger for whatever reasons) to have sought out an item or spell in their backstory to make up for a game-disrupting fluff problem. It's not like all merfolk would need something like that, but for a PC to have something? That's just par the course. Same with the ogre. A player wanting to play an ogre at level 1 with the hypothetical homebrew I tossed together would end up with 17 strength, which is just barely below that of a normal ogre. Not really that bizarre. It's easy to imagine that he could also play an ogre who, rather than training his strength and endurance, studied and learned magic, and put an 8 or 10 in his initial strength to get something merely above-average for a normal person, but weak for an ogre.

The only difference is how the starting stat is explained. If a human starts with a 16 strength, it might be because he had good genes or because he trained. If an ogre starts with 17 strength, it might mean he's a bit weaker, or still training, or doesn't life as much as the average ogre... Or it might mean that he's a bit less skilled at combat, and less adept at placing blows and taking enemies to the ground in a grapple.

If you consider that bizarre and contrived, then I shudder to think of what you think of a typical adventuring party. I mean, four or more random individuals, often of rare races or lineages (that sometimes are in conflict with each other), and possibly with strange powers, all ending up working together? I mean... The only way it wouldn't be bizarre or contrived is if something external were influencing it, or if the population density of adventurers was incredibly high.

[Rogue Shadows]

At level 1? Why not just encourage the player to put a high score in Strength at the start, and to get ability increases to "catch up" with normal ogres during the levels they're underleveled? I feel like you're trying to fit a square peg into a round hole here, in your attempt to make a mid-high hit die monster into a 1 hit die character.

Again, I'd actually rather a (functional) racial hit die/level adjustment/both mechanic so that you can't have an ogre PC at level 1, but whatever level he does show up at will be balanced against the rest of the party. Some things just can't be balanced.

Putting a high score in Strength to start is an idea, but, at least if the 5E MM is anything like the 3rd Edition MM, then each monster specifically represents the most average member of the race unless highlighted as otherwise. This means that it is common for ogres to have 19 Strength, as common as it is for humans to have 10 or 11 Strength, and an ogre with 17 Strength (using your version of having a mere +2 Strength) is considered a pushover by the standards of his race - not a problem if he wants to play a, say, ogre bard, but somewhat problematic if he wants to play an ogre as an ogre - big and loud and powerful and strong and probably a Barbarian. The only way I could see it working is if we were dealing with a child ogre, but then a) how did a child ogre get class levels, and b) how are we gonna deal with it when the child grows older (how many people are at their peak strength when they're 8?), and c) what if the player didn't want to play a child ogre?


To each his own, I guess. I, personally, am a great fan of statting monsters and PCs differently. It makes the game infinitely easier on the DM,

I find the opposite, actually. Whereas in 3rd Edition the DM only has to learn and master a single character creation system, in 4th and 5th Edition the DM has to learn and master two, and while both produce the same end statistics the road traveled to get there is entirely different.


and opens up design space for things that are necessary to make encounters work without being forced to balance them around the chance that PCs might access them.

I miss the convenience of being able to, for example, see a 13 HD creature with the Dragon type and immediately know that it had 13d12 + Con modifier hit points, a BAB of +13, base save modifiers of +8, a max of 16 ranks in each skill, 6 + Int modifier skill points per level (x4 at 1st level), that it had had three ability score increases, that it had 5 feats, and that it had Darkvision out to 60 ft. and low-light vision, and immunity to magic sleep and paralysis.

Conversely, in 5th Edition, an ogre is a Giant, and a Formorian is a giant, but one has a d10 HD and one has a d12 HD, and they don't share any traits unless specifically built to. Ugh.

Similarly, I miss the convenience of being able to take any monster and reverse-engineer it into a PC-playable race, which I could then use for my own nefarious purposes; I did as much with the Dao genies in 3rd Edition, for example, when my players had to go to the Great Dismal Delve and fight and slay the Dao Sultana Ramlah bint Abbas ibn Ihab ibn Sayed ibn Saeed ibn Khaleed al-Aziz ibn al-Ard. I was able to construct Dao fighters and Dao binders and even a Dao Sha'ir on a whim, whatever you like, and I liked that I was able to do so using the exact same rules that the players were using for their characters.

[Forrestfire]

Hrm. At this point I'm tempted to try to figure out a decent LA-like system that possibly eats some or all of your feats in exchange for higher ability scores and monster abilities. Make the break points 4/8/12/15, and then you could tweak monsters to fit into those brackets.

For example, an ogre might be playable from level 4 on and eat your ability score increase at 4, but be Large with +4 to +6 strength (still max 20) and +2 to con, and darkvision. A Hill Giant's breakpoint might be at level 8 or 12, and eat two of your three feats for being Huge and having a free, permanently-attuned Belt of Hill Giant Strength that works in an antimagic field. Probably also gets a +4 to +6 or so to Con as well.

A mummy could have its breakpoint for PCdom at level 8, with the benefit being +2 to strength and con, trading your two feats for some immunities and resistances (maybe all of the ones on the list, probably a tweaked list, it'd need to be given some thought), and a Rotting Fist and Dreadful Glare mechanic that works like a wand. n charges per day, recharge some amount each day.

For races like Rakshasas (don't have a Monster Manual on me), they might get stats, minor magical abilities, and some weaknesses and special powers, then be encouraged to use their class levels on spellcasting classes to represent their inherent magicalness. Dragons might be pointed towards Eldritch Knight and get breath and a claw/claw/bite routine similar to how Polearm Master works.

Food for thought, I guess.

[Rogue Shadows]

For example, an ogre might be playable from level 4 on and eat your ability score increase at 4, but be Large with +4 to +6 strength (still max 20)

Hmm, we continue to disagree. At Large size and above I'd have your ability score maximums for Strength and Constitution increase. Say 23 for each at Large, 25 at Huge, and 30 at Gargantuan.

If you're gonna play a monster, you should be capable of being monstrous.

[Forrestfire]

The issue with that is that it screws up the math of the bounded accuracy system. While admittedly magic items like the Tomes do that anyway at the higher levels, the math mostly works for a while and it'd be a shame to wreck it.

[Rogue Shadows]

The issue with that is that it screws up the math of the bounded accuracy system. While admittedly magic items do that anyone at the higher levels, the math mostly works and it'd be a shame to wreck it.

It doesn't mess up the math terribly. At Large size, a Strength of 23 (functionally 22) as compared to 20 only amounts to a 5% increase in melee attack rolls, Strength checks, and Strength saving throws, 1 extra point of damage per attack, and a larger carrying capacity that is rendered pointless by a bag of holding anyway. A Constitution of 23 only amounts to a 5% increase in Constitution checks and Constitution saving throws and 20 more hit points.

The whole system won't come crashing down over a 5% increase.

At Huge and Garganuan the effects are larger, but then simply being Huge or Gargantuan is probably throwing things all over the place anyway.

[Forrestfire]

Good point. It probably wouldn't screw them over too much. In that case, for the Hill Giant example I had, a quick-and-dirty method would be to start them at Str 21 or give Str +8 or +10, but permanently fill an attunement slot, rather than just setting them to that number.

I think I might try making a system for this when I get some spare time, actually. Could be fun to go through the iconic and/or popular monsters to PC-ize them.

[cobaltstarfire]

Why would you say that a -2 Str +2 Dex -1 Con is the "official" Kobold, when the only "official" stats we have on one (as an NPC) is -4 Str +2 dex?

I do think your version is a little bit nicer in that it allows for some flexibility, but if you want to be all official about things shouldn't you just stick to a combination of what information is in the DMG and the MM?


I'd still personally do kobolds +2 dex +1 con or cha, because while you don't care about the design philosophy that 5e uses, I do. If I wanted to play pseudo 3.5 I would...but I don't, I want to play 5e, where I can try to play particular concepts without negative modifiers tanking the idea entirely.

[Rogue Shadows]

Why would you say that a -2 Str +2 Dex -1 Con is the "official" Kobold, when the only "official" stats we have on one (as an NPC) is -4 Str +2 dex?

I was making a unilateral decision. If the argument is that the DMG kobolds are not meant to be played by players, then we need a version that is. That's my version. It's the official version. I unilaterally said so, and because I'm me, it's official. Because I'm me. :smalltongue:


I'd still personally do kobolds +2 dex +1 con or cha, because while you don't care about the design philosophy that 5e uses, I do. If I wanted to play pseudo 3.5 I would...but I don't, I want to play 5e, where I can try to play particular concepts without negative modifiers tanking the idea entirely.

As I demonstrated, in a system where everyone has Better Weapon Finesse, Strength isn't important if you're getting a +2 to Dexterity; and a -1 Constitution is essentially entirely irrelevant since you can just slap it onto an odd-numbered score. There is no difference between a 14 and a 15 in D&D mechanical terms. Hit point gain is even retroactive in 5th Edition, so even though you have to wait a bit longer to increase a 14 to a 16, once you get that 16 you have the same benefits as if you'd had it from 1st level, just like everyone else.

I'm not opposed to tossing in a token +1 Charisma, though.

[Gnomes2169]

Because it's all we have to go on in absence of system transparency. Seriously, I'm not the moron at Wizards of the Coast who decided that players and monsters should be built using completely separate systems back in 4th Edition, and I'm definitely not the moron who decided to keep that idea for 5th Edition. The player/monster transparency was one of the things I liked most about 3rd Edition, and I want to hew as close to it as possible, whenever possible.

Then quite simply, 5e is not designed to handle races in a way you are used to. No penalties on attributes from race choice is one of the core tennants for designing a 5e race. It is an effort to foster race-class variety, which quite frankly was something 3.P failed at. In 5e there might be classes each race is predisposed to excell at, just due to racial bonuses/ abilities. For example; Wood elves are good rangers, monks, druids, rogues and dex clerics because of their bonuses to dexterity and wisdom (which scouting rogues will want for a better perception score), while half orcs make for awesome barbarians, fighters, paladins (yeah, paladins, especially vengeance. That natural strength and con bonus is killer on the front line) and any cleric that wants to go front-line martial gishy goodness... Like that one war domain. You know. The one literally named War domain, which focuses on punching people in the face.

The thing is, while they excell at those classes... They don't suck at the other ones because of it. A wood elf paladin does not rue the day it ignored stealth and wisdom, because its constitution and dex/ str (whichever attack stat it goes with, likely dex for more ninja paladin goodness) are still rather admirable/ usable. A half orc sorcerer isn't worthless because of the 15 it starts with in charisma. Far from it, the extra constitution and strength make it more hearty and resilient to things like hit point damage and a shadow's strength drain, and their relentless ability keeps them standing for one more blow if everything goes wrong. In 3,5... neither case was really true. The -2 con on the wood elf typically made players avoid them for melee anything (let alone paladin, which needed all the non-dex (its one true dump stat) help it could get), and the half orc had a -4 to it's charisma. -4. It needed at least 15 in its charisma to cast level 1 spells. The game didn't just make the choice less optimal, it actively punished making an atypical race selection. This is completely contrary to what 5e is going for, as it focuses more on making each concept at least viable even if they aren't optimal.


Mostly, it boils down to a problem of logic. Using your kobold as an example, why don't NPC kobolds have Meek and Unimposing or Scavenging, but player kobolds do?

Because the NPC kobolds don't need meek and unimposing or scavenging. Fluff wise, they already have both. Players already think kobolds are nothing more than slightly-draconic puppies to kick, don't take kobolds seriously (even if they should) and ignore any threat they might hold. As well, they already look for worthless knick-nacks, get into places they shouldn't be able to find and really just have the most kender way of finding things without actually being kender. As NPC's, they don't need any mechanics to make them any better at these jobs, they just get it via plot. Players, on the other hand, are not nearly as associated with the story fiat-ed plot powers, and need racial mechanics to back them up. Hence, an ability to make them more harmless-looking and an ability to find hidden shinies to pick up and pocket/ bring to their "hoard" (read, big pile o' random junk found around the cave).

Thinking about it though, meek and unimposing should also give disadvantage on intimidation checks as well... Hmmm...

... Also, I did say that they needed new abilities to make them somewhat balanced with other races. So I looked at the fluff, thought of some little abilities that fit it to make the race more fun/ interesting that wouldn't shatter game balance, and after looking at them for a while said, "Meh. Good enough." All in all, a solid 10 minutes of work I think. :smalltongue:


This doesn't hold true for other examples in the Monster Manual. Drow there have all the same traits as PC drow, for example - fey ancestry, sunlight sensitivity, innate magic, and so on.

The thing is, the drow in the monster manual are the only player race given stat blocks (unless you count the generic NPC's in the back as humans, but no race is officially given to them. They're just that generic.) And even in the drow stat block, it does not list any racial bonuses they may or may not have to attributes, and the same is true of every creature/ entry in the monster manual. It's just a set of numbers that for all we know were just randomly assigned to each monster to fit them thematically. Seriously, it's not an exact science to go from the monster manual to player characters... :smalltongue:


So then do as a wizard or rogue or Dex-focused Fighter in this situation would do and don't get hit. Keeping the character alive is a job for the player, not the DM.

It's also almost impossible as far as the 5e bounded accuracy system goes. As well, you can encounter 2 at level 1, where their natural stealth can give them quite a good chance at a surprise round... Which will likely be spent eating the squishiest thing in the room, given that shadows are smart enough to know who's heart stops easiest (the skinny, out of shape nerd who can throw fire/ lightning/ radiant energy at them vs the track and field athlete who's pointy stick can't really hurt them. Not that hard of a decision). That str penalty being proposed will more than likely get you a wizard/ sorc/ rogue with 4 str if you go kobold with point buy, and that puts you firmly in the hands of "make a new character," unless the DM specifically goes out of their way not to murder you. No, shadows and creatures like them will not come up every game... But a penalty that substantial will be lethal whenever they do.


Seriously, Races of the Kobold Sorcerer Dragon addressed this issue exactly. Hang on...

All well and good for the edition that gave you immunity to everything by level 7. However, 5e is not that edition. The small size gives you no bonuses to cancel out the penalties, small equipment (apparently) doesn't have a different weight, there is no elite array, and the PB system will get you two 15's, one 14, one 9 and two 8's. If your hypothetical kobold decided to use the method above, they would put the 14 in str (setting it to 10), a 15 in dex (setting it to 17), a 9 in con (if going sorc or wizard), a 15 in cha (if going sorc or wizard) and the 8's in int and wis respectively. This sets their starting hp to 5, their str bonus to... not negative, their starting ac to 16 (given dragon sorc... Because what kobolds aren't going to go dragon sorc if they go sorc?) or 13 (if anything else) and their attack bonus with spells/ finess or ranged weapons to +4/ +5. The character would honestly be pathetic, and a shadow would need to roll 2 1's to not 1-hit KO the poor bugger (and hits a dragon sorc 45% of the time... Or 75% in the surprise round since they get advantage on the attack. And every other class it's 60%/ 85%). Doesn't even need to eat the str of the poor bugger. In fact by average damage alone, they won't need more than average damage to take the kobold out until level 3. Anything with +1 str and a war maul or great sword takes them out on average as well.


In every edition, every class has loved Constitution. But a paltry -2 to Constitution hasn't ever stopped anyone before, and it shouldn't now.

Actually... Barbarians, fighters and paladins sort of ignored any race that put a penalty on con. Rangers, warblades, psy-warriors, monks, and every single class that ever went into melee also tended to avoid races with a con penalty, because there were other options that would increase con or utility/defensive capabilies to the point where that balanced it out. Sometimes even both! That the good -con races tend to be gated behind a decently high (read horribly restrictive) LA barrier didn't exactly help with this problem...

And a -2 con is rather a bit larger in 5e. The 5 asi's a character normally gets are typically on top of the bonuses their race gave to them. No race makes the player spend their (incredibly) limited character resources to make up for a deficit they had since level 1. A -4 and a -2 would literally take until level 12 to just catch up to where the other players started, leaving 2 more ASI's to get feats/ increase stats by level 19... Or you could not try to repare the the equivalent of 7 lost points in the PB system. Which no other race has to make up for. Which... Really is a balance problem.

[Rogue Shadows]

And a -2 con is rather a bit larger in 5e. The 5 asi's a character normally gets are typically on top of the bonuses their race gave to them. No race makes the player spend their (incredibly) limited character resources to make up for a deficit they had since level 1. A -4 and a -2 would literally take until level 12 to just catch up to where the other players started, leaving 2 more ASI's to get feats/ increase stats by level 19... Or you could not try to repare the the equivalent of 7 lost points in the PB system. Which no other race has to make up for. Which... Really is a balance problem.

Well, as I reduced the penalty to -2 Str and -1 Con, that's not a problem anymore. I even demonstrated how it works out to be the same since in D&D there's no difference between an even score and an odd score if the modifier is the same:

Human Paladin: Str 16 (15+1), Con 15 (14+1). ASIs at 4th, 8th, 12th, and 16th raise each of these to 20 and 19 respectively. The human can spend his 19th ASI on Con to raise it to 20, or get a feat.
Kobold Paladn: Dex 16 (14+2), Con 14 (15-1). ASIs at 4th, 8th, 12th, and 16th raise each of these to 20 and 18 respectively. The kobold can spend his 19th ASI on Con to raise it to 20, or get a feat.

Since in 5th Edition D&D everyone has Better Weapon Finesse and there's magic items to change your Strength if you must use Strength, the -2 Str means nothing; while since hit point gain is retroactive if your Constitution score increases both end up with the same number of hit points on average anyway. You lag a little behind overall (down from levels 4 and 8 and between 12 and 16), but the same effort gives you the same hit point total in the end.


Because the NPC kobolds don't need meek and unimposing or scavenging.

Well, I don't like a lack of transparency between players and NPCs, as has been established.

[Hyena]

Just for the record, sunlight sensitivity sucks and is the reason why drow are a horrible race.

[Rogue Shadows]

Just for the record, sunlight sensitivity sucks and is the reason why drow are a horrible race.

I still like to play one, though. A dark elf thief was my first D&D character...sort of, it's complicated. Point is that I consider Iliira my "default" character and always roll her up if the setting has dark elves that are anything like those in the Realms or Greyhawk. And I accept and work with the fact that sunlight sensitivity is part and parcel of playing a drow.

[Gwendol]

In that case, how would you approach turning a 7-hit-die monster into something playable at level 1 without unbalancing the game? :smallconfused:

... Also, given that Orcs have 16 strength and 16 con to Ogres' 19 and 16, "a half-orc with gigantism" is a pretty good description of an Ogre.

And fair enough on the Eldrazi. Not for everyone, I guess. Although it'd be a bit odd if your meta involved other high-power things while keeping the Eldrazi out. Kinda like if someone complained about stuff like counterspells but not about removal, y'know? Just kinda weird and inconsistent.

I think you miss out on the "Legendary Stupidity" of the ogre by handing it out as a level 1 PC like you suggest. I'd allow a monster race to start at the level given by it's HD, have it's abilities (except darkvision, and the like) replaced by class abilities except for HD (keep the monster dice) and replace background by two skills/tools of choice.

[OldTrees1]

I think you miss out on the "Legendary Stupidity" of the ogre by handing it out as a level 1 PC like you suggest. I'd allow a monster race to start at the level given by it's HD, have it's abilities (except darkvision, and the like) replaced by class abilities except for HD (keep the monster dice) and replace background by two skills/tools of choice.

If you are going to do this, I would suggest keeping a Race+Background-2Skills worth of racial traits. Since that is what you are having the Monstrous Race replace.

[Gwendol]

I read a short passage about it in the DMG and paraphrased from memory. I'm likely to have missed a line or two, but there are suggested rules for this kind of thing.

[RedMage125]

Just for the record, sunlight sensitivity sucks and is the reason why drow are a horrible race.

That only applies when the character is in "direct sunlight". And how common is that? If the game mostly takes place inside various structures/dungeons/caves/underground, there's little drawback.

And it's better than NOT having darkvision.

Examples:
Human:
Direct Sunlight: No penalty or advantage.
Bright Light (such as artificial light sources or diffuse sunlight): No penalty or advantage
Dim Light: Disadvantage on Perception checks but not attack rolls
Complete Darkness: Disadvantage on attack rolls, automatic failure of Perception checks, attackers get advantage

Drow:
Direct Sunlight: Disadvantage on Attack Rolls and Perception checks, attackers get no special advanatage
Bright Light: No penalty or advantage
Dim Light: No penalty or advanatage
Darkness: No penalty or advanatage

Obviously, the best option would be Darkvision without Sunlight Sensitivity. But perhaps a clever character could devise "dark lenses", some kind of smoky glass goggles that allow him to treat direct sunlight as Dim Light.

But I'd hardly say drow are a "horrible race". The greater range on darkvision than other races comes in handy when the party is in dark areas. It can drastically affect what distance enemies would start from the party if they were attacked and the drow could see them and alert his friends before the elf or dwarf could even see them.

[Rogue Shadows]

That only applies when the character is in "direct sunlight". And how common is that?

Well, the most recent long campaign I ran was Red Hand of Doom. It...would be pretty common, actually. Significant portions of Hoard of the Dragon Queen also take place outside - like the entire first part in Greenest, for example.


But I'd hardly say drow are a "horrible race".

I wouldn't go that far, either, but it definitely sucks worse than it did in 3rd Edition, which was my point. Direct sunlight would also reasonably include a spell like sunbeam, sunburst, and perhaps even daylight (personally I would rule the last myself as DM).

[RedMage125]

Well, the most recent long campaign I ran was Red Hand of Doom. It...would be pretty common, actually. Significant portions of Hoard of the Dragon Queen also take place outside - like the entire first part in Greenest, for example.
Of course there are campaigns that take place outdoors during the day. Goggles come into play, and only make sense when you have a clever character who finds himself exposed to sunlight a lot.


I wouldn't go that far, either, but it definitely sucks worse than it did in 3rd Edition, which was my point. Direct sunlight would also reasonably include a spell like sunbeam, sunburst, and perhaps even daylight (personally I would rule the last myself as DM).

Sunburst is instantaneous, and blinds ANYONE, but I wouldn't punish drow further. Sunbeam creates a series of bright flashes that likewise can blind anyone, but as periodic flashes, drow would have no penalty more than anyone else.

And Daylight...by RAW, drow have no penalty in that spell, nor would any other "sunlight Sensitive" race. Magical light just isn't as piercing and bright as the natural sun. If you're going to have that spell affect drow as if it were sunlight, I think offering them a save would at least be more fair.

[AbyssStalker]

So, anyone have an idea on stats for an urd? I have been wanting to make an urd monk who's wings were crippled, yet may still be restored, planning on roleplaying it up with this character in a goofyish manner with my group as plucky comic relief, often jumping off high altitudes having forgotten his wings don't work. :smallsmile:

[Rogue Shadows]

Of course there are campaigns that take place outdoors during the day. Goggles come into play, and only make sense when you have a clever character who finds himself exposed to sunlight a lot.

Effective sunglasses in that vein probably can't be easily created with the pseudo-Medieval tech level D&D presumes; tinted lenses weren't invented until the 1750s. The best I could do is wear Inuit-style snow goggles that basically allow my drow character to see through a narrow slit, reducing exposure to light rather than intensity. It could certainly work, but my field of vision would be reduced to essentially nil. In 5E terms I'd be getting rid of disadvantage to Perception checks and attack rolls in sunlight, in order to pick up disadvantage to Perception checks and attack rolls in any condition.

[Envyus]

So, anyone have an idea on stats for an urd? I have been wanting to make an urd monk who's wings were crippled, yet may still be restored, planning on roleplaying it up with this character in a goofyish manner with my group as plucky comic relief, often jumping off high altitudes having forgotten his wings don't work. :smallsmile:

Take a Kobold give it a fly speed. There you go you have an Urd/Winged Kobold.

[RedMage125]

Effective sunglasses in that vein probably can't be easily created with the pseudo-Medieval tech level D&D presumes;

Look at any of the "Goggles/Eyes" items in the DMG and tell me you still believe this.

Such an object fitted with some smoky glass would suffice.

[Rogue Shadows]

Look at any of the "Goggles/Eyes" items in the DMG and tell me you still believe this.

Such an object fitted with some smoky glass would suffice.

Those are magic items, the cost of which is far, far beyond what a 1st-level drow is going to have access to or want to spend her money on, presuming I can even find any in the first place. And have you ever actually worn old-style crystalline sunglasses? The havoc they play with your sight has to be seen to be believed; there's a reason I left them out when I was listing historical sunglasses. They weren't even typically used as sunglasses where they were most common (12th-century China), they were used to obscure the eyes so as to make your face harder to read.

[RedMage125]

Those are magic items, the cost of which is far, far beyond what a 1st-level drow is going to have access to or want to spend her money on, presuming I can even find any in the first place. And have you ever actually worn old-style crystalline sunglasses? The havoc they play with your sight has to be seen to be believed; there's a reason I left them out when I was listing historical sunglasses. They weren't even typically used as sunglasses where they were most common (12th-century China), they were used to obscure the eyes so as to make your face harder to read.

Re: magic items: If they can be crafted as magical items, nonmagical ones can be crafted as well.

Furthermore, what's the issue with leather mask with metal retaining rings for glass lenses? Not too hard.

At any rate, This would ALL depend on the DM, as it is not an item that exists in a strictly RAW sense. In the 5e game in which I am a player, we've encountered some kind of half-dragon kobold with smoky lenses that the DM created to negate his Sunlight Senitivity. And I stand by what I said before, Race with darkvision but no sensitivity>Drow>Race with no darkvision.

[iskoaya]

I hate ability score modifiers. People should play whatever race that best fits their character, and/or choose the race with the most useful racial abilities for their build. The ability score bonuses make many otherwise viable race/class combinations a very suboptimal choice.

i ditched racial ability modifiers completely, player gets +2 and +1 to any two dif stats, period.
bring on the gnome barbarians, the woodelf hedgewizard sorcerers, the halforc bard and his drums, the dwarven warlock hearing voices from the deeper depths, the dragonborn monks, ECT ECT ECT.... FLUFF & COOL > min/max POS videogame WoW players.

[CrusaderJoe]

+1 Int or Cha? really?

not charisma since the stat expresses the ability to interact with "people" in the world. No kobold would have a bonus to that, unless you were playing in a world where they are common and were having those interactions on a frequent basis.


Actually Int or Cha works just fine. You aren't a normal Kobold but one of those few that becomes awesome Rogues or Sorcerers by decree of Tucker.


Edit: Yeah I hate racial ability modifiers. I would totally prefer the +2/+1 approach or having your class effect them somehow.

[Myzz]

Actually Int or Cha works just fine. You aren't a normal Kobold but one of those few that becomes awesome Rogues or Sorcerers by decree of Tucker.

And that is what his ASI's would do.

Someone pointed out a named Kobold who had great Charisma and was level 8... thats +4 to Cha btw

My point is that a Kobold should NOT be the racial equivalent of any of the other races. AND the stats I gave, if you took the negs from DMG and the applied the point buy would actually be point equiv. To play a Kobold it should feel underpowered, underwhelming...

A kobold adventurer would be better than a human peasant, but not better or the same as an equivalently experienced human adventurer...

[CrusaderJoe]

And that is what his ASI's would do.

Someone pointed out a named Kobold who had great Charisma and was level 8... thats +4 to Cha btw

My point is that a Kobold should NOT be the racial equivalent of any of the other races. AND the stats I gave, if you took the negs from DMG and the applied the point buy would actually be point equiv. To play a Kobold it should feel underpowered, underwhelming...

A kobold adventurer would be better than a human peasant, but not better or the same as an equivalently experienced human adventurer...

That makes no sense. Why shouldnt this very special kobold adventurer be on equal footing with the rest of their party? Why would she be brought along if he was just going to be a liability? Why the speciism?

You are punishing players mechanically based on fluff reasons and that isn't cool.

If you agree to have a race in your game then it shouldn't be a trap option.

The DMG is giving you the NPC version of the Kobold not the PC. Remember PCs are used much more often than NPCs or monsters.... NPC and monsters are pretty much disposable whereas a PC will be used constantly.

[Forrestfire]

Why, though? In both editions where Kobolds have been playable, the stats for them implied that they were not the wimpiest race on the block. In 3.5, they had ties to dragons and various unique and powerful abilities, especially regarding magic, and in 4e, they got +con and +dex.

By that same logic, anyone playing a halfling should also feel underwhelming, because they're not as big as the normal races. I mean, it's obvious that halflings shouldn't be able to be as strong as humans, right? And that humans should never ever be as strong as half-orcs, because the half-orcs are just better at lifting things. Oh yeah! And none of the races should ever be able to be as good a wizard as elves, because elves grow older and are more magical.

D&D 5e (and 4e, and later 3e) abandoned the idea of races catering to one concept and only one concept because it's dumb to limit players' choices based on fluff, when anyone who is an adventurer is already unique and special. It's not a large leap of logic to believe that a kobold adventurer PC would be non-super-wimpy. Hell, you could just go and say "he's a dragonwrought, an elite kobold that's less wimpy than normal ones." Or you could go "this kobold is stronger and tougher than most. This is why he's an adventurer instead of a random miner or trapsmith." Problem solved.

[Svata]

Because it's all we have to go on in absence of system transparency. Seriously, I'm not the moron at Wizards of the Coast who decided that players and monsters should be built using completely separate systems back in 4th Edition, and I'm definitely not the moron who decided to keep that idea for 5th Edition. The player/monster transparency was one of the things I liked most about 3rd Edition, and I want to hew as close to it as possible, whenever possible.


Seriously. I've moved past most of my gripes with 5e, but this? No. Why should they not be built with the same system? Wouldn't that be easier? Especially of you're oneof those crazy DMs who occasionally wants to *gasp* slap a class level or two on a monster.



Emrakul... [is] perfectly legal in the commander format
Actually, no.

[Myzz]

if you make him as strong, then he's not really playing a kobold anymore... He's playing a PC that happens to look like a kobold.

Same reason you don't remove light sensitivity for Drow... if you do, its not really a drow anymore... If the player wants to play an obviously weaker character instead of choosing one that has stats already pre-done from the PHB for fluff reasons, then they should realize that they are playing an obviously weaker character mechanically. The Schtick for the character even makes those assumptions.

[Forrestfire]

If your imagination is that dependent on penalties to make something feel right, fluffwise, I shudder to think of what you'd make of the more rules-light narrative systems :smallconfused:

[DireSickFish]

if you make him as strong, then he's not really playing a kobold anymore... He's playing a PC that happens to look like a kobold.

Same reason you don't remove light sensitivity for Drow... if you do, its not really a drow anymore... If the player wants to play an obviously weaker character instead of choosing one that has stats already pre-done from the PHB for fluff reasons, then they should realize that they are playing an obviously weaker character mechanically. The Schtick for the character even makes those assumptions.

I don't really jive with the fluff of kobolds being that they are weak. Cowardly? Yes. Commoners are weak and just chaff for the PC's to walk though. We don't give penalties to PC's that play humans. There's no disadvantage for literally growing up on the streets as a bum with no formal training. Instead that nets you two skills and the ability to move around cities faster.

The draconic heritage. The hatred for Gnomes. The fiendishly clever traps and mined out tunnels to bring there dragon masters the precious minerals. That's the "fluff". In fact Tuckers Kobolds are so often used as an example of terrifying crafty buggers that are the bane of the party that I'd say they get off a lot better than most monster races.

[Myzz]

I don't really jive with the fluff of kobolds being that they are weak. Cowardly? Yes. Commoners are weak and just chaff for the PC's to walk though. We don't give penalties to PC's that play humans. There's no disadvantage for literally growing up on the streets as a bum with no formal training. Instead that nets you two skills and the ability to move around cities faster.

The draconic heritage. The hatred for Gnomes. The fiendishly clever traps and mined out tunnels to bring there dragon masters the precious minerals. That's the "fluff". In fact Tuckers Kobolds are so often used as an example of terrifying crafty buggers that are the bane of the party that I'd say they get off a lot better than most monster races.

If someone asked you to play a "commoner"... would you give them full stats?

I would degrade stats from somewhere if they wanted to play a commoner... or give them an XP penalty so they were a few levels behind... If they had the same stats, they're not really a commoner anymore, by virtue of being above and beyond common - a PC!

[CrusaderJoe]

If someone asked you to play a "commoner"... would you give them full stats?

I would degrade stats from somewhere if they wanted to play a commoner... or give them an XP penalty so they were a few levels behind... If they had the same stats, they're not really a commoner anymore, by virtue of being above and beyond common - a PC!

Basically you want to throw away all the core principals and ideas of 5e just to penalize a player for fluff?

That is messed up.

5e has evolved past the need for penalizing players for arbitrary reasons.

[LaserFace]

I think it's important to keep the feel of the kobold true with a few traits, but as far as stat bonuses go I think it's best to use the same kind of formula as the rest of the races use. The character is an unusual kobold to be adventuring and should be able to defy the limitations that beset the average sample of their kind anyway. It's not like Half-Orcs still get an Int penalty, or Halflings STR, I see no reason to force penalties elsewhere even if it would be typical among subjects. So, I don't agree with minus STR for any PC kobold.

I mean, you might find some way to balance huge stat penalties with other traits, or let people be masochists or something, but if somebody in my group decided they wanted to be a kobold, I'd give them the following:

- +2 DEX, +1 CON or CHA
- Darkvision 60ft
- Sunlight Sensitivity
- some fluff-based proficiency in a tool or whatever
- maybe some kind trait that gives them an easier time hiding or running from hostiles
- possibly another trait revolving around their habitat or ancestry, depending on the culture or however else I think might be interesting. Thinking along the power level of Stonecunning or a Cantrip.

It's not the only way to do it, but I think it's simple, fairly consistent with other races, and allows people play whatever concept they want without me having to micromanage a bunch of boring mechanics against other abilities. If the character ends up with STR 10 or higher, I'll let the player decide how they want to express their kobold being as strong as the average human. I don't feel the need to focus on this as a DM.

[LaserFace]

If someone asked you to play a "commoner"... would you give them full stats?

I would degrade stats from somewhere if they wanted to play a commoner... or give them an XP penalty so they were a few levels behind... If they had the same stats, they're not really a commoner anymore, by virtue of being above and beyond common - a PC!

This strikes me as a curious argument.

If someone asked me if they could play a Commoner, I would ask, why are they adventuring? And at that point, are they really "just" a Commoner? If they shouldn't be in an adventuring party, then they can't play a Commoner. If they're a Commoner who happened upon an arcane spellbook and is teaching himself wizardry and joins some adventurers, he'd get the same stats as any other PC. And he'd be a Wizard. His station may be a "commoner" but he's quite obviously competent enough to be worthy of a narrative. And at that point, why bother making it any different from other PCs?

[Myzz]

Basically you want to throw away all the core principals and ideas of 5e just to penalize a player for fluff?

That is messed up.

5e has evolved past the need for penalizing players for arbitrary reasons.

maybe I should have clarified...

If someone wanted to play a commoner, vice playing a PC with a Commoner Background, then I would most definitely give them penalties. The point of playing that type of character is being able to overcome those negative and still do amazing things. A bard with less than a +2 in his Cha is going to be a terrible bard. Heck 0 is an avg bard...

And if that is the CORE of thier character, its not really fluff... thats the entire principle of their character... The fluff at that point is stats.

[CrusaderJoe]

maybe I should have clarified...

If someone wanted to play a commoner, vice playing a PC with a Commoner Background, then I would most definitely give them penalties. The point of playing that type of character is being able to overcome those negative and still do amazing things. A bard with less than a +2 in his Cha is going to be a terrible bard. Heck 0 is an avg bard...

And if that is the CORE of thier character, its not really fluff... thats the entire principle of their character... The fluff at that point is stats.


The thing is with how the background system works, that Level 10 Urchin Fighter was once a commoner. Urchins and many other backgrounds start a PC off as a commoner before they become the class.

When a commoner or whomever becomes a PC they have already lost their penalties because they pushed through and became something rare and awesome.

You punishing a player for having a background as a commoner means you need to punish everyone at the table, well unless they have the noble background I guess.


Edit: PCs have learned to take the benefits of their background and help them become more awesome and not let it penalize them.

I don't know why anyone would want to play in a game where the DM throws out arbitrary penalties.

[Myzz]

The thing is with how the background system works, that Level 10 Urchin Fighter was once a commoner. Urchins and many other backgrounds start a PC off as a commoner before they become the class.

When a commoner or whomever becomes a PC they have already lost their penalties because they pushed through and became something rare and awesome.

You punishing a player for having a background as a commoner means you need to punish everyone at the table, well unless they have the noble background I guess.

I think you missed the distinction...

If they wanted to play a commoner... not a player with a commoner background...

I whole heartedly agree with the bold part.

If someone told me they wanted to be a kobold and follow along beside a player dragonborn and sing his praises... I would assume they want to play an actual kobold... not a PC dressed in kobold clothing. They would want the feel of being lower in stature and having equivalent stats does not do that. Part of taking that race is being able to overcome those negatives... And if your not giving those negatives...

I mean otherwise just give the guy Dragonborn stats and say he's shorter...

[Logosloki]

If someone asked you to play a "commoner"... would you give them full stats?

I would degrade stats from somewhere if they wanted to play a commoner... or give them an XP penalty so they were a few levels behind... If they had the same stats, they're not really a commoner anymore, by virtue of being above and beyond common - a PC!

In 3.5 you could play as a commoner though. One of the big charms of the 3.5 system was that NPCs and PCs were built the same way. http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Commoner that is the SRD for commoner. You gain feats at level 1, 3, then every third level and ASIs at level 4 then every four levels. You gain skill points every level at a rate of 2+int mod and 4(2+int mod) at level one. There is no xp penalty or attribute penalties for playing the class.

Whereas if I wanted to play/allow to play a commoner in 5th I have to build the class from scratch. I've been meaning to go and make all the NPC classes into Player Classes so that a person could play as an NPC class.

[DireSickFish]

If someone asked you to play a "commoner"... would you give them full stats?

I would degrade stats from somewhere if they wanted to play a commoner... or give them an XP penalty so they were a few levels behind... If they had the same stats, they're not really a commoner anymore, by virtue of being above and beyond common - a PC!

You are kind of making my point for me. I was saying human = kobold, not commoner = kobold. By your own logic the Kobold should not be penalized because he is not a normal MM kobold just like that Thug you fight is a human but has no bonus feat, or +1 to all stats for being human.

You are not playing the kobold that stays at homes int he mines toiling away. You are the one willing to risk your life on an adventure. The paladin needs his squire because you are good at things he is not and help him to become better. You may look up to him and let him make the decisions, but you're a dynamic duo.

The Barbarian who sits int he corner of the party and only social roll is intimidate and lets the rest of the party decide what he smashes is giving up control of decisions and is not penalized for it. Being a servent doesn't make you not an adventurer, you're -on- the adventure. Doing all the same stuff!

[OldTrees1]

So if I understand correctly the argument currently is:

One side:
I would not make "the player that wanted to play a kobold because it is weaker" play "beefed up kobold".

The other side:
I would not make "the player that wanted to play a kobold because it is scaly/draconic/..." play "weak kobold".

So where is the argument?

[DireSickFish]

So if I understand correctly the argument currently is:

One side:
I would not make "the player that wanted to play a kobold because it is weaker" play "beefed up kobold".

The other side:
I would not make "the player that wanted to play a kobold because it is scaly/draconic/..." play "weak kobold".

So where is the argument?

Well as the DM you are the one deciding what stats the player will have, so the players intent is not the deciding factor. It's the DM's job to enforce the rules he sees as fare. We all (mostly) seem to want to enforce verisimilitude and "fluff" but with a gulf on how we perceive Kobolds and arguments about design decisions in 5th edition.

I am hoping in the future they will publish other PC races. But it is fun to use the DMG tools to craft other races. Makes me want to run/play in a monster game where all the potential races are homebrew.

[CrusaderJoe]

You are kind of making my point for me. I was saying human = kobold, not commoner = kobold. By your own logic the Kobold should not be penalized because he is not a normal MM kobold just like that Thug you fight is a human but has no bonus feat, or +1 to all stats for being human.


This.

Also, people should look into the Barbarian from 4e and play a Kobold... Tons of fun.


So if I understand correctly the argument currently is:

One side:
I would not make "the player that wanted to play a kobold because it is weaker" play "beefed up kobold".

The other side:
I would not make "the player that wanted to play a kobold because it is scaly/draconic/..." play "weak kobold".

So where is the argument?

One side is "I want to strip away the core principals of 5e and penalize players based on primarily fluff"

The other side...

"Stripping 5e of its core principals and penalizing players is not the way to go".

[Xetheral]

I'd split the difference between character balance and adhering to racial attributes:

I'd give the Kobold character the stats (including attribute penalties) from the monster manual, but offer the player a chance for a corresponding bonus. It could be a plot bonus, or an artifact, or a special background, or even extra points for Point Buy to counteract the racial penalties (with an appropriate fluff explanation).