D&D 5E Unearthed Arcana: Gothic Lineages & New Race/Culture Distinction

The latest Unearthed Arcana contains the Dhampir, Reborn, and Hexblood races. The Dhampir is a half-vampire; the Hexblood is a character which has made a pact with a hag; and the Reborn is somebody brought back to life.

News Archive | Dungeons and Dragons

Read the full archives of Dungeons & Dragons news, Sage Advice, Unearthed Arcana, and D&D Studio Blogs.

dnd.wizards.com

Perhaps the bigger news is this declaration on how race is to be handled in future D&D books as it joins other games by stating that:

"...the race options in this article and in future D&D books lack the Ability Score Increase trait, the Language trait, the Alignment trait, and any other trait that is purely cultural. Racial traits henceforth reflect only the physical or magical realities of being a player character who’s a member of a particular lineage. Such traits include things like darkvision, a breath weapon (as in the dragonborn), or innate magical ability (as in the forest gnome). Such traits don’t include cultural characteristics, like language or training with a weapon or a tool, and the traits also don’t include an alignment suggestion, since alignment is a choice for each individual, not a characteristic shared by a lineage."

 

[doctorbadwolf]

To be clear, I support making the game more inclusive and less full of "biological essentialism". I don't support saying, "Minotaurs are strong because the iconic minotaur adventurer is strong, not because minotaurs tend to be stronger than humans." That's nonsensical garbage that makes race or lineage into a meaningless waste of space, better used by expanding background to include culture and leaving biological stuff completely out.

Minotaurs are strong, but you can make a minotaur with any stats you want within the confines of a fair point buy or stat rolling system, is vastly superior on every level, and leaves room for your lineage actually telling you and other players something about your character, where they come from, etc. Free-from "your lineage tells you nothing about where you come from" design should be the optional variant, not the default.

If this had been put out a few years ago, would we have gotten all the races we have seen in the last few years? I don't think we would have. The game would be lesser for it. Where would halfling bravery be, if halflings had to fit this mold?

Instead, the game is right where it should have always been before this UA. A Mountain Dwarf is usually strong and tough but some are wise or smart or charismatic, instead, and skilled with a variety of tools and weapons and armor, with a default set of tools and weapons, but the ability of the player to change those to any tools or weapons in the game. Exactly right.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

You bought the book for those mechanics? I bought it for the subclasses (and the Satyr).

This is drastically different than Tasha's. Tasha's kept cultural traits, but just had them be floating. This strips away cultural traits entirely.

Yes, that is precisely why Tasha's is better. The goal of the player controlling the cultural bits of their character is accomplished, but default lore about the folk they're choosing to play can be written about as cultural icons and norms. Exactly as it should be. The idea of just not having culture impact characters at all is absurd. If most elf cultures are a certain way (not to mention that not all proficiencies are cultural, elves literally have better senses), then the game should reflect that with options to change it, not just erase it entirely from the game.

edit to clarify: the goal in question is a more inclusive game, not "get rid of cultural traits". There is a reason most 3pp options to solve the goal don't remove cultural traits, but instead separate them from race, which is ultimately the same thing as making them optionally floating, as Tasha's does.

 

[Hurin70]

It's very difficult to me to consider Ability Score Increase as CULTURAL. I strongly believe it is physiological. These are aberration of common sense twisted to... ok I stop myself. But truth is more important than... ok stop.

This is my problem too.

I am all for separating culture from race/lineage. My preferred system (Rolemaster) already does that.

But I don't see a Minotaur's size or strength as cultural. He can live amongst Halflings for his whole life, but that won't change the fact that he is just massive and strong. That is physiological, plain and simple.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Yes, that is precisely why Tasha's is better. The goal of the player controlling the cultural bits of their character is accomplished, but default lore about the folk they're choosing to play can be written about as cultural icons and norms. Exactly as it should be. The idea of just not having culture impact characters at all is absurd. If most elf cultures are a certain way (not to mention that not all proficiencies are cultural, elves literally have better senses), then the game should reflect that with options to change it, not just erase it entirely from the game.

edit to clarify: the goal in question is a more inclusive game, not "get rid of cultural traits". There is a reason most 3pp options to solve the goal don't remove cultural traits, but instead separate them from race, which is ultimately the same thing as making them optionally floating, as Tasha's does.

Culture should have an impact, I fully agree with you, but I think that it should be non-existent when it comes to racial traits. Your race is your genetic traits, not your culture.

I'd actually split the Background into two different categories, your Culture and your Occupation. Your Culture would be like the weapon/armor proficiencies that Dwarves, Elves, and Hobgoblins get, while your Occupation would give you skills, tools, and other proficiencies that you got from your former job (basically 5e's current Background but expanded a bit). High Elven Warrior and Mountain Dwarf could be Cultures, and any race and any character could choose it as long as they were raised amongst the right community. A Dragonborn could have Mountain Dwarf Training and get specific armor/weapon proficiencies, while a Half-Elf raised by Orcs should get proficiencies related to their upbringing.

Who you are genetically, who you are culturally, who you were occupationally, and who you are class-wise should all affect your character in different ways.

Sadly, this will have to wait till the next edition if we are ever to get it.

 

[dave2008]

As @dave2008 mentioned, go ahead and make +2/+1 the default, I do not care whatsoever, but unless they also provide the restriction system used previously, its not like we gain anything, we simply lose another layer of the game.

I understand wanting the option in the book for race restrictions (it is unlikely to happen, so prepare yourself), I don't feel anything is lost by not including it. I mean the mechanics are right their for you to use, you just need to decided how you want to restrict them. There is nothing you can do with the new direction that you could do with the old direction. Nothing is lost, They only thing I can see being lost is the lack of choice.

I want more race restrictions than RAW, but I understand there is nothing gained by having those in the book. In fact, if they do include race restrictions in future books, it will be more work for as I am sure I will not agree with their choices. I would rather start from a blank slate and that is what this gives me.

 

[Xohar17]

I think that’s a good idea. You have enough warning points already.

I find it funny that one can no longer asociate ability increases as physiological instead of racial, because that somehow needs a warning for some reason

 

[Faolyn]

The one thing, the singular thing, I was really hoping they wouldn't do.

IMO, this makes even having races/lineages in dnd a total waste of time and space.

How so?

 

[Morrus]

I find it funny that one can no longer asociate ability increases as physiological instead of racial, because that somehow needs a warning for some reason

Don’t post again in this thread. If you have comments to make about moderation, do so in the appropriate place.

 

[discodecepticon]

Ok. Cool. The TCoE ability score rule is the default... Fine, but can you give us the ability scores and other stuff as "Optional ""race/lineage"" features"?

Or take the next step and make the default rule that every character starts with the same stats after character creation. Rogues get 8, 17, 12, 10, 14, 14. Warlocks get their 17s in CHAR and one 14 in CON... ect.

Also

This UA is poorly made within the design space of 5e... This should be a "Pick a race (or ancestry or what ever) then replace the relevant stats from these lineages.

If I'm a Gnome and I gain the Reborn lineage... do I get to choose my size when I gain the reborn's Size feature? b/c it says "choose when you gain this lineage"

 

[Faolyn]

But I don't see a Minotaur's size or strength as cultural. He can live amongst Halflings for his whole life, but that won't change the fact that he is just massive and strong. That is physiological, plain and simple.

Well, the way I see it, if you have floating attributes, you can have your massively strong minotaur. But you could also decide that you were abandoned for being a runt and you never grew up to minotaur standards.

Size shouldn't change, though, unless you wanted to play a minotaur with dwarfism.