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."

 

[Scribe]

It's like your saying that choosing to play a strong race should have no bearing at all on the Str of your PC.

Like a goliath PC, just because they are a PC, isn't really a goliath.

For me, player character dwarves (or whatever) are still dwarves. Your attitude (and that rule) suggests that player character dwarves are not dwarves.

And has been stated many times, that is the point for some. You are not a Dwarf. You are a PLAYER CHARACTER Dwarf, and the themes and tropes need not apply. You are exceptional. That is what they want. See, its right here.

PCs are supposed to be the exception. Therefore, they should be able to be created with any combination of racial adjustments. Not only to avoid the stereotypical frequent race/class combos, but to allow archetypes to be achieved and supported mechanically.

If the lowest score I can possibly get in ability is a 10 (because the racial bonus gives a +2), that means as a PC, I can never have that as a weak area. Strengths aren't the only thing that helps flesh our our archetypes. Weaknesses also do that, and are just as important. Maybe I want to play a PC who is crude, rude, and bears horrific scars, and overall is not charismatic at all. Well, if I play a half elf, or tiefling, or other CHA bonuses race, I guess I can't really do that and have the mechanics support it.

I agree, give me back my -2 Cha Tieflings!

 

[Remathilis]

So, bring you consideration to the end point: why no dispute on food rate and a dispute on ASI?

Because ability scores don't actually represent much as far as in game fiction.

Imagine this. You have two goliaths. One has a 10 str, one a 17 str. One is 6'4 204 lbs, one is 7', 320 lbs. Which height goes with which strength?



Answer: they are unconnected and the one with the min str could have max size and vice versa. So clearly strength =\= mass. Strength is an abstraction that measures ability to lift, athletics, and melee prowess. Nothing more.

It makes even more sense when you consider mental scores. What does Wisdom represent? Hot do you measure it? What is YOUR wisdom score? It's an abstraction that keys some skills and spells.

Once you decouple the idea that strength equals mass, you see it like hp. Hp doesn't equal meat, it is an abstraction if how long you can fight until you die. Just like you don't limit how many hp a pc has by size, you don't need to limit strength by the same measures.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I'm sorry. If you like games where internal coherence in rules is broken you are welcome. The next time we play tennis togheter, I'll first say you that the net is 1 meter high but when it's my turn the net magically go to ground. It's ok for you?

I was going to lose at tennis anyway, so sure. Also instead of a tennis ball, we use a bowling ball slathered in mineral oil to make thins interesting.

Internal coherence is actually funny and a credible world enhance the suspension of disbelief. This is how it works normally. I don't want to say you are not normal, of course. But try not to push too much your position because it can be easily became paradoxical.

...
I think internal consistency was omitted from this paragraph because I have no idea... I guess I've been insulted?

I don't know. I'm scared.

 

[Arial Black]

No, it doesn't. What it means is that your PC is stronger or weaker than others. Unless you go out of your way to fully stat out every single NPC, you're going to use the same basic commoner stats for all of them, regardless of race. And then, if you really need to, give that NPC a +1 on some roll you make for it, because you decided that it's stronger than a typical NPC commoner.

(Also, it proves that just because a race is physically small doesn't mean they also have to be weak. For all we know, halflings are built like chimps.)

"Okay DM, in your game world, what race is the strongest race that is allowed for PCs?"

"Among the playable races in my world, goliaths are the strongest."

"I want as strong a PC as I can, so I'll play a goliath. What bonus do I get to my Str score for being a goliath?"

"None. PC goliaths are no stronger or weaker than any other race. If you want to play the strongest fighty type that you can, best play a halfling; that Halfling Luck trait makes you a much better Str-based PC than any goliath."

Did you see where that stopped making sense there?

 

[Hurin70]

No book hand, but does the 5e PHB actually attribute "physical beauty" to Charisma as a stat anymore? I would be surprised if it did since Charisma and Beauty have been divorced since the 1e days of the Comeliness stat.

Good catch: I just checked, and it talks instead about confidence, eloquence, and leadership.

So I guess the answer then is no, the quote about Elven beauty doesn't bother me at all now, since it has no mechanical effect.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

ASI?

Chimps are stronger than humans, but they get tired sooner.

If we are talking about creation of PCs and potential abuses by munchkins players we should remember there is a 5.5 Ed with a harder playesting, the videogame adaptations. Here they aren't thousands of players but millions creating PCs and looking for the best max/min.

And PC races need flexibility, because typecasting is like wearing a boring uniform and you want differeing fashion style fo show you are different for certain urban tribe. What if I want to create a PC, a sorcerer gnome name Chibiusa whose warcry is "in the name of the moon I will punish you!", or Krilin, a halfling monk whose best friend is the vanara (monkey-folk from Oriental Adventures Kara-Tur) champion Son Wukong?

I say again "racial traits" based in "cultural legacies" should be modular or custom-made. Also I love the idea of archetypes from Pathfinder, where the class features can be changed with other optional list. 3.5 Unearthed Arcana had got something like that.

 

[Scott Christian]

As has been explained many times, it's not about the math it's about the perception. The reality remains that players tend to only choose races that let them start with a 16 in their primary stat. D&DBeyond data bears this out.

Want to go out and persuade the entire D&D community that they should stop doing this? Be my guest.

...is substantively different than being -1 on all of your primary rolls for 8-12 levels, and then being one feat short after that.

Which one is it?
Are you sick and tired of seeing the same race/class combinations or do you just really want all races to start with the same class determined primary stat?
I am going to guess it is a little of both, but please correct me if I am wrong.

 

[Guest 6801328]

As has been explained many times, it is the perception that the +1 is more important that leads others to a less worn path. You seem to understand the ASI side perfectly. You are spot on - it is the perception, not the actual statistics, that makes people think their character stronger or weaker. But you don't seem to want to view it from the other side. It is a two lane road.

I'm viewing it from the point of view of impact on the game. The same race/class combinations show up constantly.

Also, I'm not agreeing that the statistics say there's not much difference (you chose AC 11 in your example for a reason...). I'm saying that we don't need to argue about the statistics, because it's really the perception that matters.

Finally, with a floating ASI you can still have the exact same character you have today. So in that sense you're right: I don't have much sympathy for the argument that "other characters shouldn't get to have the same scores I have."

 

[Hurin70]

In this particular case, I have never, not once, heard a player ask or complain about these sorts of disconnects.

We've never had plain text so completely divorced from mechanics before either.

 

[Guest 6801328]

And has been stated many times, that is the point for some. You are not a Dwarf. You are a PLAYER CHARACTER Dwarf, and the themes and tropes need not apply. You are exceptional. That is what they want. See, its right here.



I agree, give me back my -2 Cha Tieflings!

I will agree that I think it's unfortunate that using Point Buy or Standard Array you can't have a score less than 8.