I feel my DM tried to nerf a race pick. Wondering of I'm good feeling upset about it.

[DarkKnightJin]

So, I brought up the idea of a Kobold character to my DM, asking if it was okay of I picked that from Volo's as my +1 thing he has for the table.
I asked if he would consider waiving the -2 Str penalty, expecting a 'no'. That's okay, just thought I'd ask him.

What got to me was his houserule of the Sunlight Sensitivity being affected by *ALL* sources of bright light. Justifying that the 'Pack Tactics' would cancel it out.

I said that if he wanted to enforce that rule, that I wouldn't play a Kobold character.
He construed that as me 'walking away from negotiations', and the topic is now closed from discussion.

My question is, Plaugrounders.. Am I okay in feeling that the houserule would be far too harsh on a Kobold Paladin?

[jaappleton]

Well, let’s lay all the facts on the table.

Kobolds are a Monster race playable at DMs discretion.

Kobolds, lore wise, typically dwell in dark areas like caves. But thats not to say they are adverse to all forms of light. Fire is light. They cook food.

So according to your DM, they’re averse to the light created by fire....? That makes no sense.

It seems like your DM believes Pack Tactics to be too strong for a PC. I disagree with it being OP, as there’s literally dozens of ways to generate Advantage without it being very difficult at all.

Him “closing the topic for discussion” is simply adversarial, and a —— move.

[Damon_Tor]

So, I brought up the idea of a Kobold character to my DM, asking if it was okay of I picked that from Volo's as my +1 thing he has for the table.
I asked if he would consider waiving the -2 Str penalty, expecting a 'no'. That's okay, just thought I'd ask him.

What got to me was his houserule of the Sunlight Sensitivity being affected by *ALL* sources of bright light. Justifying that the 'Pack Tactics' would cancel it out.

I said that if he wanted to enforce that rule, that I wouldn't play a Kobold character.
He construed that as me 'walking away from negotiations', and the topic is now closed from discussion.

My question is, Plaugrounders.. Am I okay in feeling that the houserule would be far too harsh on a Kobold Paladin?

He was doing "yes, but". You asked to remove a penalty from a race. He said "Yes, but instead we'll make a different penalty more severe". You wanted a boost to your stats for free I guess?


Well, let’s lay all the facts on the table.

Kobolds are a Monster race playable at DMs discretion.

Kobolds, lore wise, typically dwell in dark areas like caves. But thats not to say they are adverse to all forms of light. Fire is light. They cook food.

So according to your DM, they’re averse to the light created by fire....? That makes no sense.

It seems like your DM believes Pack Tactics to be too strong for a PC. I disagree with it being OP, as there’s literally dozens of ways to generate Advantage without it being very difficult at all.

Him “closing the topic for discussion” is simply adversarial, and a —— move.

In the context, this was a "trade" being offered for lifting the str penalty. He wasn't just arbitrarily adding this penalty for nothing.

[Unoriginal]

Making creatures with Sunlight Sensitivity be affected by all form of bright light is a quite ridiculously huge penalty. Also, Pack Tactic is supposed to be a perk, not a "barely make the species viable" feature.

It was well within the DM's right to implement this nerf, but personally I would call it not reasonable.

[Unoriginal]

He was doing "yes, but". You asked to remove a penalty from a race. He said "Yes, but instead we'll make a different penalty more severe". You wanted a boost to your stats for free I guess?

He wasn't doing "yes, but", the DM said "no" to removing the STR penalty, which OP accepted, then the DM increased another penalty of the kobold.

[sophontteks]

Just don't play the kobold. There is no reason to be upset about this. Its a monster race and the DM doesn't sound very thrilled about you playing it.

[Unoriginal]

Just don't play the kobold. There is no reason to be upset about this. Its a monster race and the DM doesn't sound very thrilled about you playing it.

Not allowing a race is perfectly legitimate, increasing Sunlight Sensitivity looks more like a "I don't want to say 'no' so how do I make him drop the idea" tactic.

[MThurston]

It be different if he said no Dragonborn, unless that race wasn't in the world.

[Theron_the_slim]

One question you could ask the DM is, if all Sunlight Sensitivity is affected by this rule ... including other monsters.

Because on the one hand, that seems to be the only logical conclusion (outside of you are being a espicially buff breed of kobold with very sensitive eyes)
But if he would include this, he really would **** up a lot of his own monster options (foremost the Underdark and Shadowfell creatures)

Countering entire races with the light cantrip or a torch would nerf them quite a bit.

[sophontteks]

Not allowing a race is perfectly legitimate, increasing Sunlight Sensitivity looks more like a "I don't want to say 'no' so how do I make him drop the idea" tactic.
Doesn't matter. Its the DMs ruling on something the player can easily work around.
Or alternatively the player can choose to ruin the whole game over this before it begins by being upset about it.

[JakOfAllTirades]

I'd avoid playing any race with light sensitivity at this DM's table.

And I'd consider finding a new DM, because this one sounds really unreasonable.

[Schopy]

I said that if he wanted to enforce that rule, that I wouldn't play a Kobold character.
He construed that as me 'walking away from negotiations', and the topic is now closed from discussion.


Reading it like that it does look to me like an ultimatum. And those are often very bad for negotiations.

Did you tell him why you wanted to play a kobold paladin? Don't get me wrong, i like unusual race/class combination, but they would need a pretty good reason/backstory. Or did you want it only for the mechanics of pack tactics and crit-fish for smites? Why exactly are you upset about not getting to play that paladin?

You could have offered to try it out with that penalty, but be allowed to switch chars or renegotiate if it proves to be too hard.

I'm not fully convinced that you should feel upset about this with the information you provided.

[strangebloke]

Doesn't matter. Its the DMs ruling on something the player can easily work around.
Or alternatively the player can choose to ruin the whole game over this before it begins by being upset about it.

Yup.

Can you be upset? Sure. It's a bad ruling.

Do you want to be upset? Well, do you think it would accomplish anything?

Just roll a different character, forgive and forget. If he does this a lot, put up a fuss, but have some Grace. We're all human, and no DND game has ever been without a bad ruling or three.

At absolute most, I would say to him: "if you wanted to ban the race, just do it outright."

[Tanarii]

He was doing "yes, but". You asked to remove a penalty from a race. He said "Yes, but instead we'll make a different penalty more severe". You wanted a boost to your stats for free I guess?



In the context, this was a "trade" being offered for lifting the str penalty. He wasn't just arbitrarily adding this penalty for nothing.


He wasn't doing "yes, but", the DM said "no" to removing the STR penalty, which OP accepted, then the DM increased another penalty of the kobold.
I don't see that the OP stated there was an explicit "no" on the Str increase. It reads very much like it was a non-explicit "yes, but ..." to me. That there was a misunderstanding between the OP and the DM. Especially given the "walking away from negotiations" response.

Obviously the OP can clarify for us that it was actually "no and here's this house rule with nothing offered in return". But the OP doesn't necessarily read that way to me, as is.

[DarkKnightJin]

The Str penalty was not removed.

And it was an option, I already had a Human Paladin prepped as well.

I hadn't even thought about Pack Tactics and critfishing. I thought the character up as an Eldritch Knight, but since that's the class I'm playing at that table right now, but the character has reason to consider retiring.

[Tanarii]

The Str penalty was not removed.
Yeah, thats a whole different story. Makes me wonder what he though he was offering in the "negotiation". Allowing a non-PhB race maybe?

[Cealocanth]

The "sunlight sensitivity is affected by all light sources" rule is remarkably common, and is actually considered RAW by some DMs. You're right that it makes Kobold, Drow, and similar races basically unplayable if its run that way. That's not a problem with your GM or with you. That's a problem with the wording of the stat in the PhB. Nothing you can really do about that.

My advice? Just don't play a kobold. While your GM is being a little childish by saying you're ignoring the conversation when you say that a certain rules interpretation makes your character unplayable, your GM has no reason to break a rule that he seems to think is balanced.

If the reason you want to play a kobold is that you want to:

Play a draconic character -> Play a dragonborn.
Play a character that belongs to a race that is usually thought of as weak -> Play a goblin
Play a small character -> Play a halfling, gnome, or goblin
Play a character that gets a +2 to Dex -> Play a Goblin, Arakocra, Elf, Tiefling, Halfling, Kenku, or Tabaxi

[JNAProductions]

Yeah, I'd consider this a jerk move.

It's fine to say "No, I don't want players being Kobolds," but your DM pretty much said that in a very passive-aggressive fashion.

Now, that's hardly a deal-breaker. If the DM is otherwise good, runs a fun game, etc. etc. just play in the game with a non-Kobold. If, however, this is a pattern and the DM consistently is passive-aggressive and a jerk, then remember: No gaming is better than bad gaming.


It be different if he said no Dragonborn, unless that race wasn't in the world.

Why do you hate dragonborn so much?

[Unoriginal]

The "sunlight sensitivity is affected by all light sources" rule is remarkably common, and is actually considered RAW by some DMs. You're right that it makes Kobold, Drow, and similar races basically unplayable if its run that way. That's not a problem with your GM or with you. That's a problem with the wording of the stat in the PhB. Nothing you can really do about that.

From the Volo's, entry on the Kobold as a player race:


Sunlight Sensitivity. You have disadvantage on attack rolls and on 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.

There is no possible way to argue that "affected by all light sources" is an interpretation of what is written (aka RAW). A DM can houserule it, sure, but that's clearly not a problem of the wording.

[Cealocanth]

From the Volo's, entry on the Kobold as a player race:


There is no possible way to argue that "affected by all light sources" is an interpretation of what is written (aka RAW). A DM can houserule it, sure, but that's clearly not a problem of the wording.

I agree, but I have had no less than four DMs run the rule that sunlight sensitivity is affected by all light sources and claim that that is how the power works in the PHB. My point was that this rather dumb interpretation of the rule is fairly common, and OP's DM is not an exception to this trend.

[Pex]

So, I brought up the idea of a Kobold character to my DM, asking if it was okay of I picked that from Volo's as my +1 thing he has for the table.
I asked if he would consider waiving the -2 Str penalty, expecting a 'no'. That's okay, just thought I'd ask him.

Understandable as to why but probably best not to have asked. DX can be an attack stat so the only class that would have a hard time as a kobold is barbarian. Unless you really, really wanted to play a kobold barbarian this waiver isn't necessary.


What got to me was his houserule of the Sunlight Sensitivity being affected by *ALL* sources of bright light. Justifying that the 'Pack Tactics' would cancel it out.

Does it affect other races like Drow? Does it affect bad guy monsters the DM uses? As long as the answer is "yes" then disappointing but fair.


I said that if he wanted to enforce that rule, that I wouldn't play a Kobold character.

Reasonable. The character would no longer fit what you had in mind. Cynical me says the DM wanted to ban the race without actually banning it so he made you ban it yourself.


He construed that as me 'walking away from negotiations', and the topic is now closed from discussion.

Here's the proof. It's ok for a DM to say no to a player request. It's not ok for the DM to resent the player the audacity of asking unless the player was being unreasonable. Strike one for me wanting to play his game.

[stoutstien]

I think it's a little much to do that. Now if you want to make spells like daylight..... You know actual daylight. What class are you going for?

[elyktsorb]

I once played in a game where the DM did make it so that any effect where the brightness would drastically increase around the character with sunlight sensitivity. (IE being in darkness and a room lighting up suddenly) would cause the player with sunlight sensitivity to suffer disadvantage for a round. (Sort of like they got flash banged due to their sensitivity.)

But imposing the effect due to any bright light is kind of ridiculous. Though would the DM in question be suggesting that torch light is comparable to sunlight, because that's just wrong from a physics standpoint, in real life and in dnd. Where would any creature have light, comparable to direct sunlight, just actively on.

Because I've looked into plenty of fires in my life, and not once have they come close to direct sunlight. Hell, actual light-bulbs aren't close to direct sunlight either.

[Damon_Tor]

My own houserule is to replace any kind of "sunlight sensitivity" with "When you're dealt radiant damage, make a dex save with a DC equal to the damage dealt. On a fail, you're blinded until the end of your next turn." So being in the sun doesn't hurt you, but you still have a light-themed weakness that enemies could exploit.

[DarkKnightJin]

Understandable as to why but probably best not to have asked. DX can be an attack stat so the only class that would have a hard time as a kobold is barbarian. Unless you really, really wanted to play a kobold barbarian this waiver isn't necessary.



Does it affect other races like Drow? Does it affect bad guy monsters the DM uses? As long as the answer is "yes" then disappointing but fair.



Reasonable. The character would no longer fit what you had in mind. Cynical me says the DM wanted to ban the race without actually banning it so he made you ban it yourself.



Here's the proof. It's ok for a DM to say no to a player request. It's not ok for the DM to resent the player the audacity of asking unless the player was being unreasonable. Strike one for me wanting to play his game.

I wanted to play a Heavily Armored Kobold because the mental image is just too damn adorable. Eldritch Knight or Paladin was the initial idea, with both Sunlight Sensitivity and Pack Tactics not really being on my mind at all.

I asked if the "Bright light = sunlight" thing would also mean that a Vampire standing next to someone holding a torch or using the Light spell would then suffer the 20 radiant damage, or be unable to Regenerate while in the bright light. The answer I got to that question was "I'm using a different Vampire template than you."
And then he reiterated that he was 'out', and wasn't going to discuss the matter any more.

As for the people wondering. I made the character 'work' with the -2 Str penalty, I just figured I'd ask if the DM was with me on thinking the stat penalties for Kobold and Orc are kinda nonsense considering the rest of the racial stat stuff. I was fully prepared to work with the penalty. That wasn't a point of contention with me.

What I think the DM's reasoning was that I'd have 'constant' Advantage on my attack rolls because of people being in melee with my target. Sure. If we're in a cave, or fighting at night.
During the day, the Pack Tactics simply cancels that out.

I might float the 'balancing' idea of merging the 2 traits into a single one. Something along the lines of "You have Disadvantage on Wisdom (Perception) rolls that rely on sight if you or the object or person you are looking at are in direct sunlight. While in direct sunlight, you also suffer Disadvantage on your attack rolls, unless there is an ally within 5 feet of your target, and that ally isn't Incapacitated".

Fixes the 'Problem' of having 'easy' Advantage by making it not even a thing. Though, as said before, getting Advantage on attack rolls is relatively easy to do as is.

Anyway, I hope I've explained the issue adequately for those still wondering about some things.
I'll check in on the thread from time to time, and I'm happy to answer more questions if need be.

[DarkKnightJin]

It be different if he said no Dragonborn, unless that race wasn't in the world.

Dragonborn aren't allowed as a PC race option, though this was communicated before we started playing. Draconic as a language known was also not allowed.
These are both for plot reasons that we've yet to discover why, though he did say that we'd be able to become 'Dragonborn' during the campaign.
I'm suspecting something more along the line of Half-Dragons, because regular PHB Dragonborn would be.. not worth it.

[Pex]

"A different template than you".

Monsters and NPCs don't follow the same rules as PC and that's ok, but that reads to me as he wants to ban kobolds but for some reason won't so he'll passive aggressively take it out on you to make you suffer because they have an ability he absolutely hates but since he's the DM he can do whatever he wants for his monsters how dare you question me you're merely a player you don't count for anything.

Is he refusing you to change your race? Is he giving you an ultimatum of play a kobold or don't play? If so, choose don't play. It has nothing to do with the house rule and everything to do with his lack of respect.

[Unoriginal]

Dragonborn aren't allowed as a PC race option, though this was communicated before we started playing. Draconic as a language known was also not allowed.
These are both for plot reasons that we've yet to discover why, though he did say that we'd be able to become 'Dragonborn' during the campaign.
I'm suspecting something more along the line of Half-Dragons, because regular PHB Dragonborn would be.. not worth it.

...I think your DM is going to use Skyrim's plot.

Different template vampires, no access to draconic language, "becoming Dragonborn"...

Might just me being crazy, though.

[stoutstien]

Just refluff goblin or gnome?

[DarkKnightJin]

"A different template than you".

Monsters and NPCs don't follow the same rules as PC and that's ok, but that reads to me as he wants to ban kobolds but for some reason won't so he'll passive aggressively take it out on you to make you suffer because they have an ability he absolutely hates but since he's the DM he can do whatever he wants for his monsters how dare you question me you're merely a player you don't count for anything.

Is he refusing you to change your race? Is he giving you an ultimatum of play a kobold or don't play? If so, choose don't play. It has nothing to do with the house rule and everything to do with his lack of respect.

No, I've got a Human Eldritch Knight at that table right now, but after his second death, he's got reason to be thinking about maybe hanging up the cloak and retiring, settle for a simple life of being a blacksmith or weapons' designer for the manufacturing monopoly his father's running.

That's why I was looking at other character ideas to play. The Kobold thing is just something I thought of the other day and kinda want to play sometime. Just not with that particular DM running the game.


Also, the Vampire thing was me drawing the 'Sunlight sensitivity' thing to the 'logical' conclusion, since Vampires in the Monster Manual are 'hypersensitive' to sunlight.
The only 'answer' I got was that they're using a different template than I was. So.. I didn't get an answer at all.

I mean, if they want to eff over creatures with Sunlight Sensitivity, that's fine. Just be consistent and eff *everybody* that has it over just as hard.

[sophontteks]

I mean, if they want to eff over creatures with Sunlight Sensitivity, that's fine. Just be consistent and eff *everybody* that has it over just as hard.
Now thats something to be upset over. If this kobold senstitivity is unique to your Kobold, and not to other creatures with sunlight sensitivity, well, I'd be pretty upset. Inconsistent rulings are not fun for anyone.

[Snails]

Yes, the DM is wrong. Sometimes the DM is wrong. Lots of very good DMs are sometimes wrong. Do not take it personally. In this case, you can so very easily work around this little emotional issue of his by choosing a different PC. You should man up and not make a big deal about this -- you are being kind to someone who is being nice enough to DM for you. Be gracious about it, and move on to the fun gaming.

[Mr.Spastic]

Your DM sounds like an adversarial d***. The whole reason the kobold has pack tactics is because it has a -2 to strength and sunlight sensitivity. It already sucks during the daytime anyways so why make it suck all of the time? I'm on the player side on this. Kobolds are fun because their racial traits are built to fix each other. Pack tactics is given to them to make sunlight sensitivity not suck. If you make sunlight sensitivity worse you negate the pack tactics, which is arguably the only redeemable factor of the kobold.

[Teaguethebean]

Dragonborn aren't allowed as a PC race option, though this was communicated before we started playing. Draconic as a language known was also not allowed.
These are both for plot reasons that we've yet to discover why, though he did say that we'd be able to become 'Dragonborn' during the campaign.
I'm suspecting something more along the line of Half-Dragons, because regular PHB Dragonborn would be.. not worth it.

I bet he is going with a dragonborn of Bahamut from 3.5 with the transformation

[Gastronomie]

I'd avoid playing any race with light sensitivity at this DM's table.

And I'd consider finding a new DM, because this one sounds really unreasonable.I second this. If you are feeling upset about it, simply don't play at that table, and go on to somewhere else where the DM and you can get along better.

This is not about whether the DM is good or bad; this is about whether the player can go along well with the DM, which is just as important. I doubt you can have fun with a DM who you are upset about.

[strangebloke]

I'd second the guys saying that this sounds like a mess-up on the DM's part.

I do not second the idea that you should ditch the game, or even get very upset. Ultimately, only you can decide how annoyed youa re at this, but at the end of the day, this won't really be a big deal if you can enjoy playing something other than a kobold. If this is the only thing he messes up, he's one of the best DMs in history.

[Gastronomie]

I'd second the guys saying that this sounds like a mess-up on the DM's part.

I do not second the idea that you should ditch the game, or even get very upset. Ultimately, only you can decide how annoyed youa re at this, but at the end of the day, this won't really be a big deal if you can enjoy playing something other than a kobold. If this is the only thing he messes up, he's one of the best DMs in history.I assumed from the way the TC said
I said that if he wanted to enforce that rule, that I wouldn't play a Kobold character. He construed that as me 'walking away from negotiations', and the topic is now closed from discussion ...That the DM is not allowing the TC to build a non-Kobold character.

If that's just a misinterpretation on my part, that's that.

[Pex]

No, I've got a Human Eldritch Knight at that table right now, but after his second death, he's got reason to be thinking about maybe hanging up the cloak and retiring, settle for a simple life of being a blacksmith or weapons' designer for the manufacturing monopoly his father's running.

That's why I was looking at other character ideas to play. The Kobold thing is just something I thought of the other day and kinda want to play sometime. Just not with that particular DM running the game.


Also, the Vampire thing was me drawing the 'Sunlight sensitivity' thing to the 'logical' conclusion, since Vampires in the Monster Manual are 'hypersensitive' to sunlight.
The only 'answer' I got was that they're using a different template than I was. So.. I didn't get an answer at all.

I mean, if they want to eff over creatures with Sunlight Sensitivity, that's fine. Just be consistent and eff *everybody* that has it over just as hard.

Ok then. Put it off for some other game. You have to do that sometimes and hope you can play the character you want in another game. Sometimes you can, sometimes you never will.

[strangebloke]

I assumed from the way the TC said ...That the DM is not allowing the TC to build a non-Kobold character.

If that's just a misinterpretation on my part, that's that.

No.

The player wanted to play a kobold. Asked for a buff.
DM gave a nerf.
Player said "guess I won't play a kobold then."
DM said, "cool, topic is closed then."
Player has leftover annoyance on the topic, unsure if he wants to re-open the topic.

[DarkKnightJin]

Ok then. Put it off for some other game. You have to do that sometimes and hope you can play the character you want in another game. Sometimes you can, sometimes you never will.


No.

The player wanted to play a kobold. Asked for a buff.
DM gave a nerf.
Player said "guess I won't play a kobold then."
DM said, "cool, topic is closed then."
Player has leftover annoyance on the topic, unsure if he wants to re-open the topic.

Strangebloke has got it correctly.
I don't feel like I asked for a buff, as much as I asked if I could have the RAW 'nerf' removed. DM said they 'figured out' why Kobolds have that when another player had a Kobold during a one-shot. (I don't think they had sensitivity to ALL light, but they were a Necromancer Wizard, and it has been some time since then, so I can't be sure.)
He wouldn't negate the -2 Str. I had peace with that, said I'd already built the character with the penalty in mind.

THEN the whole Sunlight Sensitivity thing happened, and I guess things got a bit heated.
I just have this knee-jerk reaction of getting defensive when DMs have the urge to 'pre-balance' things without even trying to see how they might work out at the table.
Like they don't trust WotC on this one thing all of a sudden.

As you might be able to tell, I can be quite passionate about D&D, so.. I might've overreacted. Had I been thinking clearly, like I had a chance to do afterwards.. I might've suggested we just get rid of BOTH features. Because getting rid of Pack Tactics and leaving the Sensitivity would make it basically unplayable (Especially for a martial character), and removing the Sensitivity but leaving Pack Tactics would make it a bit too strong. I'm not ignorant of that.

And considering the backstory I'd thought up for this guy (That the DM never read, just my tl;dr version because they were unable to download anything at the time), it would've made sense not to have either trait, too.

For your guys' (and gals's) benefit: I give you - Rurik the Kobold's backstory.

It's simple, really. You get picked up as an egg by a bunch of Dwarves that are lookin' for some big omelettes, and you hatch before they can turn you into one.
Latching onto the nearest implement you see, a meat tenderizer, they take a liking to the little 'scaly Dwarf', and decide to raise ya up like one of their own.

Sure, I got some weird looks growing up, but can you honestly say your childhood was devoid of strange looks your way?
I mastered working the forge, and smithed my own set of armor before I set out on the path of an Adventurer,
to broaden my horizons. And maybe find other Dwarven settlements to learn more about my craft.

Short, simple, and gets to the point of why he is like he is. With plenty of room to work with the DM on NPCs he might encounter, or other PCs they might join up with along the way to fulfilling their goal.

[terodil]

It's simple, really. You get picked up as an egg by a bunch of Dwarves that are lookin' for some big omelettes, and you hatch before they can turn you into one.
Latching onto the nearest implement you see, a meat tenderizer, they take a liking to the little 'scaly Dwarf', and decide to raise ya up like one of their own.

Sure, I got some weird looks growing up, but can you honestly say your childhood was devoid of strange looks your way?
I mastered working the forge, and smithed my own set of armor before I set out on the path of an Adventurer,
to broaden my horizons. And maybe find other Dwarven settlements to learn more about my craft.

Sorry but... that's... adorable.

Would totally allow any and all buffs you can think up, for who can resist those big hatchling kobold eyes? You make all saving throws with advantage.

[MThurston]

Why do you hate dragonborn so much?

I have had the misfortune of dealing with many Dragon lovers.

What is your character background?

Oh he is half Dragon half elf.

What is your character background?

He is half Dragon half human.

What is your character background?

He is a Dragon caught in his human form. He is trying to break the curse.

Blah, blah, blah......

Lame and old. Now they added Dragonborn and people are still not happy. They should fly! Their breath weapon sucks. It should be more inline with real dragons.

Tired of the bs with dragons and anything do with them.

[Unoriginal]

Tired of the bs with dragons and anything do with them.

Have you considered that maybe a game called Dungeons and Dragons might pose a problem for you?

[Boci]

Have you considered that maybe a game called Dungeons and Dragons might pose a problem for you?

Funny, but I've played in plenty of games where dragons never actually appeared, plus its not a problem when the DM has access to dragons, but players. I personally don't mind them too much, but I have noticed what MThurston is talking. Not as severly, but if I had to, it would dragonborn I would nominate for character race to likely have the least interesting backstory.

[mephnick]

At some point this DM will realize that saying "No" is just as important as saying "Yes, but" (or whatever flavor of the month phrase DnD circles is jerking) and next time just tell you you can't play the race instead of waffling about it in a passive aggressive "negotiation".

Just play something else and see how he runs the game before you get all angsty about it.

[DarkKnightJin]

Sorry but... that's... adorable.

Would totally allow any and all buffs you can think up, for who can resist those big hatchling kobold eyes? You make all saving throws with advantage.

Well, another option I literally thought of like, 5 minutes ago, was the Kobold Age, Size, and speed.. But the racial traits from Dwarf. At least the ones that'd make cultural sense for a Dwarf to have.
The Resistance to Poison is from their love of booze. Stonecunning is from learning how to work stone. Stuff like that.
Basically fluff the Dwarf racial stuff as being an adopted Kobold raised by them.

As for the racial stat stuff, I'd be fine with the Kobold or the Dwarven ones, whichever the DM deems to be 'balanced' for the character/campaign.
I can make my Heavy Armor Eldritch Knight work with a -2 Str if I need to. Just less room for a feat. Fighters get 2 extra ASI anyway, I can work with it.

[Unoriginal]

Well, another option I literally thought of like, 5 minutes ago, was the Kobold Age, Size, and speed.. But the racial traits from Dwarf. At least the ones that'd make cultural sense for a Dwarf to have.
The Resistance to Poison is from their love of booze. Stonecunning is from learning how to work stone. Stuff like that.
Basically fluff the Dwarf racial stuff as being an adopted Kobold raised by them.

As for the racial stat stuff, I'd be fine with the Kobold or the Dwarven ones, whichever the DM deems to be 'balanced' for the character/campaign.
I can make my Heavy Armor Eldritch Knight work with a -2 Str if I need to. Just less room for a feat. Fighters get 2 extra ASI anyway, I can work with it.

According to 5e writers the +2 to CON the Dwarves get is from the large amount of time they spend lost in their thoughts, working.

[DarkKnightJin]

According to 5e writers the +2 to CON the Dwarves get is from the large amount of time they spend lost in their thoughts, working.

And here I thought it was from their substantial love of ale.
Today I learned!

Edit: The image that made me want to make an Armored Kobold (https://i.imgur.com/YvLFb1l.jpg) in the first place.

[MThurston]

Have you considered that maybe a game called Dungeons and Dragons might pose a problem for you?

People don't fight Dragons very often and there are a good amount of roleplaying games without Dragon in the name.

[Unoriginal]

People don't fight Dragons very often

Debatable. Dragons are relatively common bosses. Of course you fight them less often than mooks, but still.


and there are a good amount of roleplaying games without Dragon in the name.

Which is why I'm saying maybe those roleplaying games would be better for you, if you dislike everything that has links with dragons that much.

[CantigThimble]

Which is why I'm saying maybe those roleplaying games would be better for you, if you dislike everything that has links with dragons that much.

I'm kinda with him that dragon-like things are overplayed. I love dragons, but I love them being rare, ancient and incredibly powerful. Making dragon-mooks defeats the point. I'm fine with a couple half-dragons or dragon-sorcerers around but those should be only slightly less rare than dragons themselves, entire armies of dragonborn or half-dragons is not at all to my liking.

[clash]

I mean going by raw op essentially asked for a free asi at no cost. Any same dm threat assumed raw was balanced would apply a nerf as well. I don't agree with the one he used but having never seen kobolds in play myself I would apply a nerf equivalent of an asi

[Unoriginal]

I mean going by raw op essentially asked for a free asi at no cost. Any same dm threat assumed raw was balanced would apply a nerf as well. I don't agree with the one he used but having never seen kobolds in play myself I would apply a nerf equivalent of an asi

The DM said no to the free AsI and then added the nerf. It wasn't an either/or deal.

[stoutstien]

I'm kinda with him that dragon-like things are overplayed. I love dragons, but I love them being rare, ancient and incredibly powerful. Making dragon-mooks defeats the point. I'm fine with a couple half-dragons or dragon-sorcerers around but those should be only slightly less rare than dragons themselves, entire armies of dragonborn or half-dragons is not at all to my liking.

In my worlds kolbolds are more akin to Gremlins. They reproduce quickly. They mold to fit the environment with thick hair, web feet, and so on. They aren't inherntly evil just destructive due to rampid population spikes.(babies from back boils)

[Boci]

I mean going by raw op essentially asked for a free asi at no cost. Any same dm threat assumed raw was balanced would apply a nerf as well. I don't agree with the one he used but having never seen kobolds in play myself I would apply a nerf equivalent of an asi

Its not really a free ASI, since it just negating a penalty. The kobold is still going to be worse at strength stuff than a half-orc, mountain dwarf or dragonborn, and no better than and elf or hafling.

[sophontteks]

Its not really a free ASI, since it just negating a penalty. The kobold is still going to be worse at strength stuff than a half-orc, mountain dwarf or dragonborn, and no better than and elf or hafling.
He asked for +2 strength. That's a free ASI no matter how you cut it.

[Ganymede]

This literally hurts you no more than your DM giving a blanket No to kobold PCs, which doesn't hurt you at all.

Make a different character and move on with your day.

[stoutstien]

People don't fight Dragons very often and there are a good amount of roleplaying games without Dragon in the name.

Have you had a ridiculous amount of character s eaten by dragons or something? Your hatred of dragon kin/born/half dragon is borderline fanatical.
I'm at a lot of players come over from the Elder Scrolls series more specifically Skyrim. most of these players are more scared of yeti than dragons any day 🙄.

[Pex]

This literally hurts you no more than your DM giving a blanket No to kobold PCs, which doesn't hurt you at all.

Make a different character and move on with your day.

Not quite. There is a difference between a DM banning something and letting you play something but giving in game penalties as house rules you wish you weren't playing it. The difference is a matter of respect.

[Ganymede]

Not quite. There is a difference between a DM banning something and letting you play something but giving in game penalties as house rules you wish you weren't playing it. The difference is a matter of respect.

The DM slighted the OP's honor, what? He is more than free to challenge the DM to a duel over it, but he's just making a mountain out of a mole hill.

[Dalebert]

Does it affect other races like Drow? Does it affect bad guy monsters the DM uses? As long as the answer is "yes" then disappointing but fair.

Excellent. Don't let him forget this ruling. Pass on the kobold but then bring this up when you're fighting monsters with sunlight sensitivity and let him see how awful it is that an enemy can just strike up a torch and impose disadvantage on all of them at any time.

[Ganymede]

Excellent. Don't let him forget this ruling. Pass on the kobold but then bring this up when you're fighting monsters with sunlight sensitivity and let him see how awful it is that an enemy can just strike up a torch and impose disadvantage on all of them at any time.

OP, please do not passively aggressively torment your DM.

[JakOfAllTirades]

The DM slighted the OP's honor, what? He is more than free to challenge the DM to a duel over it, but he's just making a mountain out of a mole hill.

Not his honor, his intelligence. Being intellectually dishonest is condescending; it implies the person you're disrespecting is too dim to notice, and it's never a good idea to let this sort of behavior slide.

[Aetis]

I'd like to hear the argument from the DM before I make any judgment, tbh.

[Ganymede]

Not his honor, his intelligence. Being intellectually dishonest is condescending; it implies the person you're disrespecting is too dim to notice, and it's never a good idea to let this sort of behavior slide.

Yup, rephrase it however you want, the OP is still free to make another character. He is also free to go tilt at windmills and get into a spat with his DM, but that gets him nothing.

[CantigThimble]

Yup, rephrase it however you want, the OP is still free to make another character. He is also free to go tilt at windmills and get into a spat with his DM, but that gets him nothing.

I mostly agree with this. Most people are going to be immovably unreasonable about some fraction of things. If that fraction is small enough then just avoid those things. Unless it's actually worth putting the friendship on the line for then it's better to just put aside your differences and focus on your common ground.

I have a lot of friends who have weird opinions about what in 5e is too strong or too weak and how to fix it. If a discussion of my disagreement gets me nowhere I just roll with the punches and let the DM do what he thinks is best, whether or not I agree.

Other positions I'm in favor of:
We haven't heard the DM's side of this so lets not jump to conclusions, esecially about his attitude, his tone or what is implied by what he's said. Those are difficult things to judge in person, let alone on the internet through a second-hand account.

Passive aggression is only a good idea if its done ironically and in good humor with your friends. Actual points of contention should either be set aside or spoken about directly. Ask him if he's going to rule enmies with sunlight sensitivity the same way, don't try to 'gotcha' him, that's just going to make things worse.

[Genoin]

Yup, rephrase it however you want, the OP is still free to make another character. He is also free to go tilt at windmills and get into a spat with his DM, but that gets him nothing.

While he is being an ass about it, he isn't wrong. Arguing with a ****ty DM just makes them be a ****tier DM. Just make sure you never let him forget that ruling regarding sunlight sensitivity.

[Boci]

He asked for +2 strength. That's a free ASI no matter how you cut it.

No, they asked for a penalty to be negated. There is a difference.

[clash]

No, they asked for a penalty to be negated. There is a difference.
A penalty that requires a +2 strength to counteract. That is equivalent to not omitting the penalty and giving the race +2 strength which is cancelled by the preexisting -2 strength. So logically speaking there is no difference.

[Boci]

A penalty that requires a +2 strength to counteract. That is equivalent to not omitting the penalty and giving the race +2 strength which is cancelled by the preexisting -2 strength.

Yes, if kobolds race absolutly has to have the -2 to strength to be balanced, then maybe you'd have a point. But it doesn't, so you don't. Giving +2 strength to any one race would be bad. It bould absolutly break the strength races like mountain dwarf or half-orc if they gave +4 strength, and even other races like elf would be problomatic if they got +2 strength, +2 dexterity and +1 to a mental state. The kobold is the one exception here, because its not made unbalanced by +2 strength, because the racial penalty to strength is not a neccissary balancing factor.

[sophontteks]

Yes, if kobolds race absolutly has to have the -2 to strength to be balanced, then maybe you'd have a point. But it doesn't, so you don't. Giving +2 strength to any one race would be bad. It bould absolutly break the strength races like mountain dwarf or half-orc if they gave +4 strength, and even other races like elf would be problomatic if they got +2 strength, +2 dexterity and +1 to a mental state. The kobold is the one exception here, because its not made unbalanced by +2 strength, because the racial penalty to strength is not a neccissary balancing factor.
Is this objective or your opinion?
I think pack tactics is an incredibly strong ability on a melee class, and that +2 strength opens up strength-based class options. Its a substantial buff.

[Dalebert]

OP, please do not passively aggressively torment your DM.

I don't see it as passive-aggressive. It's just about being consistent. I would openly challenge the DM if he wasn't consistent--if he decided this nerf was only for PCs and not for NPCs.

[Pex]

Is this objective or your opinion?
I think pack tactics is an incredibly strong ability on a melee class, and that +2 strength opens up strength-based class options. Its a substantial buff.

Whereas except for barbarian a kobold could be any warrior class using DX as his attack stat and be awesome with it. Using ST instead of DX wouldn't change anything except make a kobold barbarian be in the realm of feasibility. I'm not seeing how a kobold barbarian would ruin the game. Most other races do not get penalties to an ability score. It's not unreasonable to think no race should.

It's all fine and dandy for a DM to decline the request. It's not about not allowing it. It's about how the DM does it.

[sophontteks]

Whereas except for barbarian a kobold could be any warrior class using DX as his attack stat and be awesome with it. Using ST instead of DX wouldn't change anything except make a kobold barbarian be in the realm of feasibility. I'm not seeing how a kobold barbarian would ruin the game. Most other races do not get penalties to an ability score. It's not unreasonable to think no race should.

It's all fine and dandy for a DM to decline the request. It's not about not allowing it. It's about how the DM does it.
He could be any DEX warrior. Strength builds have their merits over dex builds. Athletics, special attacks, better melee weapons. This buff allows kobolds to use these builds where they otherwise couldn't.

[JNAProductions]

He could be any DEX warrior. Strength builds have their merits over dex builds. Athletics, special attacks, better melee weapons. This buff allows kobolds to use these builds where they otherwise couldn't.

But why shouldn't they?

[JakOfAllTirades]

While he is being an ass about it, he isn't wrong. Arguing with a ****ty DM just makes them be a ****tier DM. Just make sure you never let him forget that ruling regarding sunlight sensitivity.

Or just take it as a sign that it's time to walk away from the table. I don't mean ragequitting, just walk away and find a DM who's not a jerk.

[Mordaedil]

While he is being an ass about it, he isn't wrong. Arguing with a ****ty DM just makes them be a ****tier DM. Just make sure you never let him forget that ruling regarding sunlight sensitivity.

Man, if you are just going to hold grudges, I suggest you just don't play at all. This is stupid, just ask the DM if he'd rather you play something else and play something else. There's no need to be passive-aggressive about this, you are all trying to play a game to have fun and if he'd rather not have kobolds at the table, that's his call as the DM.

[Tanarii]

He could be any DEX warrior. Strength builds have their merits over dex builds. Athletics, special attacks, better melee weapons. This buff allows kobolds to use these builds where they otherwise couldn't.
For example, Str warrior kobolds can use Pack Tactics and GWM's -5/+10 together. Which, as Barbarians and Reckless attack already demonstrate, is an outright broken combo.

[DarkKnightJin]

For example, Str warrior kobolds can use Pack Tactics and GWM's -5/+10 together. Which, as Barbarians and Reckless attack already demonstrate, is an outright broken combo.

You do realize that even with Pack Tactics in effect, they'd just be making a straight attack roll at -5 because Kobolds are a Small race, and therefore make attack rolls with Heavy weapons (Which the -5/+10 component of GWM *requires*) at Disadvantage, yes?

Besides, I've never been one to take Heavy weapons unless they made sense for the character. And a Kobold with a Greataxe just doesn't make sense to me, either.

[Pex]

For example, Str warrior kobolds can use Pack Tactics and GWM's -5/+10 together. Which, as Barbarians and Reckless attack already demonstrate, is an outright broken combo.

Being broken is opinion not fact, but even if it was fact that says more about the feat than kobolds not having a penalty to strength.

[Daghoulish]

For example, Str warrior kobolds can use Pack Tactics and GWM's -5/+10 together. Which, as Barbarians and Reckless attack already demonstrate, is an outright broken combo.

Oh no, a kobold can't have pack tactics and GWM, that -5/+10 is far too strong with pack tactics! It's not like the +2 to dex pushes them towards ranged options and having SS with a light crossbow is so much worse than being forced into melee and using GWM. It's not like SS gives you range and still allows you to use pack tactics.

But no, your right. GWM with pack tactics is totally broken.

[lperkins2]

So, I'll wade in on the 'other' side here. This gets into an area that D&D (and most other RPGs for that matter) handle terribly, so some fudging is necessary. Torches don't actually cast light very well: no reflector; low colour temperature; inconsistent flame. But no one wants to treat cave exploring as the royal pain it truly is, so we pretend torches cast useful light a long way from the holder.

I run 'sunlight sensitivity' as 'bright light sensitivity', and I think it makes perfect sense to do so. But I don't count torches or campfires as bright light. Or I suppose in a sense I split light into 4 levels (black, dark, dim, bright) rather than 3 (dark, dim, bright). Black and dark roughly correspond to 5e's dark and dim (or name it dark, dim, bright, very bright, the idea is the same). A torch, a campfire, or even a whole bunch of torches won't provide bright light, except immediately around them. Even indirect sunlight doesn't (cloud cover, or just a tree canopy). Gas lights and a wide variety of magic spells, however, do.

If the illumination is from above (as with most fancy interior lighting, and the sun), races with sunlight sensitivity can mitigate it by simply wearing a hat (or an oversized hood), as this takes their eyes out of direct light (it also often makes them stand out, but then again so does pale or scaly skin).

This does make light spells relatively effective against the Drow, but at a cost. First, the Drow will often just sit back with bows until the casters are dead. Second, bright flashes of light in the underdark are visible for miles (a burning cigar can be seen in the dark from miles away), which likely will attract much more unwanted attention. Kobolds tend to counter it will small twisty tunnels, where you can't engage them properly, so your bright light can't target all of them well enough to save you.

[KorvinStarmast]

At some point this DM will realize that saying "No" is just as important as saying "Yes, but" (or whatever flavor of the month phrase DnD circles is jerking) and next time just tell you you can't play the race instead of waffling about it in a passive aggressive "negotiation". Just play something else and see how he runs the game before you get all angsty about it. Good advice.
There is a difference between a DM banning something and letting you play something but giving in game penalties as house rules you wish you weren't playing it. Yeah; the plain ban simplifies this and no feelings need to be hurt.

Sample conversation:

"P: OK, I am going to play a firbolg druid."

"D: I am sorry, that's not going to work. I don't have any firbolg's in this world as playable races. Pick something else."

"P: But I want to!"


"D: When you are done holding your breath, I'll compliment the nice shade of blue that you turned, and offer you two choices:

play at another table
or
play one of the playable races in this game world. I've got some loverly dragonborn over here who'd love for a player to bring them to life ... I even allow {suppresses a gag} gnomes.

Here, have a pint while you think it over. "

(I find that the pint is an important part of such a conversation ...)

[Tvtyrant]

Are you looking to play a Kobold, or the stats of a Kobold? Because you could easily play a Halfling or Gnomes stats and just be a Kobold in game.

[Ihazturtlez]

You do realize that even with Pack Tactics in effect, they'd just be making a straight attack roll at -5 because Kobolds are a Small race, and therefore make attack rolls with Heavy weapons (Which the -5/+10 component of GWM *requires*) at Disadvantage, yes?

Besides, I've never been one to take Heavy weapons unless they made sense for the character. And a Kobold with a Greataxe just doesn't make sense to me, either.

Some tables do allow the smaller races with a greater weapon and just refluff the size. (Coming from a halfling Barbarian with a Greataxe with no disadvantage)

I'd allow it as a DM if your story and class match up.

[Boci]

Is this objective or your opinion?
I think pack tactics is an incredibly strong ability on a melee class, and that +2 strength opens up strength-based class options. Its a substantial buff.

Its objective, these are number, no opinion required. As mentioned by others, GWM is the greatest asset a strength based fighter has, and kobolds cannot use it. A kobold will get more out of going togue or just dex fighter with their advantage than they will from strength.


If the illumination is from above (as with most fancy interior lighting, and the sun), races with sunlight sensitivity can mitigate it by simply wearing a hat (or an oversized hood), as this takes their eyes out of direct light (it also often makes them stand out, but then again so does pale or scaly skin).

Sunlight senitivity speciies you or the target is in sunlight, so if the illumination is coming from above, a hood is unliekly to help you.


This does make light spells relatively effective against the Drow, but at a cost. First, the Drow will often just sit back with bows until the casters are dead. Second, bright flashes of light in the underdark are visible for miles (a burning cigar can be seen in the dark from miles away), which likely will attract much more unwanted attention.

Where in the Underdark can you see for miles unobstructed? Sure there will be some massive caverns, but they're going to be the exception right? Generally no one will be able to see a flaring light from more than 60ft away because the rocks and walls will obscure it.

[sophontteks]

Its objective, these are number, no opinion required. As mentioned by others, GWM is the greatest asset a strength based fighter has, and kobolds cannot use it. A kobold will get more out of going togue or just dex fighter with their advantage than they will from strength.
No, is it objective that Kobolds are underpowered without applying this buff?
Grappling, pushing, and shoving is why you go strength IMO.

[Boci]

No, is it objective that Kobolds are underpowered without applying this buff?
Grappling, pushing, and shoving is why you go strength IMO.

And? The kobold will be worse at that than a half-orc, hill dwarf or dragonborn. Its not underpowered ith the penalty, because you just make a build that ignores strength. Negating the penalty presents the kobold with another option buildwise that is now just slightly suboptimal, rather than near impossible.

[lperkins2]

Sunlight senitivity speciies you or the target is in sunlight, so if the illumination is coming from above, a hood is unliekly to help you.

Oh, yeah, I should have specified that I also discount the target illumination part. Also, depending on the campaign I'm running, the Drow have sunglasses (Eberron-like worlds).



Where in the Underdark can you see for miles unobstructed? Sure there will be some massive caverns, but they're going to be the exception right? Generally no one will be able to see a flaring light from more than 60ft away because the rocks and walls will obscure it.

This will also depend a bit on setting (I do like the Avernum-like caverns). Even in winding tunnels, depending on the material of the walls, high colour temperature light will often make it around several corners (especially with the lack of light pollution otherwise). Then you consider that the light will bounce an extra couple times after it drops into the infrared range, and that much of the local flora is likely to phosphoresce in response.

Sure, there's lots of times where the light doesn't travel that far, in absolute terms, but around the next corner or two is very often enough to bring enemy reinforcements.

[Boci]

Oh, yeah, I should have specified that I also discount the target illumination part. Also, depending on the campaign I'm running, the Drow have sunglasses (Eberron-like worlds).

I mean yes, if the DM ignores part of a racial weakness and homebrews a mundane items to overcome it, then yes that racial weakness becomes much less of an issue. With those editions, making it bright light sensitivity is more reasonable, especially if torches are also no longer considered bright light, but in this case that was not mentioned by the OPs DM.


This will also depend a bit on setting (I do like the Avernum-like caverns). Even in winding tunnels, depending on the material of the walls, high colour temperature light will often make it around several corners (especially with the lack of light pollution otherwise). Then you consider that the light will bounce an extra couple times after it drops into the infrared range, and that much of the local flora is likely to phosphoresce in response.

Sure, there's lots of times where the light doesn't travel that far, in absolute terms, but around the next corner or two is very often enough to bring enemy reinforcements.

Yeah, but if the reinforcements are around the next corner or two, wouldn't they already be alerted by the sounds of fighting without the flares of light?

[lperkins2]

I mean yes, if the DM ignores part of a racial weakness and homebrews a mundane items to overcome it, then yes that racial weakness becomes much less of an issue. With those editions, making it bright light sensitivity is more reasonable, especially if torches are also no longer considered bright light, but in this case that was not mentioned by the OPs DM.

Well, it's either that, or have whole units of Drow archers lay down, engage from super long range, or do other silly things.

Assuming the OP adequately represented what happened, the troubling part is the DM saying he was 'walking away from negotiations'. I suspect there was some sort of miscommunication involved, on whose part is hard to say. I don't think changing the sunlight sensitivity is itself a huge issue, assuming the DM applies it in a consistent way and accounts for the implications for its application.




Yeah, but if the reinforcements are around the next corner or two, wouldn't they already be alerted by the sounds of fighting without the flares of light?

Sometimes, yes. Not so often if the party is trying to be stealthy. Also, sound can carry unpredictably underground. Depending on the area, sounds of fighting might not be unusual, and might not indicate the problem is 'next door'. As you point out, light doesn't carry as far in tunnels, so it better indicates the threat is close by.

[Boci]

Well, it's either that, or have whole units of Drow archers lay down, engage from super long range, or do other silly things.

Its not either, prone archers is a quirk of the advantage system, it will still happen with your method too.


I don't think changing the sunlight sensitivity is itself a huge issue, assuming the DM applies it in a consistent way and accounts for the implications for its application.

Changing sunlight sensitivity is fine, like you do, giving and taking. Making it strickly more punishing, in response to a player choosing a race with sunlight sensitivity...less so.

[Tanarii]

You do realize that even with Pack Tactics in effect, they'd just be making a straight attack roll at -5 because Kobolds are a Small race, and therefore make attack rolls with Heavy weapons (Which the -5/+10 component of GWM *requires*) at Disadvantage, yes?
Damn. Good counter-point. Not like I havent considered enough Halfling Barbarians I shouldnt have known it already

Okay, +2 Str approved! 😂

[Pex]

Are you looking to play a Kobold, or the stats of a Kobold? Because you could easily play a Halfling or Gnomes stats and just be a Kobold in game.

Perhaps, but there's nothing wrong with wanting to play the stats to get enjoyment from how game mechanics of a thing works.

[DarkKnightJin]

Are you looking to play a Kobold, or the stats of a Kobold? Because you could easily play a Halfling or Gnomes stats and just be a Kobold in game.

A Kobold. As I said, the stats didn't factor into my decision until the race was made nigh unplayable with proposed alterations to Sunlight Sensitivity.

Bit more info: The DM suggested the Bright Light Sensitivity thing, I said that'd br too punishing, and they agreed. Then he said about finding a 'middle ground'. Couple minutes later, he goes back to the (admitted by him) too punishing option, and that's when I 'walked away from negotiations'.

[AHF]

I asked if the "Bright light = sunlight" thing would also mean that a Vampire standing next to someone holding a torch or using the Light spell would then suffer the 20 radiant damage, or be unable to Regenerate while in the bright light. The answer I got to that question was "I'm using a different Vampire template than you."
And then he reiterated that he was 'out', and wasn't going to discuss the matter any more.

Couple of thoughts here.

1) He is within his rights not to allow either the strength buff or the Kobold race in general, although hopefully there is some good reason if the latter.

2) The question of whether bright light = sunlight is a fair one. Seems that either that inquiry was asked too narrowly (specific to vampires) or that it was answered too narrowly (again, only specific to vampires).

3) The DM walking away and refusing to discuss this anymore is the big issue. This is what creates bad blood and resentment. Now this point is a little less clear to me as a read the thread as to whether the OP stopped the 'negotiation' or if the DM shut it down, but if the DM is going to houserule penalties in for player races then it should be as part of a rule consistent across his world and he should not be the one walking away from discussion about it.

[Tanarii]

3) The DM walking away and refusing to discuss this anymore is the big issue.In this case, possibly.

But in general, not really. Many players will try to keep arguing after a ruling has been made, or twist for every little advantage, and DMs have to learn to cut them off.

That the DM viewed it as a negotiation implies they thought they were making a good faith attempt to communicate. That they ended it may indicate they felt they were being harassed after offering a fair trade.
(If I had to guess, I'd guess it was viewed as "Overpowered non-core race allowed" in return for "thing that tones overpowered-ness down". Obviously not everyone agrees with that assessment of overpowered-ness.)

Otoh the OP doesn't strike me as one of those kinds of harassing players, despite bringing the issue to the Court of Internet Judgement.

[strangebloke]

Why are we still talking about this? The DM made a goof. Even by his own admission.

So yeah. If you're really angry, walk away. But TBH you only need to be as upset as you wanna be.