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]

One thing I like to do is rename the stats to something like Valor, Subtlety, Discipline, Mana, Piety, and Creativity, so that it's as clear as day how the stats could be relevant to warriors, rogues, monks, wizards, clerics, and bards (respectively), but it's eminently impossible to tell how they could ever somehow represent the sum and total of any individual character's capabilities. The simple act of renaming the stats really does cause players to interpret them differently!

Oh I really like "Valour" instead of "Strength"!!!!!

That just sounds so....cinematic and heroic. Love it.

 

[Hurin70]

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

I though what was most important was enabling character choice?

I want to play my unique character concept of a T-Rex right now. And my friend wants to play a human 'stronger than any T-Rex' at level 1. Why are you oppressing us by not allowing us to play ridiculous character concepts?

 

[TwoSix]

Longer than that. While B/X also did not have racial modifiers, there were also no caps. Sure, the stats on the chart only went to 18, but you could do the "minus 2 to gain 1" method to keep going up, I suppose. Nothing said "halflings can only have a max strength of X".

So it was really only 1E and 2E that messed it up.

 

[Sacrosanct]

His argument still stands if you assume he was using ratios (dividing upper number by lower number) instead of differences (subracting lower number from upper number).

Yeah, I was using ratios. Even said the word "ratio" in that comment. I thought it was pretty clear I wasn't using straight subtraction. But it's moot now.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Is Killer Croc stronger than Superman?

If we're going by the movies, he has a stronger character than Superman despite only having like three lines.

He's also more heroic!

 

[Jack Daniel]

Longer than that. While B/X also did not have racial modifiers, there were also no caps. Sure, the stats on the chart only went to 18, but you could do the "minus 2 to gain 1" method to keep going up, I suppose. Nothing said "halflings can only have a max strength of X".

Halflings maxed out where everyone else did in basic: 18 if mortal, 100 if immortal.

 

[Waller]

The common argument about races and ability scores in this thread is word-for-word the exact same argument as those who used to want women to have strength penalties in D&D, just with the word 'women' and 'men' replaced with 'halflings' and 'minotaurs'. I suspect it's also the same people, but I can't tell for sure.

 

[Vaalingrade]

The common argument about races and ability scores in this thread is word-for-word the exact same argument as those who used to want women to have strength penalties in D&D, just with the word 'women' and 'men' replaced with 'halflings' and 'minotaurs'. I suspect it's also the same people, but I can't tell for sure.

Oh please god, let's not.

 

[Guest 6801328]

I want distinct racial difference, at the mechanical level.

(snip)

Support for that is officially being dropped going forward.

There is zero indication that they are moving away from racial abilities ("Relentless Endurance", "Fey Ancestry", "Dwarven Resilience", "Halfling Luck", etc. etc. etc.)

So how on earth can you claim that's happening?

 

[Urriak Uruk]

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.

Relevant, sure. Maybe for a couple of pages of this thread. But we are now on page 63, and very little of this seems to speak specifically to the changes made in this UA. Instead, it seems almost entirely about a debate on how race/culture should be reflected in the base rules of D&D.

It's a debate to be had sure, but at this point it feels like these same arguments (and let's be clear, no one is being convinced or changing their minds on either side), need to go in their own discussion somewhere else.