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."

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Look, I'm definitely not arguing that there's zero benefit to a non-primary ASI, just that that benefit is so dramatically outweighed by a primary ASI that for many, many players it's too much benefit to pass up on.

Right. And I just don't feel that we should jettison the last remaining shreds of verisimilitude because min-maxers can't stop themselves. I simply don't see this miniscule balance issue as a big deal whereas I actually appreciate verisimilitude rather highly. This of course is a value judgement, so YMMV and all that.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Right. And I just don't feel that we should jettison the last remaining shreds of verisimilitude because min-maxers can't stop themselves. I simply don't see this miniscule balance issue as a big deal whereas I actually appreciate verisimilitude rather highly. This of course is a value judgement, so YMMV and all that.

Amusing. If you truly believe that, then there's a 0% chance of making any progress here. Best of luck.

 

[Jacqual]

All I think is that the system as published in Tasha's is not complete, they really need to tie it in with racial choice and that is based on the wording in this last UA.
1) I really think it should go you pick your race Gnome, Dwarf whatever granting you your size and base movement and any abilities based on the race darkvision and such as detailed in the UA.
2) Then you choose your lineage of the 3 from the UA or the custom one in Tasha's.
3) Then you add in your background this will give you your languages, skills, and bonus weapon proficiency's.
4) Then you pick your class apply your lineage ASI's to your choice.
5) Then you get your equipment in whatever manner you choose as presented in game now.
Now what we need is a rework of the backgrounds in the game. I mean you choose soldier or mercenary but they don't grant you skill in a weapon or two. I do think they are really going in the right direction

 

[Scribe]

When 5e came out, I realised that my personal preference was still 3.x/Pathfinder, but 5e was a step in the right direction and couldn't deny its strengths as a game. D&D is very influential in the TTRPG market, but it isn't infallible (4e proved this). Would it continue to be the trend setter or push itself too far outside of the community's expectations?

Going to be different for everyone.

I would argue that to make an appeal to the MOST people, you must have a ready made, and packaged world. The idea that FR is the 'default', that basic attributes that can be superficially understood (Ability Scores at a glance can make sense unless you dig too deep) even things like the Alignments that we have mostly lost, at its most basic, didnt break down, after all look at all the 'D&D Alignments for X', these are things which have imo transcended the game itself.

So I think there comes a point where you are talking about sacred cows mechanically, and foundational aspects that have not just been part of your games definition, but have entered into the 'geek' culture outside of the game itself. They are not always going to be the same.

I'm not saying these things cannot be changed, and made more mechanically sound, but I do believe if you remove them, then you remove a piece of what D&D is perceived to be.

For my money you must have the following, and you must not LOSE things, going into 6th.

1. The Races. Dont fix what isnt broken. I dont think I have any major issues with any of the current races, I would actually move quite a few more into the PHB next time.
2. The Attributes. Ask anyone, and Str/Dex/Con/Int/Wiz/Cha can make immediate sense with simply a one liner description, its only on a deep dive (like say an 80 page thread) that you run into issues.
3. The Alignment system. I was looking at my favorite stuff yesterday (Planescape, The Great Wheel, Blood War, etc etc) and honestly I just cant accept dumping the Alignment system.
4. The Classes and eventually Sub Classes (Prestige Classes, Archetypes). The core classes, are as iconic as the core races.

People with tons of experience, who have crafted their own worlds, their own settings, you can of course add, remove, ignore, whatever, but if I had to guess, providing a wide open 'you can do whatever you want' approach, is not going to help a company push a product to people who need a bit more help to ease into the game world.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

It is fun because some racial feats give ASI (Attribute Score Increase). and then all this discussion may be useless.

I like the idea of "bloodline" or lineage as an optional subrace but avaible for all the races/ancestries. How would be a halfling hexblood?

Wait a moment! Could the spellcale race from "Races of Dragons" come back as a draconic lineage?

I am too used with the atributes modifiers for PC races to be quited. If somebody thinks this may help to cause "typecasting" with race/class, then we could use the option from Pathfinder 2, where you choose: +2A, +2B or +2A+2B-2C. This would allow more flexibility, for example your half-orc can be a barbarian or a shaman.

 

[Scott Christian]

Let's work with that example. +2 Dex (whether it's 8 to 10 or 14 to 16) gets you:
+1 AC
+1 Initiative
+1 Dex Saving throws
Those are all great things. Maybe even as useful overall to a fighter as +2 Str would have been. (I tend to think not, but it's a really hard thing to model.). Less useful to classes that tend not be as attacked as often, but still pretty useful.

But Dex is also the über stat, and not all races give +2 to Dex. For any of the mental stats the benefit is much more dubious. Sure, +1 to my social interaction rolls can come in handy, but if I have a 10 or 12 Cha I'm not going to be the party "face" anyway, so generally I'll only be making Cha rolls if forced to.

Look, I'm definitely not arguing that there's zero benefit to a non-primary ASI, just that that benefit is so dramatically outweighed by a primary ASI that for many, many players it's too much benefit to pass up on.

True, it is an uber stat. But I still really feel the secondary and tertiary attribute bonuses are way overlooked. If we were to choose wisdom instead, you'd get a saving throw bonus, passive perception bonus and a bonus to 5 different skills. That seems like a pretty big deal to me. But I do understand that different tables use skills differently, so it might not mean anything to some tables.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I'm now only 17 pages behind, so I figured I'd tackle another point

Right, but that's already the reality. So your position is already supported.

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?

It's a non starter. It's honestly absurd. It's like training children (and I have) and training heavyweights (and I have).

For you, this new system is fine.

For me, it never will be.

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.

So, here is the problem I see with you saying the system will never be fine as presented in this UA.

How big is a Dhampir? Are they 3 ft tall or 8 ft tall? Are they very skinny for their size, or very broad and muscular?

The rules say "small or medium" so, they can range from 3ft to 8ft, from 50lbs to 800 lbs. Therefore, what should their strength modifier be? +0? +2?

What if I decided to play A Dhampir who fed upon the dreams of the living? Should I have a bonus to intelligence? Or to Wisdom? Would a bonus to intelligence still make since if I chose to be a Dhampir who consumed raw meat like a ghoul?

What if my undead nature came from being hit by a blast of psionic energy that killed my body, but my mind was empowered and tried to force my body to still function, even though my heart was destroyed so I cannot pump blood? What if my character is actually a parasite piloting a corpse, who needs to consume various vital fluids and nutrients to maintain the body in good shape? Do those two concepts get the same bonuses?


These lineages as presented cover such a wide variety of ideas, how would narrow them down into a single +2 and a single +1?

Now, you might say "that is one thing, but they said all lineages going forward will be designed this way, that in unconscionable"

But, is it? Aren't there more concepts that work exactly like this? Sure, I'd say the Thri-Kreen shouldn't be treated this way they are clearly a single defined race...

Except the "Kreen" include Thri-Kreen, Tohr-Kreen (with further variants like J'ez, J'hol, T'keech and Tondi ), Zik-Trin, Xixchil, Trin, Zik-trin'ak, and Jalath'gak

Now, I'm not an expert on what all of these differences mean in game, but I'm counting ten to eleven difference variants. That shoudl easily give enough variety to justify some floating scores. Sure, you could make ten to eleven different subraces instead, but it depends on how big of a difference you want, and looking at the races presented outside of the PHB... very few have sub-races. Most are one offs. So, a "Kreen" one-off, with a floating set of scores, could easily cover the entirety of the species, and allow a lot of the more obscure versions that would otherwise be ignored.

So... where is the downside, either here or in the future? That they might have more races like Humans that have floating ASIs? I'm fine with that. Humans don't need to be that unique, after all, there are about half a dozen races that have +2 str/+1 con. And Half-Elves, Changelings and Tritons already have floating scores. Shifters have multiple subraces, each with a different set of scores.

If this isn't about "I don't like Tasha's rules" and is purely about the future or this current ASI... then where exactly is the problem? That they might maybe do something in the future that won't make sense?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Now, you might say "that is one thing, but they said all lineages going forward will be designed this way, that in unconscionable"

But, is it? Aren't there more concepts that work exactly like this? Sure, I'd say the Thri-Kreen shouldn't be treated this way they are clearly a single defined race...

Except the "Kreen" include Thri-Kreen, Tohr-Kreen (with further variants like J'ez, J'hol, T'keech and Tondi ), Zik-Trin, Xixchil, Trin, Zik-trin'ak, and Jalath'gak

Now, I'm not an expert on what all of these differences mean in game, but I'm counting ten to eleven difference variants. That shoudl easily give enough variety to justify some floating scores. Sure, you could make ten to eleven different subraces instead, but it depends on how big of a difference you want, and looking at the races presented outside of the PHB... very few have sub-races. Most are one offs. So, a "Kreen" one-off, with a floating set of scores, could easily cover the entirety of the species, and allow a lot of the more obscure versions that would otherwise be ignored.

So... where is the downside, either here or in the future? That they might have more races like Humans that have floating ASIs? I'm fine with that. Humans don't need to be that unique, after all, there are about half a dozen races that have +2 str/+1 con. And Half-Elves, Changelings and Tritons already have floating scores. Shifters have multiple subraces, each with a different set of scores.

If this isn't about "I don't like Tasha's rules" and is purely about the future or this current ASI... then where exactly is the problem? That they might maybe do something in the future that won't make sense?

I actually half agree with you there. Subraces are awkward and rather problematic (imagine trying to give ability adjustments to human 'subraces.' ) Furthermore some races have about million subraces and some have none. So if you want to be an elf but are not so fussed about exactly which sort of an elf, you get a lot of flexibility, but if you want to be a goliath you're out of luck. I would give each species some fixed traits (including ASIs) and then some they can choose from. So all elves would get a Dex ASI, Trance, Keen Senses, Fey Ancestry and Darkvision as standard, but then they would get to choose their other ASI and choose from a list of some other bonus rules and proficiencies. The second ASI could be completely freely assignable (except of course not stackable with the first ASI) or it could be a limited list if one would for example not want to let small species to put it in strength (I definitely wouldn't.) But yeah, I feel something along these lines would be a sensible compromise option.

 

[Charlaquin]

the poll is up, has everyone made their opinion know yet?

I’m not seeing it on the mothership. Anyone have a link?

 

[bedir than]

This should work

D&D UA Survey 54 (Gothic Lineages)

D&D UA Survey 54 (Gothic Lineages).

survey.alchemer.com