Dwarves aren't cool anymore

[Leon]

Oh yeah, remember when this thread was about Dwarves?

The fate of any thread on this forum that last a while is to be circular arguments that drift a long way from the topic

[Witty Username]

The fault is not in our Dwarves but in ourselves.

[RedWarlock]

Apropos of nothing in particular, I'm reminded of the way 3e was diversifying their giants a little bit. For one thing, they seemed to be making the fire giants look more stocky, almost dwarven, and that was an interesting parallel, that the different giant races might resemble the spread of humanoid variety. (I know we definitely had forest giants described as looking elven..)

Then there's been some occasional usage that connects dwarves to giants in various ways, sometimes as their slaves (with azer, galeb duhr, and others as elemental-influenced derivations). At least one world I read described the dwarves as the smallest of giant-kind, which was something I have played with in my own homebrew worlds.

A page or so ago, someone said we don't subrace humans out, and, well, we do, if you count tieflings, aasimar, and genasi as human subraces (or the human subraces in 3.5's Races of Destiny..), but also, when you try to mechanically describe traits which can be heated debate topics, like ethnicity, gender, other forms of bio-essentialism, etc, it doesn't go well. (See: FATAL. Wait, don't.) Humans might be the exception that otherwise proves the rule, because social politics prevent it.

Originally, as I recall, that was the origin of the human bonus feat in 3e, it was representing the specifics of a region, the feat as flexible chunk of mechanics. Like most of the folks from this place had Toughness, while those folks in that region usually took Endurance.

[Errorname]

Well... if we must. Honestly? I think most games go kinda off the rails when they feel the need to introduce a multitude of sub/side races. Do we really need hill dwarves, and ice dwarves, and whatnot? It just seems strange (and oddly human focused) that we never (or at least very very rarely) hear about game systems/settings where humans, simply becuse they are encountered in some other environment, now have different stats and are a different sub-race or something, yet this is done all the time with other races in games.

I think this ultimately comes down to what people expect the diversity of an individual taxon to be.

We have a really good sense for what human diversity looks like, because well, we're humans. So we have an strong model for what human diversity looks like, if you need a human culture for any region of your map there are a lot of obvious real world influences to pull from that your audience is going to be familiar with (and also have very strong feelings about, so tread lightly). This largely does not exist with most fantasy races, because Elves aren't real. If you're pulling from folklore sometimes you get a 'light elf / dark elf' split, but you don't have that same real diversity to model off of and applying a biome or element as an adjective and saying "ice dwarf" is the path of least resistance.

Note that the path of least resistance is different for other racial options. With options like Aarakocra or Lizardfolk you can end up with creators putting all the diversity of an entire clade into a single 'race', because if you want to make a slightly different lizard person you just base them on a different sort of lizard

Then there's been some occasional usage that connects dwarves to giants in various ways, sometimes as their slaves (with azer, galeb duhr, and others as elemental-influenced derivations). At least one world I read described the dwarves as the smallest of giant-kind, which was something I have played with in my own homebrew worlds.

I think writers look at "big human" and "little human" and are inclined to draw a connection between them, it's not an uncommon idea to place Dwarves and Giants close together on the tree.

A page or so ago, someone said we don't subrace humans out, and, well, we do, if you count tieflings, aasimar, and genasi as human subraces

If you count the planetouched and the hybrids you actually get a decent amount of human variation. It's just not the same sort of thing you get with Elves.

[Witty Username]

I think this ultimately comes down to what people expect the diversity of an individual taxon to be.

A quick thing, since I think it is part of the rub, diversity will be a bit different in D&D. Since D&D basic worldbuilding assumptions tend closer to created kinds than the real world we have as a frame of reference.

Dwarves are created by Reorx, Moradin, etc. Sometimes for a specific purpose, so the range does not necessarily need to be the same as human. It doesn't need to be that way, but I find this smooth over some of the weirdness.

Hm, that could be a fun play of Dwarves having similar appearances accross gender. Moradin built a model and modified it to make the species work.

Environment dwarves being literally reforged by Moradin to survive conditions better does tickle me for some reason.

[Mordar]

A quick thing, since I think it is part of the rub, diversity will be a bit different in D&D. Since D&D basic worldbuilding assumptions tend closer to created kinds than the real world we have as a frame of reference.

Dwarves are created by Reorx, Moradin, etc. Sometimes for a specific purpose, so the range does not necessarily need to be the same as human. It doesn't need to be that way, but I find this smooth over some of the weirdness.

Hm, that could be a fun play of Dwarves having similar appearances accross gender. Moradin built a model and modified it to make the species work.

Environment dwarves being literally reforged by Moradin to survive conditions better does tickle me for some reason.

I think there is value in the contemplation that the dwarves created Reorx, Moradin etc.

I think that several posts have hit on a primary issue, beyond even the "bumpy foreheads" thing. The mechanical advantage of selecting a dwarf for a PC, especially under the newer rulesets, is minimal especially beyond the earlies levels¹, and the mechanical disadvantage of move rate is significant, particularly for the class types the racial advantage would ostensibly help the most.

So all there is to lean into is lore/stereotype/aesthetics?

- M

¹ - especially if the prevailing opinion is that it is always better to be "5%+ harder to hit" than "able to absorb slightly more damage"

[Witty Username]

I think One D&D is moving away from the movement rate. So turn off will hopefully be reduced.

I don't actually remember what they did with Dwarves otherwise, I am not a big fan of playtest material in general so I only pay scant attention to it.
--
Would people be alright with Dwarves getting physical damage resistance, either generally or perhaps a specific one like slashing?

[Mordar]

I think One D&D is moving away from the movement rate. So turn off will hopefully be reduced.

I don't actually remember what they did with Dwarves otherwise, I am not a big fan of playtest material in general so I only pay scant attention to it.
--
Would people be alright with Dwarves getting physical damage resistance, either generally or perhaps a specific one like slashing?

That could be interesting. I'd like to entertain something like a 1-per-x opportunity to "soak" all damage from a single attack...1/day or whatever. That feels "tough", especially if declared after the hit/damage are rolled.

- M

[OldTrees1]

Would people be alright with Dwarves getting physical damage resistance, either generally or perhaps a specific one like slashing?

Yes I would like Dwarf to have some damage resistance. How much and how it is implemented depends on how strong the species benefits are allowed to be (this was part of the issue with 5E).

For 5.5E, I suggest the following.
Thick Skin: Bludgeoning/Piercing/Slashing damage you take is reduced by your proficiency modifier.

Having full 5E style Resistance (50% damage) to the common BPS damage could be excessive. Having it be scoped to only one of those types would probably mean Slashing resistance. However that is a very common damage type and I think we could see Dwarves as being hardier vs bludgeoning and piercing too. So let's use a flat reduction instead and have is scale with level (like resistance would) by using proficiency modifier.

That could be interesting. I'd like to entertain something like a 1-per-x opportunity to "soak" all damage from a single attack...1/day or whatever. That feels "tough", especially if declared after the hit/damage are rolled.

- M

Sounds familiar to Goliath (one of the 2 other "tough" species).

[Psyren]

I think One D&D is moving away from the movement rate. So turn off will hopefully be reduced.

I don't actually remember what they did with Dwarves otherwise, I am not a big fan of playtest material in general so I only pay scant attention to it.
--
Would people be alright with Dwarves getting physical damage resistance, either generally or perhaps a specific one like slashing?

OneD&D Dwarves appear to be getting the following (mechanical buffs in green, mechanical nerfs in red):

• Darkvision 60'
• Poison damage resistance + advantage on poison saves (both prevention + ongoing)
• Toughness (as Hill Dwarf, but baseline)
• Tool Proficiency with two tools from the following list: mason's tools, smith's tools, jeweler's tools, tinker's tools. (brewer's supplies have been removed, but you can grab those via your background.)
• Starting feat (can be used to pick up Medium Armor as Mountain Dwarf + shields, or alternative things like Alert, Lucky, Magic Initiate etc.)
• Stonecunning now grants tremorsense 60' for 10 minutes, however no longer grants expertise in history to determine the origins of stonework.
• No movement penalty
• Floating ASIs
• Weapon proficiencies removed

Duergar were already updated in MPMM; the only difference for them this year will be the starting feat and background changes.

[OldTrees1]

OneD&D Dwarves appear to be getting the following (mechanical buffs in green, mechanical nerfs in red):

• Stonecunning now grants tremorsense 60' for 10 minutes, however no longer grants expertise in history to determine the origins of stonework.

Duergar were already updated in MPMM; the only difference for them this year will be the starting feat and background changes.

Which sources do we have for the Tremorsense? I do not see it in MPMM Duergar and I have not seen the 2024 PHB yet.

I don't want to get my hopes up too quickly.

[Psyren]

Which sources do we have for the Tremorsense? I do not see it in MPMM Duergar and I have not seen the 2024 PHB yet.

I don't want to get my hopes up too quickly.

Character Origins UA

While they haven't 100% confirmed what will make it to the final PHB, apparently every species in this UA scored high except Dragonborn (which was revised) and Ardling (which was scrapped), so chances are pretty good that the UA Dwarf will make it into the final PHB without too many, or any, changes.

EDIT: Duergar won't be getting the tremorsense AFAICT, that'll just be standard dwarves, but Duergar will maintain their super-darkvision, size-changing/invisibility stuff, and psionic fortitude.

[Grim Portent]

I think One D&D is moving away from the movement rate. So turn off will hopefully be reduced.

I don't actually remember what they did with Dwarves otherwise, I am not a big fan of playtest material in general so I only pay scant attention to it.
--
Would people be alright with Dwarves getting physical damage resistance, either generally or perhaps a specific one like slashing?

That could be interesting. I'd like to entertain something like a 1-per-x opportunity to "soak" all damage from a single attack...1/day or whatever. That feels "tough", especially if declared after the hit/damage are rolled.

- M

Half-Orc and Goliath both have abilities that fill that general concept, so the basic idea is already proven to work fine in 5e. Staying up when you would otherwise be downed feels tough, and reducing damage taken from an attack also feels tough in the sense of shrugging off blows. Which ties the points from earlier about Goliaths and so on taking the 'tough guy' role from Dwarves, in that they literally fill the tough guy role in 5e. Other than Powerful Build the Goliath makes me think Dwarf more than the actual Dwarves tbh. Part of it is active vs passive mechanics, having more HP is passive and you only really think about it when comparing characters, negating damage or ignoring a down is a regular reminder of being tough.

The Dwarven Fortitude feat to me is the most dwarven feeling mechanic in 5e, other than maybe Heavy Armour Master, which is of course not race related.

[Witty Username]

Hopefully tremorsense actually does something this time around.
--
I think with that, mechanically, there is a lack of 'pop', something to draw attention to it as a player.

[Psyren]

Hopefully tremorsense actually does something this time around.

I'm not sure what you mean by this but here's the UA definition:

"A creature with Tremorsense can pinpoint the location of creatures and moving objects within a specific range, provided that the creature with Tremorsense and anything it’s detecting are both in contact with the same surface (such as the ground, a wall, or a ceiling) or the same liquid.

Tremorsense can’t detect creatures or objects in the air, and Tremorsense doesn’t count as a form of sight."

The surface in question for the 2024 dwarf is stone (both natural and worked) which means it will function in a lot of dungeons and structures. This will let them do a variety of useful things, such as counting the enemies patrolling behind a wall or locked door, tracking what square invisible enemies touching the floor are in, detecting a spy hiding in the corner, noticing a trap door swinging shut in the next room etc.

[gbaji]

I'm not sure what you mean by this but here's the UA definition:

"A creature with Tremorsense can pinpoint the location of creatures and moving objects within a specific range, provided that the creature with Tremorsense and anything it’s detecting are both in contact with the same surface (such as the ground, a wall, or a ceiling) or the same liquid.

Tremorsense can’t detect creatures or objects in the air, and Tremorsense doesn’t count as a form of sight."

The surface in question for the 2024 dwarf is stone (both natural and worked) which means it will function in a lot of dungeons and structures. This will let them do a variety of useful things, such as counting the enemies patrolling behind a wall or locked door, tracking what square invisible enemies touching the floor are in, detecting a spy hiding in the corner, noticing a trap door swinging shut in the next room etc.

Yeah. It's actually a really really powerful ability. But, if you're playing in a game where all encounters are "you enter the room, and see X, now fight/whatever with it", it might not be seen as such. The reality though is that this gives the ability for dwarves to basically detect anyone entering their underground/stone strongholds without themselves having to be anywhere near the location themselves. Dwarven defenders can literally feel invaders walking along the stone floor "down on level 3, corridor 8, stone marker 5", and then mount a massive defense. This is the kind of ability that doesn't mean a lot once a direct encounter fight has started, but should *massively* affect the makeup of those encounters/fights in the first place, overwhelmingly in favor of the dwarf(ves).

For adventuring dwarves, it means that they can basically stand in a tunnel and feel if there's anything down at the other end of it, or in the cavern beyond, etc. Basically, as long as it's connected via solid stone/earth, they can feel it. Obviously, this is subject to GM interpretation as far as how much seams or breaks in "solid stone" may damper this over a given distance. But for caverns more or less carved out of solid rock in a mountain? Should allow dwarves to get a good sense for things moving around within that mountain at a pretty decent distance. Certainly, well out of sight or hearing range, and absolutely far enough away that it should be almost impossible to actually sneak up on a dwarf when they are underground (basically have to fly inside the tunnels or something).

I suppose if you have a GM that limits this to "the stone surface in the room you are in" then, yeah, that's not going to seem like such a great skill.

We actually grant dwarves in our RQ game a similar skill called "earthsense". Same deal in that they can basically feel even minor vibrations though the earth, allowing for sensing enemies moving about even a good distance down tunnels, in adjacent caverns, etc. It also allows them to basically "feel the earth", essentially getting a sense of the shape and substance of earth/stone they are in contact with. That part of the ability is primarily about being able to easily detect things like hidden passages and whatnot. They can feel the difference between "the stone here is solid and deep" and "there's a gap in the stone 1 foot beyond this wall". And yeah, that also gives them the classic ability to "know how far under the earth you are" as well.

[Witty Username]

I'm not sure what you mean by this but here's the UA definition:

"A creature with Tremorsense can pinpoint the location of creatures and moving objects within a specific range, provided that the creature with Tremorsense and anything it’s detecting are both in contact with the same surface (such as the ground, a wall, or a ceiling) or the same liquid.

Tremorsense can’t detect creatures or objects in the air, and Tremorsense doesn’t count as a form of sight."

It is more or less a bug, for lack of a better word, with how tremorsense and blindsight work. Essentially, characters can already determine location via sound. And it isn’t sight, so advantage for enemies and disadvantage for the character still apply.
So tremorsense doesn't work properly as written.

I don't think anyone plays that way, but it irks me that it is there.

[OldTrees1]

It is more or less a bug, for lack of a better word, with how tremorsense and blindsight work. Essentially, characters can already determine location via sound. And it isn’t sight, so advantage for enemies and disadvantage for the character still apply.
So tremorsense doesn't work properly as written.

I don't think anyone plays that way, but it irks me that it is there.

I would expect tremorsense / blindsense to pinpoint a location and temorsight (Toph) / blindsight to be alternative sight (thus no advantage for enemies). This means only blindsight doesn't work properly as written.

I am disappointed it is limited use. "Action: Tremorsense 5ft-10ft for 1 round" at-will would be more interesting to me than "Bonus Action: Tremorsense 60ft for 10 minutes" 2-4 times per day. I mostly see it as a way to sense into or through walls.

[gbaji]

It is more or less a bug, for lack of a better word, with how tremorsense and blindsight work. Essentially, characters can already determine location via sound. And it isn’t sight, so advantage for enemies and disadvantage for the character still apply.
So tremorsense doesn't work properly as written.

I don't think anyone plays that way, but it irks me that it is there.

Again. Only if you are thinking of it purely as a "does this help me in a fight with people in the room I'm in".

[OldTrees1]

Again. Only if you are thinking of it purely as a "does this help me in a fight with people in the room I'm in".

To be fair, the limited uses, bonus action activation, and long range imply to me, that the author was primarily letting "you were ambushed, now find the enemy" scenario shape the feature.

[Mordar]

To be fair, the limited uses, bonus action activation, and long range imply to me, that the author was primarily letting "you were ambushed, now find the enemy" scenario shape the feature.

How often can you use it? No sense of 5e rules at all. 60' isn't great...but it can be very handy in a dungeon invasion!

- M

[icefractal]

From OldTree1's post, it looks like [proficiency bonus] times per day, lasting 10 minutes each time.

So, if you're exploring a relatively dense dungeon, that's pretty good, 10 minutes will cover a large chunk of searching it. But in a more spread-out cavern where notable things are like 15 minutes apart, it's not great, really just a "check on this particular room that we're already suspicious of" tool.

As for defensively - not really. Like, if you already know invaders are coming soon then you can use this to spot them a round or two in advance, but it's not something you can just have up in general.

[OldTrees1]

How often can you use it? No sense of 5e rules at all. 60' isn't great...but it can be very handy in a dungeon invasion!

- M

You can use it, as a bonus/swift/free action, prof bonus (2-4) times per day. Each use is 10 minutes. 60' is rather long distance for tremorsense (especially combined with movement and dashes).

For dungeons or mining I think 10ft (or even 5ft) would be very handy. However I would want something that lasts longer than my lunch (or something that can be called on demand all day long). Having it cost an action or even a minute would still make it useful in the normal cases (mining, defending home, delving a dungeon) and should be more than enough to pay the cost for it being at-will.

This is why I think the costs imply the author was primarily thinking about an ambush after the first arrow flew. It is still more useful outside of combat, but it would have been priced differently if that was the primary intent.

Edit:
Also I don't like the long range for dense dungeons. While the limited usage (2-4 uses at 10min) can cover a day's worth of dense dungeon, it does so by doing all of it at once. Imagine a dwarf rogue dungeoneer using this ability on various puzzles or searching for traps. They want to focus on just what is near them, but the limited uses has them writing notes like they are running out of time. They need to focus on the previous rooms' puzzles while also searching for traps, and scout the next couple of rooms. OR it could have been shorter range and at-will. Then they have the time to focus.

[Mordar]

From OldTree1's post, it looks like [proficiency bonus] times per day, lasting 10 minutes each time.

You can use it, as a bonus/swift/free action, prof bonus (2-4) times per day. Each use is 10 minutes. 60' is rather long distance for tremorsense (especially combined with movement and dashes).

For dungeons or mining I think 10ft (or even 5ft) would be very handy. However I would want something that lasts longer than my lunch (or something that can be called on demand all day long). Having it cost an action or even a minute would still make it useful in the normal cases (mining, defending home, delving a dungeon) and should be more than enough to pay the cost for it being at-will.

Thanks - wasn't sure what "normal" proficiency bonus would be. So at least a couple times an adventuring day I get to see beyond a closed door, or zero in on a funny sound, or monitor a space I can't otherwise see...frankly I think that has much better "gamist" value than the older form of stonecunning, even if it is limited by time and "recharge".

- M

[Psyren]

Essentially, characters can already determine location via sound.

Sure, but if the enemy is trying to be sneaky - which, since invisible = heavily obscured, they can attempt even in combat - you would need an opposed check if you're trying to use sound to perceive them. And combat is loud, good luck locating someone being sneaky through the clang of steel next to your ear or the wizard's thunderwave. Tremorsense meanwhile is automatic success to the Dwarf, and it doesn't care about ambient noise conditions; it just works. And that's just one of the scenarios I listed.

As for the advantage part - if you have blindsight (say, you're a Dwarf Fighter - I know, weird combination ) then you can activate this to know what square they're lurking in and then walk up and whack them with no penalties at all. Or you'll know which squares your ally should aim their Faerie Fire at.

Thanks - wasn't sure what "normal" proficiency bonus would be. So at least a couple times an adventuring day I get to see beyond a closed door, or zero in on a funny sound, or monitor a space I can't otherwise see...frankly I think that has much better "gamist" value than the older form of stonecunning, even if it is limited by time and "recharge".

- M

You can also save this for when it counts. At the beginning of the day when getting into a fight isn't so bad, you can listen at doors and peek around corners like a normal adventurer would. But when the day is running long and you're trying to avoid wandering into a tough fight with lower resources, you can use this instead to peek behind those doors or avoid patrols with more certainty.

Imagine a dwarf rogue dungeoneer using this ability on various puzzles or searching for traps. They want to focus on just what is near them, but the limited uses has them writing notes like they are running out of time.

brb, making Alexandwarf Hamilton

[gbaji]

To be fair, the limited uses, bonus action activation, and long range imply to me, that the author was primarily letting "you were ambushed, now find the enemy" scenario shape the feature.

To be fair (to me, someone who doesn't play D&D regularly), those restrictions were not in the description, so...

To parrot what other folks said, this ability either needs to be longer lasting or usable more often per day. I'd honestly make it an at will thing, but maybe requiring some kind of perception roll (not sure of specifics here). The idea being that, when used outside of combat, you are extending your senses and feeling for vibrations in the stone, with perhaps penalities depending on how far away something is (and maybe some negatives if one of your hobbit companions like drops something in a well right next to you or something). Makes it useful for dungeon delving, but not something that effectively allows you to map out the entire complex in one shot (but pretty reliable for "there are folks moving around in the very next chamber"). And when used inside of combat, it might possibly warn you of that invisible assailant sneaking up on you, or it may not (there's a lot of folks in the room, stomping their heavy boots around, juming, banging things on the ground, etc).

Honestly don't even understand the whole "uses per day" on something like this. It's a perception sense that you have. You don't only let humans see things X times a day, do you?

It's a perception sense. Make it modest in use, make it usable normally, with some modest restrictions, tie it to a perception skill/roll, and then move on. Does anyone only get infravision X times a day? Or ultravision? Silly me, I just assumed this was something dwarves would just have available all the time. The restriction should be on the usefulness in any given situation, not some arbitrary number of uses per day IMO. It's already going to be of less use outdoors, and useless in a lot of situations (we're in the second floor of an Inn made of wood). Let the sense shine when in the environment it's designed for.

[Psyren]

Constant Tremorsense... eh. That suggests all dwarves are part-spider or part-bulette or something. I don't think they're supposed to be that overtly monstrous or mystical, they're still just humanoids.

I would be okay if it lasted an hour per activation though, that could be an okay compromise. But I'm fine with 10 minutes too.

[OldTrees1]

Constant Tremorsense... eh. That suggests all dwarves are part-spider or part-bulette or something. I don't think they're supposed to be that overtly monstrous or mystical, they're still just humanoids.

I would be okay if it lasted an hour per activation though, that could be an okay compromise. But I'm fine with 10 minutes too.

Not Constant. It would be At-Will with an activation. There is a thematic difference.

The Dwarf takes a moment (costs an action, or even a minute) to put their ear to the stone or pause to listen to the earth. The Dwarves being able to read and listen to the stones is part of their folklore background.

The longer effective usage, even allows the per activation duration and range to be shortened. Tremorsense of 60ft 2/day sounds like Wildshape to me but knowing how to pause to listen for Tremorsense 5ft-10ft sounds like Species of Stone* to me.

Edit
* Context: Dwarf, Gnome, and Goliath are thematically associated with rock and stone. There was a book called Races of Stone and I was alluding to it.

[gbaji]

Constant Tremorsense... eh. That suggests all dwarves are part-spider or part-bulette or something. I don't think they're supposed to be that overtly monstrous or mystical, they're still just humanoids.

So... we accept infravision and ultravision but not this? Why?

I'm not seeing at all why a species either evolving or being created by their gods, to exist and live in underground environs, and in many settings are viewed as being magically "tied to the earth" (in the same way that elves are often tied to trees/plantlife), would not have senses that match that fact. Why do Bulettes have it? What makes this some kind of ability restricted to monstrous creatures? Aren't dwarves supposed to be a little bit mystical (lots of settings have then as an ancient race similar to elves, just in a different environment).

I guess this really depends on whether you view dwarves as just "short stocky humans who live underground", or if they are an actual unique species in a fantasy setting. I tend to lean in the latter direction. And given that the topic is "dwarves aren't cool anymore", maybe thinking of them as something more than just short humans who like to make things and maybe dabble in explosives might move things in the right direction. Because those latter descriptions make them great NPCs to have in a game setting, but don't give players a whole lot of reason to play them. They should be at least as powerful/userful in underground environments as Elves are in forests IMO (maybe a bit moreso, since most special elven abilities work everywhere, not just when they're surrounded by trees).


Again. I don't play a lot of D&D these days, so there could be game balance issues with this. But those balance issues should be the only concern here IMO.

[Witty Username]

As for the advantage part - if you have blindsight (say, you're a Dwarf Fighter - I know, weird combination )

Eh, get a second feature that does the same thing as the first but better to make the first feature work isn't exactly a ringing endorsement.

I just rule tremorsense and blindsight as 'sight', which solves the bug. It also means a dwarf can use tremorsense for targeting spells that rely on sight.