Truly Monstrous Adventurer Races?

[Shadow_in_the_Mist]

If you've been around long enough, you'd know that Monster Adventurers are actually a very old tradition in D&D. To the point that way back in Basic D&D, not only were "standard" evil humanoids like orcs, goblins, gnolls and kobolds playable, but so to were truly monstrous races like treants, centaurs, pegataurs, harpies and sphinxes.

5th edition prides itself on a certain level of flexibility - one of the reasons people like it so much is that it's not that hard to homebrew something and have it be fairly balanced.

So, I'm curious; do you think 5e is mechanically capable of handling truly monstrous PC races? Things like Medusas, Sphinxes, Nagas, etc?

I mean, obviously, you'd need to tone down the power level a lot depending on the creature in question, but that's fair enough; you shouldn't want a race to overwhelm every other race, and you're substituting racial features with class features that the MM version doesn't normally get.

I think it's quite possible, myself.

Though... I have to ask; seeing as how 5e has brought back the idea of negative racial traits - not ability score penalties, which are stupid, but things like Sunlight Sensitivity and Small - do you think it's appropriate that a particularly monstrous race may suffer similar negative racial traits? For example, given their distinctly non-bipedal body structure, I would readily see a Naga or Sphinx PC have restricted access to weaponry and physical gear, as well as needing to pay extra to get fitting armor.

[Unoriginal]

5e can handle it. If it can handle it in a satisfying way is a different issue, as monsters would probably need to be more complexe (which 5e doesn't like much) than - and hard to balance with - other species.

Also, yes, negative traits (and negative ability score modifiers, in some case) would probably be on the menu

[Mortis_Elrod]

https://media.wizards.com/2017/downloads/magic/plane-shift_amonkhet.pdf

nagas

[Sariel Vailo]

Being a real vampire.

[Rebonack]

If you're wanting to run a monster as an adventure, as a general rule of thumb, a monster's 'level' is about one and a half times whatever its challenge rating is. So a CR6 Medusa is approximately equivalent to a level 9 PC, just treat it as multiclassing. This isn't a hard and fast rule by any means, but it gives you a pretty solid ballpark.

This of course means that most big monsters would only be compatible with a fairly high level party.

Also: dragons are rated QUITE a bit lower on their CR than their actual power clocks in at.

[qube]

Considering D&D 3E could do it, I don't see why 5E couldn't do it as well

[JNAProductions]

Considering D&D 3E could do it, I don't see why 5E couldn't do it as well

Considering how flipping borked LA was... Yeah, not a vote of confidence. :P

I'd say you can do it, but treat the monster as a class for some levels.

[Naanomi]

You'd also have to carefully consider legendary and lair actions... they are intended to make a monster stand up to a party alone; they are very close to making you a one-man-party with them (as experienced by anyone using true-polymorph)

[Kane0]

If you're wanting to run a monster as an adventure, as a general rule of thumb, a monster's 'level' is about one and a half times whatever its challenge rating is. So a CR6 Medusa is approximately equivalent to a level 9 PC, just treat it as multiclassing. This isn't a hard and fast rule by any means, but it gives you a pretty solid ballpark.

This of course means that most big monsters would only be compatible with a fairly high level party.

Also: dragons are rated QUITE a bit lower on their CR than their actual power clocks in at.

Neat, might try this in a one shot if I get the chance.

[Shadow_in_the_Mist]

You'd also have to carefully consider legendary and lair actions... they are intended to make a monster stand up to a party alone; they are very close to making you a one-man-party with them (as experienced by anyone using true-polymorph)

Honestly? If I were to try my hands at a PC writeup of any monster, nixing all Legendary/Lair Actions would be step #1 to make the process.

Like I said, I think it's quite possible to make nonstandard races work as PC options, but you and the player's gotta accept that you won't be 100% mechanically identical to the Monster Manual version of the monster in question.

[Rebonack]

You'd also have to carefully consider legendary and lair actions... they are intended to make a monster stand up to a party alone; they are very close to making you a one-man-party with them (as experienced by anyone using true-polymorph)

It would probably be easier to just say 'nothing with legendary actions/resistance allowed'.

Those abilities absolutely are not balanced for PCs.

[Kane0]

Or just remove them.

[nanoboy]

How about making the monster both a race and a class? If you play a monster, then you gain levels as the monster until you reach a minimum level after which you can multiclass. In this way, a monster PC will seem somewhat like the monster itself in terms of mechanics. You could even get your lair actions at later levels when appropriate.

[90sMusic]

In D&D you can do whatever you want.

The problem is most DMs want to keep things as simple and typical and standard as possible and don't like things like monster adventurers. A lot of them have their own notions of what they think is "fair" and even if no player at the table has a problem with it, the DM will say it would be unfair to them unless they were all monsters and things like that.

What I have always done historically is sort of design my own class based on the creature. That way it has progression like everyone else, gets stronger over time, and won't start with all of it's abilities from the get-go. It's interesting because what I found in doing this is that monsters, by themselves, 9 times out of 10 are significantly weaker than what players could simply do. The succubus race/class combo I made that unlocks over time ended up being something of a rogue/warlock hybrid as far as class features go. Double proficiency in social skills (insight, deception, and persuasion), rogue can do the same thing and then some. Rogues also have more skills available.

Succubus has at-will charm which make some people balk at, but any caster could cast charm more often than you'd ever really have need to. For instance by level 5 you could cast Charm Person 9 times per day as a bard. If you're ever in a game where you need to use charm that often, I don't even know what to say, i've NEVER seen it happen. And the number of times you can cast per day only increases from there, in addition to all the other spells and utilities and attacks they get access to.

What you start to realize is these creatures actually need to be buffed in a lot of cases just to stay competitive with player classes. The trick is not front-loading all of their perks and powers at level 1, make them earn it over time through level progression at a point where it becomes more reasonable for them to have it. You end up with characters that tend to be more specialized in very specific areas but lack a lot of the diversity and utility that player classes have. For instance, compare a Succubus from the monster manual to a player Warlock. With Master of Myriad Forms invocation, you can alter self at-will to change into whatever humanoid you want within a couple of feet height difference, compared to succubus Shape Change which lets you become any medium or small humanoid, so a succubus might turn into a gnome or halfling more easily but they can't get the breath underwater aspect, but both are very comparable. Succubus has telepathy, well so does a Great Old One warlock, starting at level 1, only difference is it's half the range. Succubus can charm at-will, but as I said any caster with charm person can cast it so many times per day that it doesn't matter that it's an at-will power for a succubus. Also, succubus can only have one target charmed at a time while a player can charm as many people at once as they have spell slots, players can also cast it again on a successful save while the succubus can only try it once every 24 hours on any given target. Succubus has natural claw weapons, but they're 1d6, I mean any class can pickup a weapon that does more damage than that. Being disarmed isn't something that happens often, and is impossible to disarm casters with damage cantrips, so that isn't breaking anything. The draining kiss can't really be compared to anything players can do, but due to the fact it has to be used on a charmed person or a willing person, it might as well be any spell attack with a will save except if they succeed on the save (against the charm) they take zero damage and can't be attempted on them again for 24 hours. And even if you do manage to get it off on a target, they get another saving throw each time against that charm when they take damage from you. Also, that charm is against humanoids only, so as soon as you start fighting monsters which is easily the majority of enemies you face in most games, both the charm and kiss become null and void.

So the only ability left is Etherealness which is at-will shifting to and from the ethereal plane. I give it to them at a high level, same level casters can get it as a spell. At this stage in the game, it can already be cast by other people when they want to take advantage of it. A succubus might be able to escape a trapped gas room or bypass a puzzle door or something, but who cares, because if the rest of the party dies in that room or doesn't get past that puzzle door, the succubus isn't going to be able to do much by themselves for the rest of the dungeon. Spells still hurt things in the ethereal plane and theres plenty of monsters that can see creatures hiding there and the true seeing spell to reveal it as well, which (spoiler alert) a lot of magic users will have prepared when they are aware a succubus is traveling with the party that has been a thorn in their side.

I've made such race/class combos for tons of various creatures that I have either played myself or that i've made for my players in campaigns I DM. Some of my personal favorites being the succubus, unicorn, and sea siren. Never heard a complaint from anybody. There was one game I remember when a player ended up becoming a dragon and he was very concerned about it and felt that he was going to be too powerful for the rest of the party to feel useful, but when he saw how I set it up and made it work, he loved it, the other players loved it, life went on and everyone was happy. And at the end of the day, that has always been my goal when playing D&D: to just make sure everyone is enjoying themselves.

[Safety Sword]

It would probably be easier to just say 'nothing with legendary actions/resistance allowed'.

Those abilities absolutely are not balanced for PCs.



Or just remove them.

This would be my solution.

Plus, adventuring monsters don't get to stay in the lair, so that's probably moot.

[Regitnui]

Can this edition handle monstrous (nonhumanoid) adventurers? I don't see why it couldn't. But I would probably disagree that it could be handled the same way 3.5 did it with LA and monster classes. Perhaps starting the races at a higher level? Saying that a sphinx is the equivalent of a level 10 character and should not be played alongside normal player characters of lower level. Put playable monsters into level 'tiers', and they can only then gain however many PC levels takes them to 20.

I have let a player play an oni before, but that was just handing ver the MM entry and letting them play an oni the PCs had met earlier with a grudge against the BBEG, so helped the PCs get to that point. Worked fairly well for that one boss fight.

[Safety Sword]

Has anyone actually ever realised that the PCs are the monsters in any case?

I mean, orcs, sitting around doing orc things and suddenly there's poor dead orc babies and women and all of the men folk are struggling to protect them. All for living a natural life in a cave near those "civilized" areas.

It's a disgrace.

[Bob_McSurly]

Has anyone actually ever realised that the PCs are the monsters in any case?

I mean, orcs, sitting around doing orc things and suddenly there's poor dead orc babies and women and all of the men folk are struggling to protect them. All for living a natural life in a cave near those "civilized" areas.

It's a disgrace.

Only because the Orcs were raiding OUR wives and children first.

[Lord Raziere]

Only because the Orcs were raiding OUR wives and children first.

And then the human raid the orcs wife and children, who raid them who raid them back, who raid them back, who raid them back until both sides have the same story to justify continue hating each other. Does it really matter who did the crime first as long as it keeps being committed?

[Dankus Memakus]

And then the human raid the orcs wife and children, who raid them who raid them back, who raid them back, who raid them back until both sides have the same story to justify continue hating each other. Does it really matter who did the crime first as long as it keeps being committed?

I came into this thread for monster races and found a discussion on the morality of orc killing....was not disappointed

[Safety Sword]

Only because the Orcs were raiding OUR wives and children first.

Prove it. more characters

[Unoriginal]

IIRC, there are rules to play a Giant in Storm King's Thunder.

[Regitnui]

IIRC, there are rules to play a Giant in Storm King's Thunder.

Though giants are really just big humans with extra powers. They're still practically humanoids, compared to harpies, centaurs and sphinxes, which are decidedly inhuman.

[Unoriginal]

Though giants are really just big humans with extra powers. They're still practically humanoids, compared to harpies, centaurs and sphinxes, which are decidedly inhuman.

They might have an human-looking shape, but they have characteristics that are not often seen in humanoids, notably (as you mentioned) their size and their innate powers (in some cases), but also how some of their stats go above the humanoid maximum and how their HDs aren't the same as for Medium beings.

Of course it's not the end-all of the question, but I think if someone wanted to homebrew rules for inhuman beings, they should look at what the game has done for Giant PCs.

[qube]

Considering how flipping borked LA was... Yeah, not a vote of confidence. :P

I'd say you can do it, but treat the monster as a class for some levels.I was thinking of that. In fact, with 5E being much better geared towards multiclassing then 3/3.5 (ex. splashing in caster is a much better idea, since DC's are no longer spell level dependant) it would be able to deal with it better then previous editions.