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]

But this still leaves a middle ground when the 3ft halfling fighter with 16 Str would be evenly matched with the 8 ft goliath fighter with a 16 strength. You'd have to cap and floor the strength scores so that the strongest halfling couldn't match the weakest goliath if we want strength and size to correspond.

Yes, but again, there's no traction for that, and it doesn't need to be that fine tuned.

Lines in the sand and all that.

 

[Dire Bare]

Y'all have thoroughly ruined what should be a normal thread about new race options with the same tired debate about whether D&D is racist or not.

It's a GAME. Can't we just talk about whether being able to play a Dhampir is cool or not, and take this old argument to a different thread?

These discussions do tend to be circular and the same tribes draw the same battle lines . . . .

But it is relevant to the discussion. The whole reason for this change in how new races are being introduced to the game is the institutional racism built into D&D, real or perceived.

 

[Hurin70]

Edit: double post.

 

[Sacrosanct]

That's not really the question though, is it? How much stronger would Wadlow have been if he had trained as much as Baccianini? It wouldn't be a contest.

Well, if you knew who Wadlow was, you wouldn't make this comment. Funny thing about giantism in people, it doesn't really make you stronger. Many people with it have a hard time moving their own weight.

You can try to justify it with strained arguments, but I've never heard of a chimp who was stronger than a bull. Relative strength is not absolute strength.

Strained argument? The weight difference between a chimp (100 lbs) and a strong human (300 lbs) is a lot closer than with a bull (2,000 lbs). I find your comparison disingenuous. Even between a halfling (50lbs) and a human is a much closer ratio than a chimp to a bull.

But again, all this ignores how this is a fantasy game, where reality bending stuff happens all the time. I mean, in 5e, the cow has a strength of 16, which is less than a person can start with at level 1. How many regular people do you know that are stronger than a cow?

Sorry, but your argument fall apart at the seems in the context of the game.

 

[Dausuul]

I prefer my solution, which is "Recognize that stats are an historical artifact whose only real use is as a game balance tool, and not use them to derive any sort of world-building or simulative rules."

If I accept that then next step for me is tossing the rules in the trash bin. I have no use for rules that do not represent anything.

The trash bin is where ability scores belong. They're a wretched mechanic. Unfortunately, they are also the sacredest of sacred cows.

I sat down once to see what it would take to excise them from 5E, and decided the work required exceeded the benefits (when it would only benefit my table). So instead I just cheer every time Wizards does something that reduces their impact.

 

[TwoSix]

I'm not saying you shouldn't get to have your system to tell your stories.

I'm consistently being told 'no it's fine'.

It isn't. It's not remotely close to fine.

We're in the 3rd decade of D&D not having any sort of cap on racial minimums and maximums. If that's a deal breaker for you, you'll need to change systems.

 

[Guest 6801328]

It's mine that's losing out, and everyone spending 60 pages telling me I'm wrong and a 3 foot tall slim (vs dwarf, thick) being is going to be as strong as an 8 foot tall (seriously folks, go stand beside someone who is 6'8) powerfully athletic being makes sense?

You keep phrasing it that way to make it sound ridiculous. You make it sound like it's some kind of inevitability, that because the rules allow it happen, it's some kind of reality or truth. But it doesn't mean "a halfling is going to be as strong as a goliath" it means "it's possible to tell a story in which a halfling hero is as strong as a goliath." But if that doesn't meet the storytelling preferences of the people at your table, it doesn't happen.

Second, "Strength" score is an abstraction. Two beings with equal Strength scores do not have to be "as strong as each other". It means they have the same chance of succeeding at a variety of tasks that require Strength. How you interpret the results is up to the DM and players. So it's more accurate to say, "When the dice start falling, the halfling is as likely to succeed on Strength-based tasks as the goliath."

 

[TwoSix]

If I accept that then next step for me is tossing the rules in the trash bin. I have no use for rules that do not represent anything.

Identifying which rules fit your personal aesthetic needs is an important part of playing in or running a successful game.

 

[Guest 6801328]

If I accept that then next step for me is tossing the rules in the trash bin. I have no use for rules that do not represent anything.

That does make me wonder why you chose D&D 5e.

 

[TwoSix]

Shh.... the anti-ASI people might use that to argue that Humans should get more strength bonuses than T-rexes, if only their players come up with the character concept of playing a 'human stronger than any T-Rex' at first level.

T-rexes aren't a playable race, and thus don't have Strength bonuses. They're NPCs.