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."

 

[Guest 6801328]

An equally trained Goliath and Halfling will see the Goliath winning the vast majority of melee one on one fights.

It’s easy to dismiss size-strength in favor of training, but the more useful comparison is to assume the same amount of training and skill.

And the halfling will be a better rock climber.

 

[bedir than]

Is it "supposed to be 2/3" of the game? I mean, yes, there are 3 pillars, but what evidence do you have that they are supposed to be equal pillars? Certainly not the page count of the rules, or the content of the official adventures, I hope.

Let's assume that you are correct, just to quit that debate entirely and ignore that the most popular streamed games certainly don't focus on combat like your table and builds do.

Even if you are correct that those two elements are merely 10% of the game, or some other absurd number, again ALL optimization ignores them completely.

 

[PsyzhranV2]

I love this comment and wish to highlight it, because you rarely see people optimize their characters for what is supposed to be 2/3rds of the game.

ALL of the optimization discussion as relates to race and lineage focuses on combat. How boring.

5e's disproportionately focused on combat, in that it's the area of the game with the most comprehensive player-facing mechanics. Exploration and social interactions are less developed by comparison, and thus have less to optimize. Them's the breaks.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Don't have time. Excuse me. it is sufficient to scroll the thread.

The only thing I can think of, in this thread, is where somebody said that it's the "aesthetic" of the races that appeals to them, and when somebody else thought this meant "how they look" it was explained that by "aesthetic" they meant the overall feel and roleplaying opportunities, not just what they looked like.

And isn't that exactly why people should be picking races? Not to minmax their attributes?

 

[Charlaquin]

The differences in average strength between real-life humans are going to be minuscule. This is one of the reasons the concept of race is so problematic when applied to real-world peoples. Yes, the Spartans did practice a primitive form of eugenics (inspection and infanticide) to their children, but it is unclear whether they could really tell which infants would be strongest at birth. In any case, the real-life differences between humans are so small that the concept of race really doesn't carry much if any water when applied to real world peoples. We're all the same species in the end.

In the fantasy world, though, we're not really talking about race so much as species. They do have real differences. A Minotaur or Bull is much stronger than a Chimpanzee. And we're talking orders of magnitude there.

If we’re talking about orders of magnitude of difference, I don’t think +2 strength even begins to adequately model such difference.

This is why I don’t find the argument from verisimilitude compelling. The mechanic it’s being used to defend is such a poor way to express the concept it’s meant to model. The idea that one can accept that the only difference between characters of different sizes is +1 to hit and damage, but take away that +1 and your suspension of disbelief is shattered... Seems like such an arbitrary line to draw in the sand.

 

[Stefano Rinaldelli]

So, wait, let me get this straight: you don't find the whole orc portrayal thing problematic (I remember your posts on the subject) and don't think there's any connection between fantasy games and racism in the real world, but you're worried that your 9 year old might transfer a disconnect between size categories and strength scores into some kind of real world blunder?

Seriously?

My son asked me: pa why orcs are so cruel? My response was: "because in this story (LOTR), orcs are perverted by evil that make them greedy, rabid and ultimately stupid, do you know that once upon a time they were elves?" (eyes and mouth wide open) "In real world things a little more messy, because people like them exist but are not easily recognizable as green horrid guys. Fortunately this is a story and it is simple to know who the bad ones are".

The issue of finding a phrase like "ASI is a cultural attribute" is very much more problematic, because it is something that pass before your eyes and you don't immediately recognize the error. It is more insidious and it is tossed on the page without explanation. A young guy could absorb it without thinking too much upon it and assimilate the error.

So the answer is yes, seriously.

 

[Charlaquin]

I thought Powerful Build was designed to solve this issue?

Do we need Lithe Build and Stout Build?

If they replace racial adjust to strength score? Please!!

 

[Vaalingrade]

I love this comment and wish to highlight it, because you rarely see people optimize their characters for what is supposed to be 2/3rds of the game.

ALL of the optimization discussion as relates to race and lineage focuses on combat. How boring.

Because optimizing for the rest means 'play a wizard or druid'.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Let's assume that you are correct, just to quit that debate entirely and ignore that the most popular streamed games certainly don't focus on combat like your table and builds do.

Even if you are correct that those two elements are merely 10% of the game, or some other absurd number, again ALL optimization ignores them completely.

Not entirely. Most optimization guides suggest that Perception is the über skill.

I don't disagree though, that most optimization is focused on combat. Except in cases, such as Tomb of Annihilation, where an aspect of one of the other pillars is known to be important.

Spoiler: Spoiler

Better bring your Ranger with Outlander background!

 

[TwoSix]

Even if you are correct that those two elements are merely 10% of the game, or some other absurd number, again ALL optimization ignores them completely.

No it doesn't. I've absolutely seen builds built around interaction or exploration. (Warlocks with at-will disguise self and the Actor feat come to mind.)

The problem is the way DMs run non-combat sections is so variable that doing any sort of builds oriented around them are going to be merely guidelines, at best. Not to mention how much of non-combat scenarios will be arbitrated by player-DM negotiation rather than utilizing character resources.