DnD Head Canons

[Beleriphon]

Yes, a thousand times yes! Kind of like football fans …

Almost like another franchise in space has football hooligan orks...

Git em boyz! Deff to da humies! Krump em roight good! Kick em roight in da teef!

[KorvinStarmast]

Almost like another franchise in space has football hooligan orks...

Git em boyz! Deff to da humies! Krump em roight good! Kick em roight in da teef!

I am not a WH40K player, so I'll just guess at that reference and recall that GW originated in the UK.

[Beleriphon]

I am not a WH40K player, so I'll just guess at that reference and recall that GW originated in the UK.

Very much WH40K. Orks were always a straight up parody of the football hooligans.

I need ta fin' da boyz and give sum humie a good krumpin!

[Steven K]

Lawful Good deities are just as willing and able to find and abuse major exploits in rules systems, even ones they crafted themselves, as any Lawful Evil creature. As such, at least some of them likely can and do have ways of influencing the nine hells and its denizens directly in subtle ways.

For example, a relatively junior devil or collective thereof finally gathers the resources to become a warlock patron. They choose an adventurer, and said adventurer joins a party with a cleric whose deity is actively paying attention to that cleric at the time. This deity is one of the savier lawful good types in the pantheon (maybe one of the important figures, maybe a comparatively recent and minor godling who nonetheless was taught or intuitively knew a great deal about what they could and could not get away with).

Said deity somehow has a comprehensive knowledge of the infernal bureaucracy, enough to quietly send a request to negotiate directly with the warlock's patron(s) to whoever could, and also would, approve it and do so quickly and secretly, maybe in exchange for some minor concession or drawing on a precedent already established by someone further up the chain, or a favour owed. They might do this under an alias of some kind, possibly posing as or working through a fictional or complicit devil to avoid undue attention from both sides.

They get permission, and in short order contact the warlock patron, and spin a totally true justification that convinces the devil to make a 'non-aggression' contract or whatever, ostensibly to protect the cleric, but does so in perfect (infernal) legalese such that the devil is both genuinely impressed, and suddenly privy to 'secret information' about the gods and their dealings, which might suggest to it for any number of reasons a course of action it had never considered before, without realising the god was actively working towards some longstanding plan or purpose designed to favour Law as a whole or long-term overall Good, a plan conceived long before that devil was even an imp.

[Bohandas]

Despite being ostensibly concerned specifically with arcane secrets and forbidden knowledge, the cult of Vecna's money and influence comes more from trading in day-to-day secrets and blackmail

[LibraryOgre]

Kobolds do not "have scales like reptiles", but rather "have horrible skin conditions". They're MANGY in the truest sense of the word. Kobolds with access to skin care or Cure Disease? They look like little dog-people.

[Luccan]

Kobolds do not "have scales like reptiles", but rather "have horrible skin conditions". They're MANGY in the truest sense of the word. Kobolds with access to skin care or Cure Disease? They look like little dog-people.

I'm considering moving Kobolds to be seen in-universe as a descriptor for "those tiny, thieving, violent things that aren't goblins or our local murderous amphibians". Some kobolds are dog people, some are tiny dragon/lizard folk. Others are more like bipedal rats and then some are based on those early mammal-reptile ancestors I can't remember the name of (which I might have read the idea for in this thread).

[LibraryOgre]

I'm considering moving Kobolds to be seen in-universe as a descriptor for "those tiny, thieving, violent things that aren't goblins or our local murderous amphibians". Some kobolds are dog people, some are tiny dragon/lizard folk. Others are more like bipedal rats and then some are based on those early mammal-reptile ancestors I can't remember the name of (which I might have read the idea for in this thread).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synapsid

[Luccan]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synapsid

Yeah that's the one. I don't remember where I saw the art of Synapsid kobolds, but now I have too many options for different kobolds to not use them all.

[Spore]

Pretty sure that's actually canon...

Sorry for the late reply. Yes and no, because the debate on whether Good and Evil are cosmic or karmic forces changes from game to game.

I'm considering moving Kobolds to be seen in-universe as a descriptor for "those tiny, thieving, violent things that aren't goblins or our local murderous amphibians". Some kobolds are dog people, some are tiny dragon/lizard folk. Others are more like bipedal rats and then some are based on those early mammal-reptile ancestors I can't remember the name of (which I might have read the idea for in this thread).

Goblins, kobolds, faeries, pixies and brownies are actually just exchangable descriptions for the average D&D commoner to describe "tiny ugly humanoids" that robbed us, killed some of our livestock and are generally ugly to be around. When described that a group of goblins has raided a nearby farm, make sure to get a proper description, else your group might be caught in a weird game of fey origin as said goblins are suddenly brownies and other fey instead of the expected low level mooks.

Remember, the farmer has half a dozen hearty children, a wife and a toolshed full of make-shift weapons. He could fend of something as poorly coordinated as a goblin raid. Fey however? Their grandma has told them not to screw with fey.

[elros]

For me, thieves don’t have beards but all assassins do.

[KillianHawkeye]

For me, thieves don’t have beards but all assassins do.

What? Why?

[Bohandas]

I think he means specifically that they have goatees

[ideasmith]

For me, thieves don’t have beards but all assassins do.

This calls for more explanation. This is the first time I have heard of a class having facial hair restrictions.

Also, how do female assassins meet this requirement?

[No brains]

Assassins have beards because taking beards off of bodies is a way to prove you did a job. Beards have terrible resale value anywhere else and that's why thieves don't take them.

[elros]

What? Why?

I know it is silly, but it started because halflings and elves had dexterity bonuses, and neither race is known for having facial hair. And no self respecting dwarf would be a thief, so only a beardless dwarf would be one.
And the idea of an assassin having a beard grew out of the Star Trek joke that evil counterparts had facial hair.
This was actually a running joke in one of our campaigns. And yes, we were dorks.

[RedMage125]

And the idea of an assassin having a beard grew out of the Star Trek joke that evil counterparts had facial hair.

LOL, you mean this...

I think he means specifically that they have goatees

was correct?

[KillianHawkeye]

It was only the evil Spock who had facial hair. Everyone else's mirror counterparts were identical to the normal universe version. Well, I think Sulu had a big scar on his face. Should all assassins have big scar on their face?

[elros]

It was only the evil Spock who had facial hair. Everyone else's mirror counterparts were identical to the normal universe version. Well, I think Sulu had a big scar on his face. Should all assassins have big scar on their face?

You have to remember in the 1980s there was no streaming or internet, so we had to rely on our memories of the Star Trek episodes. Details like goatees and others were glossed over for the sake of levity.
It’s the same reason why we quoted Monty Python- it was near impossible to watch, so our quotes were how we shared the experience. I am sure we made mistakes about of the exact dialogue, but we were close enough to be entertained.

[KillianHawkeye]

You have to remember in the 1980s there was no streaming or internet, so we had to rely on our memories of the Star Trek episodes. Details like goatees and others were glossed over for the sake of levity.
It’s the same reason why we quoted Monty Python- it was near impossible to watch, so our quotes were how we shared the experience. I am sure we made mistakes about of the exact dialogue, but we were close enough to be entertained.

In the 80s, you could easily find some TV channel playing reruns of Star Trek in syndication. That's how I watched it as a kid.

[elros]

In the 80s, you could easily find some TV channel playing reruns of Star Trek in syndication. That's how I watched it as a kid.

You are 100% right, and Star Trek was shown consistently on one of my local TV channels since 1969, so a lot of people knew about Star Trek. The problem, however, was that there was no "on demand", so we had to watch whatever episode was showing at whatever time slot the station wanted, which was usually midnight. There were some die-hard Star Trek fans who knew a lot about the show, but I was not that into it, so there were a lot of episodes I didn't see. On top of that, there was no internet to fact check or discuss issues, so I had only passing familiarity with the show. That's why we knew about the parallel universe and evil Spock had facial hair, but not enough to know Mr Sulu had a big scar instead. If I had known that, I absolutely would have had assassins with big scars on their faces!

BTW, growing up in the 80s I found that D&D players were more into LoTR and other fantasy novels than into science fiction, but that might have just been my experience. The people who liked sci-fi gravitated more to Traveller or BattleTech.

[No brains]

Because they are tiny, stealthy, and can all turn invisible/ change shape, everyone is constantly watched by imps, quasits, pixies, and sprites. It's very hard to prove otherwise, and a great tool for DMs to have NPCs of any alignment learn what the PCs are up to.

[Bohandas]

The ability boost books change to tell their specific reader the specific things they personally need to know to improve themself in that area. That's why copying them over normally doesn't do any good; before they've been used they don;t really say anything, and after they've been used they say things that are specific to one oarticular person

[Wizard_Lizard]

Nonwerewolf Lycanthropes really hate the term 'Lycanthrope' as 'lycan' is wolf, so other were-creatures use terms such as 'zooanthrope' or other terms specific to their condition.

[Lord Raziere]

Nonwerewolf Lycanthropes really hate the term 'Lycanthrope' as 'lycan' is wolf, so other were-creatures use terms such as 'zooanthrope' or other terms specific to their condition.

the universal term is therianthrope actually.

[Millstone85]

Nonwerewolf Lycanthropes really hate the term 'Lycanthrope' as 'lycan' is wolf, so other were-creatures use terms such as 'zooanthrope' or other terms specific to their condition.

the universal term is therianthrope actually.

I was going to follow up with a related humorous headcanon, but it turns out it is plain canon that the werewolf-vs-wolfwere feud is shared between all therianthropes and antherions.

However, I disagree with the latter condition being passed only to offsprings. A normal wolf bitten by a wolfwere should become a wolfwere.

[LibraryOgre]

I was going to follow up with a related humorous headcanon, but it turns out it is plain canon that the werewolf-vs-wolfwere feud is shared between all therianthropes and antherions.

However, I disagree with the latter condition being passed only to offsprings. A normal wolf bitten by a wolfwere should become a wolfwere.

"Even a wolf who is clean of fur, and licks himself by night, may become a wolfwere when the moon is full and the belladonna blooms."

[KorvinStarmast]

Should all assassins have big scar on their face?

Only if they deal in hard drugs and have an Uzi a repeating crossbow as their Little Friend.

[Metastachydium]

'lycan' is wolf

No it isn't. Contrary to popular belief, lycanthrope does not combine the roots *lycan- and *throp-; it comes from the Greek term λυκανθρωπος (transl. lykanthrōpos), a combination of λυκος ('wolf') and ανθρωπος ('human').

so other were-creatures use terms such as 'zooanthrope' or other terms specific to their condition.

That would be zoanthrope and the common term is indeed therianthrope.

[Millstone85]

'lycan' is wolf

No it isn't. Contrary to popular belief, lycanthrope does not combine the roots *lycan- and *throp-; it comes from the Greek term λυκανθρωπος (transl. lykanthrōpos), a combination of λυκος ('wolf') and ανθρωπος ('human').

... Okay, I had to parse that.

You are saying the word commonly thought to be a contraction of lycan-anthrope is actually just lyc-anthrope.