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.

Screen Shot 2021-01-26 at 5.46.36 PM.png



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."
 

log in or register to remove this ad

And that is the crux of the opposite side of the discussions argument is. My individual character should have no bearing on what is "normal" for my race choice, and similarly the "normal" for my race choice should have no bearing on my individual character because, as a PC, I am by definition an outlier to the average.
This is a sticky line that keeps getting repeated. You are just as much an outlier halfling with a 15 strength than a 16. Both are outliers. You have exceeded normal halflings just by using point buy.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Look, chap - you've got a Tolkien ubermench handle followed by an 88 tag (="H(eil)H(itler)") and you keep arguing for racial essentialism? I'm going to look askance at your entire argument throughout , and you aren't exactly coming up all non racist, y'know? Might be worth reevaluating.
 

By the way, this is wrong.

I think you're only counting the extra damage from the extra hits.

The +5 fighter will do 1 extra damage every time they both hit, plus two more hits that do as much damage as the +4 fighter, plus the two points you already counted.

In twenty swings, the first fighter will hit 14 times, the second fighter will hit 15 times. If we assume 2d6 damage (greatsword) then the first guy does ((3.5 * 2) + 4) * 14 = 154 / 20 = 7.7 damage per swing. The second guy does ((3.5 * 2) + 5) * 15 = 180 / 20 = 9 damage per swing. 9 / 7.7 ~= 17% more damage, per swing.

And that's against a really low armor class. Increase the AC (or use a 1H weapon) and the difference widens.
You are correct. I did forget about the hits. So in a fight with a darkmantle at 22 hit points, the +5 fighter does 2-3 extra points of damage. It still seems trivial, but that's just me.
 

I know, I know, it's unreasonable to expect 32 years olds to understand anti racist practice!

Fortunatey, it's super easy to change one's handle!
 

You are correct. I did forget about the hits. So in a fight with a darkmantle at 22 hit points, the +5 fighter does 2-3 extra points of damage. It still seems trivial, but that's just me.

Very, very easily the difference between two hits to kill and 3 hits to kill.

I'll run some more numbers later.
 

It's not just customization, it's realism. It's realistic for your weapon and armor proficiencies to come from your culture, not your race. I like D&D, I don't like other systems. That's why I don't play them.
It's actually a lot more realistic to have proficiencies come from your background. No pirate is going to learn to wear plate, even if they are on a boat of dwarven pirates.
 

Even with the same Str score, halflings can't use heavy weapons and goliaths can carry/lift more weight (due to powerful build). So, really, you don't need that +2 Str to show that goliaths are Vin Diesel, the Race stronger than halflings.
I know, its been mentioned multiple times. Back on page 48 I mention its all an abstraction, and we all have our lines in the sand. Thats all there is to say really in the end. :)

I dont think Wizards will change the path they are on, and there are other systems that people can look to, from the one Morrus promotes, or the one AcererakTriple6 has developed, or whatever.

I want race to matter more then it will at this rate, others want it to matter less. There is no 'right' here imo, simply different tastes.
 

Very, very easily the difference between two hits to kill and 3 hits to kill.

I'll run some more numbers later.
No, I think you are right, four hits to versus three. Three is better. But how many D&D battles happen solo? How many times do we see a a person rolling hot mean a whole lot more than someone with a good character? How many sessions just have a rogue with sneak attack actually do more damage than the fighters? Etc.

This again illustrates my point of not seeing all the knobs. Only staring at one little thing - damage output via per turn. It doesn't take into account initiative (which if you were a elf your dex is on average 2 higher than your goliath counterpart). It doesn't take into account healing in four hours versus eight. It also doesn't take into account your ability to use a bow better when those archers on top of the cliff start firing down on you. Heck, at first level, it doesn't even take into account that the elf probably has a better AC. None of these things seem to be part of the equation, and they should be.
 

God. Character creation already has too many pieces.

We should at least merge culture with background.
I mean, I don’t like that either, but...eh. Whatever.

The only thing that really bugs me in all this is the idea that we can’t say that the basic most published worlds Goliath is trained in athletics.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top