D&D 5E A First Look at Tasha’s Lineage System In AL Player’s Guide - Customizing Your Origin In D&D

The new player’s guide for the D&D Adventurers League has been released. Appendix 1 includes the new info from Tasha’s Cauldron on customizing your origin. It‘s a one-page appendix.

The D&D Adventurers League now uses this variant system from Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything since it allows for a greater degree of customization. For ease of reference, the relevant information is included as an appendix to this document and doesn’t count against the PH + 1 rule.

You can do any of the following (obviously the full document has more detail):

1. Move your race ability score increases wherever your want to. “...take any ability score increase you gain in your race or subrace and apply it to an ability score of your choice.”​

2. Replace each language from your race with any language from a set list.​

3. Swap each proficiency for another of the same type.​

4. Alter behaviour/personality race-based descriptions.​

Its not clear if that’s the whole Lineage system or just part of it. You can download the player’s guide here.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I'm so glad you've never had a player quit or worse sabotage a game because they felt hamstrung by the DMs "arbitrary restrictions".

How would this even happen?

When I DM, if a player attempted to do this I would simply not allow it, ask the player to leave my house, and seriously consider if he wants to be part of our game or not.

If the player wants to quit then they are free to leave at any time, and I will shake their hand and wish them good luck in finding a table more suited to their style of play. No hard feelings in case they decide they want to come back.

 

[Hussar]

Thing is: if +1 to hit and damage is not breaking the game, then why fix what is not broken?

Because you are adding options for players that like them and allowing more concepts. Broadening the game without increasing the power levels of the PC's. Win Win.

IOW, now I can play a barbarian elf, if that's the concept I want to go for, without having to fight against the restrictions of what some game designer thinks an elf should look like. Maybe, for some reason, my elf is honkingly muscular with some serious anger management issues. Sure, unusual for an elf, but, meh, so what? Any PC I play is likely going to be different than the baseline anyway. Certainly by any significant level my character is going to be FAR different than the baseline of his or her race.

By 12th level, most PC's are going to be 18 or 20 in their main stat. That's not unreasonable is it? Which means, that most 12th level PC's are basically godlike compared to the baselines of their respective races. They are stronger/smarter/wiser/faster/whatever than EVERYONE around them. They are unmatched by any standard member of their race.

So, since I'm going to reach that point anyway, does it really matter when I reach that point?

Why are you so set on allowing game designers to tell you what your character should look like? The game designers decided the stat bonuses for various races based on their views of that race. Why should I be forced to play a stereotypical member of a given race simply because the game designers thought that elves should be dexterous or dwarves should have higher Con's?

That's why.

 

[Horwath]

Finally, I'm sick of the whole thing. Just remove racial ASIs completely. No longer an issue either way. For the people who will whine about not getting a few extra points, increase point-buy to a max of 16 or 17, improve the standard array, and allow rollers to roll 7 scores and drop their lowest score. All of those ideas will make up for the lost 2-4 racial ASI points.

point buy pool increased from 27 to 32 points.
minimum score 8
maximum score 16

cost

ability score 8 - cost 0
ability score 9 - cost 1
ability score 10 - cost 2
ability score 11 - cost 3
ability score 12 - cost 4
ability score 13 - cost 5
ability score 14 - cost 6
ability score 15 - cost 8
ability score 16 - cost 10

or if you just want default array; it's:

16,16,14,12,10,8

 

[Remathilis]

How would this even happen?

When I DM, if a player attempted to do this I would simply not allow it, ask the player to leave my house, and seriously consider if he wants to be part of our game or not.

If the player wants to quit when, they are free to leave at any time, and I will shake their hand and wish them good luck in finding a table more suited to their style of play. No hard feelings in case they decide they want to come back.

Please be advised I don't agree with this, but in many years I've seen PCs who reject the premise of a campaign...

• Refuse to leave the tavern all session
• Pick fights, kill or steal from townsfolk, with an extra layer of arson on top
• Refuse quest givers, often leading to one of the above as "tonight's entertainment"
• Walk right past the dungeon/town/adventure zone intentionally
• Prank, steal from, or attack other party members
• Act against the group, either intentionally (pocketing gold or important items without the group knowing) or "unintentionally" (making loud noise to bring wandering monsters, setting off traps) for the lols

All tended to happen when there player (and sometimes the group) rejected the premise of a campaign. It's pretty and juvenile (and to be fair, most coming in HS or college games) but the idea that telling your players the rules before hand means they automatically listen and accept them isn't true.

On a related note, this is why I tend to avoid "low-magic" or "grim & gritty" gaming. Most of the above behavior happened when players felt constrained by those types of games. But that's a topic for another day.

Edit: I want to add that these behaviors came not from some one-off jerk player, but from friends who played in multiple campaigns prior with no problem. Some were DMs in there own right. Sometimes it was one player, others it was a colab of multiple, or even the whole group going into revolt. And they could be fine the next game if the next game was too thier liking.

 

[Horwath]

• Refuse to leave the tavern all session
• Pick fights, kill or steal from townsfolk, with an extra layer of arson on top
• Refuse quest givers, often leading to one of the above as "tonight's entertainment"
• Walk right past the dungeon/town/adventure zone intentionally
• Prank, steal from, or attack other party members
• Act against the group, either intentionally (pocketing gold or important items without the group knowing) or "unintentionally" (making loud noise to bring wandering monsters, setting off traps) for the lols

If any of those actions are out-of-character, rule that they didn't happen and warn the player that next time he gets kicked out of the group.

 

[Remathilis]

If any of those actions are out-of-character, rule that they didn't happen and warn the player that next time he gets kicked out of the group.

Most of those games die horrible deaths not long after the mutiny. Some don't last a proper session.

My point was that players only accept restrictions if they feel it's reasonable. If they don't, you might see players walk (if mature) or act out (if not). The idea that if you set expectations early, players won't balk flies against what I've seen in game.

 

[TwoSix]

All tended to happen when there player (and sometimes the group) rejected the premise of a campaign. It's pretty and juvenile (and to be fair, most coming in HS or college games) but the idea that telling your players the rules before hand means they automatically listen and accept them isn't true.

I tend to agree that is probably more common among younger gamers, and realistically, younger gamers should probably stick more to "by-the-book" games precisely to head off these sort of issues. My groups are all in their 30s-50s, and we have much less of a problem gaining communal buy-in even to some of the more "out-there" game concepts.

 

[DND_Reborn]

If any of those actions are out-of-character, rule that they didn't happen and warn the player that next time he gets kicked out of the group.

Agreed. There are many cases for something like those behaviors IF it is in-character or there is a role-playing reason for it. But, it such behavior continues and it becomes clear the player (even if longstanding and maybe just having an "off" day) is doing it maliciously, they will be politely asked to stop it or leave and come back when they are feeling more like participating in a constructive manner.

 

[DND_Reborn]

point buy pool increased from 27 to 32 points.
minimum score 8
maximum score 16

cost

ability score 8 - cost 0
ability score 9 - cost 1
ability score 10 - cost 2
ability score 11 - cost 3
ability score 12 - cost 4
ability score 13 - cost 5
ability score 14 - cost 6
ability score 15 - cost 8
ability score 16 - cost 10

or if you just want default array; it's:

16,16,14,12,10,8

I would do normal point-buy, but will 16 costing 11 points and 32 points to spend. I think 14 and 15 for costs are fine, but meh it is a minor difference.

For default array I would do 16, 15, 13, 12, 10, 9. It is basically the standard array with the 14 getting the +2 and the 8 getting the +1.

 

[jasper]

Sorcerers and Rangers (but this discussion is neither here nor there).

At tier 4, if you're not fulfilling your role, you really messed up with your character. At that level, it's typically not that big of a deal.

My ROLE is to HAVE FUN. If I am having fun with Barbarian with a 10 in STR and CON, I have FUFILLED MY ROLE. Now if you want to talk about war gaming D&D well Just bring out some Avalon Hill Games and will do Wargamin.