Greetings!

I have always liked Centaurs. Mythological Centaurs have always seemed pretty cool and interesting. The ancient Greeks, of course, depict the Centaurs as a mix between being harsh, primitive barbarians, and articulate, sophisticated scholars.

As NPC's, potential allies, as well as savage enemies of civilization, and the adventurers, Centaurs provide many different opportunities within a campaign. Centaurs may vary widely in alignment, disposition, and even culture.

It seems to me though that Centaurs as *Player Characters* presents a set of considerable problems and challenges. There is the social and cultural conflict--many societies and communities simply may not accept Centaurs as being anything other than hostile, barbaric monsters that should be promptly killed. In that sense, Centaurs share many of the same social problems that Tieflings and Dragonborn present.

However, there is another serious issue involving Centaurs. This issue is precisely the same with disabled Characters trapped in wheelchairs. The issue is that of simple mobility and movement. Just like with a wheelchair crippled character, the Centaur cannot climb ropes, ladders, and indeed, many stairways and tunnel hallways would be extremely difficult, and in probably more than a few occasions, impossible.

Still, though, Centaurs are or remain fairly attractive to many Players interested in playing different races and characters.

What do you all think about Centaurs in a campaign?

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

you dirty ableist, of course a centaur can climb up ropes with its retard human arms.  If you want them in the game, make them medium in size and can do everything everyone else can or limit them as they should be limited and give them extra abilities.  I don't know like cud eater, able to live of scrub land no ration requirement if you track that or Superb Archer +2 on bow hits and then make it where they can't climb up walls.  But wait there's more, create Gotataurs who know can climb up steep walls better than Satyrs but they try to mate with any female preset etc.

If you want them run right, give them appropriate abilities to compensate.  Perhaps a Mountain Pony version of a Centaur with steep footing but they lose most of the other abilities to compensate.

If your game can handle the paladin so attached to his horse that he never leaves it, it can handle centaurs too.  If not, not.

The former is too much trouble for me in most campaigns, since I'm going to have a fair bit of going underground.  So it would take a non-standard campaign (for me) to even consider centaurs.  I'd be more likely to use a praying mantis race than a centaur, and the chances of the mantis are so low as to be practically non-existent.

But then I like most of my races to be at least semi-compatible with what humans can do and want.  I'm not into "alien" mindset merely to have it.

Quote from: SHARK on March 11, 2024, 06:26:48 AMWhat do you all think about Centaurs in a campaign?

I have Finngálkin in the game I've been working on (though instead of half-horse, its half-Reindeer). I basically adapted the Centaur rules from AD&D 1E Dragon Magazine #103, except I don't allow them to be Rangers (what I call Scouts), but Knights (aka Cavaliers) instead. In fact, they get Unlimited levels in Knight, but can only be single classed in that. They cannot be Thieves of any kind nor Clerics, but I do allow Druids. They can be Fighters and Archers. I generally limit them to around 5-7th lvls (after which they must pay an XP penalty to advance, double if they're multi-classed Fighter/Druids or the like). I may allow them to be either Shamans or Witch Doctors. Maybe Berserkers as well. But not much else.   

The problem with centaurs, is that perhaps the first half of the first session will be about character class & special abilities. The rest of the campaign will consist of centaur questions. 

I think you're flogging a dead horse, but hay, if you think they'll be an unbridled success in the mane, and you have the bit in your teeth, risk a few bucks to get it over the finish line.

In my ongoing Mystara campaign, I allow any official source for secondary characters, including the Creature Crucible series, which includes centaurs and other forest creatures' as player character classes (including treants). The book is pretty thorough in describing the limitations of each creature. As for the centaurs, they get natural AC 7, attacks with hooves, and the ability to charge with a lance as a mounted fighter would, but require custom-made barding armor and overall more suited for wilderness adventures as opposed to underworld ones.

Quote from: SHARK on March 11, 2024, 06:26:48 AM
However, there is another serious issue involving Centaurs. This issue is precisely the same with disabled Characters trapped in wheelchairs. The issue is that of simple mobility and movement. Just like with a wheelchair crippled character, the Centaur cannot climb ropes, ladders, and indeed, many stairways and tunnel hallways would be extremely difficult, and in probably more than a few occasions, impossible.

Still, though, Centaurs are or remain fairly attractive to many Players interested in playing different races and characters.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on March 11, 2024, 11:38:24 AM
If your game can handle the paladin so attached to his horse that he never leaves it, it can handle centaurs too.  If not, not.

I've never had a centaur, but I've had some other pretty strange characters among my PCs.

Besides sticking to centaur-navigable terrain, another option is that not all PCs have to be on all adventures - or in all parts of all adventures. Sometimes the party splits up, and they take different routes. Depending on how long the PCs are apart, you might have players take over hirelings or other NPCs -- or if it happens more often, then players might have a pool or sets of PCs they play.

For example, in the campaign before the last one, the PCs at one point decided to attack a kobold lair. However, the kobolds were in a section of caves where humans couldn't fit. So the gnome, halfling, and shapeshifted druid went on the assault, and players of the two human-sized characters played two goblin henchmen NPCs that the PCs had taken on. Centaurs are limited, but humans are also limited.

It depends on the campaign, but there are a lot of possibilities.

Adventure happens where the adventurers can go.  Avoiding cavern adventures for centaurs is no more limiting than avoiding underwater adventures for humans.  Where you run into trouble is when members of the party have differing capability.  Frex, if some salamander-people pcs want to head underwater for part of the adventure when the humans can't breathe there, the party will need to be split, which as everyone knows is Something To Be Avoided.  Just write your adventure so everyone can participate and it will be fine.

That said, I don't use centaurs because I find them a little too commonplace and boring.  I like wemics instead.  They have a more interesting culture, they're less tied to greek mythology, and they are a good deal more flexible when it comes to terrain.

Quote from: Mishihari on March 12, 2024, 08:04:04 AM
Adventure happens where the adventurers can go.  Avoiding cavern adventures for centaurs is no more limiting than avoiding underwater adventures for humans.  Where you run into trouble is when members of the party have differing capability.  Frex, if some salamander-people pcs want to head underwater for part of the adventure when the humans can't breathe there, the party will need to be split, which as everyone knows is Something To Be Avoided.  Just write your adventure so everyone can participate and it will be fine.

That's entirely true.  My point is that the reverse is also true.  If you plan to write adventures of a certain type, then there should be characters that can participate. 

Likewise, if the whole point of the game is that the players come up with whatever oddball things they want to play, then the challenge for the GM is to write adventures for that group--go for it.  I've done that at times.  It's a certain kind of fun.  I've also done the opposite where the setting is what it is, and the players pick characters that fit it.  That's a different kind of fun.  The latter happens to be the kind of fun I'm seeking lately, and also happens to fit what my players generally expect.  So we do that.  There's no moral imperative to cater to the players or not cater to the players.  Though everyone will be a lot happier if any specific or general catering is well understood by the whole group, as well as the boundaries there of. 

I have no problems with centaur PCs as long as the GM ruthlessly enforces the mobility limitations and the fact that centaurs are large-size creatures. Among other tings, centaurs would have to sleep in the stables when the party visits an inn and pay as a horse and rider at toll roads and for ship's passage, etc. Creatures of human size and shape are the standard in most fantasy worlds, and centaurs should acutely get to feel this. Centaurs are creatures of the wild, not of settled places.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on March 12, 2024, 08:27:34 AM

Quote from: Mishihari on March 12, 2024, 08:04:04 AM
Adventure happens where the adventurers can go.  Avoiding cavern adventures for centaurs is no more limiting than avoiding underwater adventures for humans.  Where you run into trouble is when members of the party have differing capability.  Frex, if some salamander-people pcs want to head underwater for part of the adventure when the humans can't breathe there, the party will need to be split, which as everyone knows is Something To Be Avoided.  Just write your adventure so everyone can participate and it will be fine.

That's entirely true.  My point is that the reverse is also true.  If you plan to write adventures of a certain type, then there should be characters that can participate. 

Likewise, if the whole point of the game is that the players come up with whatever oddball things they want to play, then the challenge for the GM is to write adventures for that group--go for it.  I've done that at times.  It's a certain kind of fun.  I've also done the opposite where the setting is what it is, and the players pick characters that fit it.  That's a different kind of fun.  The latter happens to be the kind of fun I'm seeking lately, and also happens to fit what my players generally expect.  So we do that.  There's no moral imperative to cater to the players or not cater to the players.  Though everyone will be a lot happier if any specific or general catering is well understood by the whole group, as well as the boundaries there of. 

Except the Centaur can't climb, so no mountains, can't go into Dungeons/Towers, can't breathe under water, can't go into the tavern...

So your only adventures are in the Savana.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 12, 2024, 01:10:15 PMExcept the Centaur can't climb, so no mountains, can't go into Dungeons/Towers, can't breathe under water, can't go into the tavern...

So your only adventures are in the Savana.

Uh, mountaineering and rock climbing are not synonymous. And horses can climb a 45 degree slope. The same is true with going into a dungeon or even in a tower, its going to depend on the how narrow the confines are. And who says a Centaur would want to go into a tavern? Maybe he wants to hang out in the stables with the other Centaurs?

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 12, 2024, 01:10:15 PM

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on March 12, 2024, 08:27:34 AM

Quote from: Mishihari on March 12, 2024, 08:04:04 AM
Adventure happens where the adventurers can go.  Avoiding cavern adventures for centaurs is no more limiting than avoiding underwater adventures for humans.  Where you run into trouble is when members of the party have differing capability.  Frex, if some salamander-people pcs want to head underwater for part of the adventure when the humans can't breathe there, the party will need to be split, which as everyone knows is Something To Be Avoided.  Just write your adventure so everyone can participate and it will be fine.

That's entirely true.  My point is that the reverse is also true.  If you plan to write adventures of a certain type, then there should be characters that can participate. 

Likewise, if the whole point of the game is that the players come up with whatever oddball things they want to play, then the challenge for the GM is to write adventures for that group--go for it.  I've done that at times.  It's a certain kind of fun.  I've also done the opposite where the setting is what it is, and the players pick characters that fit it.  That's a different kind of fun.  The latter happens to be the kind of fun I'm seeking lately, and also happens to fit what my players generally expect.  So we do that.  There's no moral imperative to cater to the players or not cater to the players.  Though everyone will be a lot happier if any specific or general catering is well understood by the whole group, as well as the boundaries there of. 

Except the Centaur can't climb, so no mountains, can't go into Dungeons/Towers, can't breathe under water, can't go into the tavern...

So your only adventures are in the Savana.

It's limiting, but it's not _that_ limiting.  I've been horseback riding on plains, hills, mountains, jungle, and sand, so those are all options.

I just had an idea while I was thinking about this ... a centaurlike creature based on a mountain goat would be interesting, you could even make it horse sized if you wanted to.  They still wouldn't climb ladders, but mountain goats can get to plenty of place we couldn't without technology.  I've seen them do some pretty insane things.  It would open up some interesting lines of gameplay

Quote from: Mishihari on March 12, 2024, 04:35:01 PM
a centaurlike creature based on a mountain goat would be interesting

So, Bariaurs from Planescape?