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."

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Did you miss the part where I explained why this is incorrect?

In 5e up to Tasha's, a Half-Orc started the game with an inherent Strength bonus, which ensured the strongest starting Orc was stronger than the Strongest starting Elf, and the Orc reached maximum Strength before the Elf. So it was still fair to say that Orcs were strong.

The fact that there were inconsistencies in previous editions, with words not matching texts, doesn't justify inconsistencies in future editions. The fact that your software has a bug now doesn't mean you should keep the bug in future editions.

Oh I read that part. It's not a rational argument, as I said. The argument you're making requires that stat minimums exist, not merely stat advantages.

 

[Hurin70]

That is not great. That is the other thing. The thing that is the polar opposite of great.

It actually is pretty great. They have a system for balancing races: Halflings are compensated for their small size with extra development points for things like feats (talents) and skills. So Halflings don't hit as hard, but they are more well rounded than Trolls.

 

[Hurin70]

Oh I read that part. It's not a rational argument, as I said. The argument you're making requires that stat minimums exist, not merely stat advantages.

To quote Inigo Montoya, 'You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.'

Simply saying my argument is not a rational argument is not itself an argument. You haven't actually addressed the substance.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

It actually is pretty great. They have a system for balancing races: Halflings are compensated for their small size with extra development points for things like feats (talents) and skills. So Halflings don't hit as hard, but they are more well rounded than Trolls.

That's not how balancing works in modern forms of D&D, though. Giving Halflings say, 2 more skills and a couple of tool proficiencies or the like, to balance them having -2 DMG and rolling an HP dice 1 or 2 sizes down would be absolute joke, and pretty much ensure anyone who played a Halfling was in for a world of Death Saves. Trading combat power in an extremely combat-heavy game, for unreliable and only-occasionally-rolled skills is not a good trade at all in about 95% of D&D games and 100% of D&D games running official WotC adventures.

I haven't played Rolemaster for 15 years and only a little back then. Maybe it works better there. But I doubt it a great deal.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

To quote Inigo Montoya, 'You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.'

Simply saying my argument is not a rational argument is not itself an argument. You haven't actually addressed the substance.

I have. I've pointed out, repeatedly now, that your argument is not rational because it relies on stat minimums to be rational, but you're only arguing for stat advantage.

 

[Vaalingrade]

It actually is pretty great. They have a system for balancing races: Halflings are compensated for their small size with extra development points for things like feats (talents) and skills. So Halflings don't hit as hard, but they are more well rounded than Trolls.

More development points was not in the post I quoted though. And there is nothing ever that is going to make 'less starting HP worth it. You could offer me a sat laser at level one and I still wouldn't trade even a 1-point hit to HP for it.

Also, can't the halfling just plow their development points into not sucking at fighting and thus foil the entire scheme?

 

[Hurin70]

I have. I've pointed out, repeatedly now, that your argument is not rational because it relies on stat minimums to be rational, but you're only arguing for stat advantage.

It does not rely on stat minimums. I've explained in detail how it doesn't rely on stat minimums in 5e either. What about this are you not getting?

 

[Hurin70]

I haven't played Rolemaster for 15 years and only a little back then. Maybe it works better there. But I doubt it a great deal.

So you're arguing from ignorance again then?

You accept that you have no idea how it works... then say it won't work. This to you is an effective argument?

 

[Ruin Explorer]

It does not rely on stat minimums. I've explained in detail how it doesn't rely on stat minimums in 5e either. What about this are you not getting?

The problem is, I do get it. It's just not a rational argument. It's attempt to skip over the rational part and just argue one small point, to try and claim that 5E needs to edit all it's text. That's not rational. If 5E needed to edit it's text because of this, it needed to edit before, because it was already false. You've accepted this premise by saying that just because previous editions also made this "mistake", this one doesn't need to. By even saying that, you are agreeing that this issue existed already. Which is what I'm saying.

 

[Charlaquin]

Which I think is a failing with the one-size-fits-all method of swapping proficiencies. An elf having bow proficiency is cultural, having keen senses is biological. It shouldn't be that an elf can dull his senses to become an expert in Arcana...

True, and I think keen senses would have been better represented by something other than perception proficiency. Maybe advantage on perception checks based on sight, or maybe something like the eagle totem Barbarian’s telescopic vision. Maybe you draw on past editions and give them a bonus to passive Wisdom (Perception) for the purpose of noticing secret doors.