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."

 

[Scott Christian]

False.

I agree. In your opinion, my opinion is false.

First of all, this varies between campaigns.

Bingo. I stated this in another comment prior to you commenting on this post. It varied by table. Since you already know this, then you should probably be in favor of the floating ASI as an optional rule - because it varies by table.

Second of all, not all ability scores are created equal.

I also stated this in that other post. But in your post, you go on to talk about how charisma is almost equally important, and how wisdom can be beneficial. So it is clear you understand that these other attributes can be helpful to a character. And since you understand that, I would ask you to consider this - maybe those characters that are helped by other attributes find something even more fun they didn't expect in their character. I have seen it happen, and it lead down an extremely fun experience. Never would have happened had the player solely focused on their two key attributes.

Third of all, a +1/+2 to your main ability score is hell of a lot more useful than a +1 to an ability score that you don't care about.

Your opinion is valid. But it is an opinion because it is a table centric game, and the ruleset is not broken when main abilities are down by a +1. I mean, movement can be argued as more useful than anything in the game, as can armor class. But when someone has 5' on another or an extra few points in AC, no one feels the need to change the rules.

Conclusion: Your argument is flawed.

You are entitled to your opinion.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

I had a weird thought... so for a game like Dungeon Crawl Classics (or the first editions of D&D), where races and class were actually one and the same, is that a racially intolerant design choice?

For those who don't know what I'm talking about, in several "D&D Retro Clones" when you create a character, you can be a warrior or an elf, not both. The classes like "warrior, cleric, wizard" are always assumed to be wizards, and if you choose something like "elf, halfling, dwarf" they are treated as entirely separate classes.

Not trying to argue here, but I am curious as to whether this design (one that will certainly never be in D&D 5E, 6E, or after) is one that is incompatible with modern sensibilities.

 

[Scott Christian]

I had a weird thought... so for a game like Dungeon Crawl Classics (or the first editions of D&D), where races and class were actually one and the same, is that a racially intolerant design choice?

For those who don't know what I'm talking about, in several "D&D Retro Clones" when you create a character, you can be a warrior or an elf, not both. The classes like "warrior, cleric, wizard" are always assumed to be wizards, and if you choose something like "elf, halfling, dwarf" they are treated as entirely separate classes.

Not trying to argue here, but I am curious as to whether this design (one that will certainly never be in D&D 5E, 6E, or after) is one that is incompatible with modern sensibilities.

I don't know about incompatible. But it narrows the audience.

I mean, personally if they did it with all races, and got rid of classes, such that the race chosen was the actual class, that might open the door a little to the design choice being consistent. It would also open up for expansion books that have subraces as a different class.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I agree. In your opinion, my opinion is false.

Not "in my opinion". Based off of evidence and logical arguments. There's no "opinion" on this matter. It's objective fact that a +1/+2 to one of your main ability scores will more often than not be more beneficial for your character than a bonus to an ability score not vital to your class's mechanical effectiveness. It's better for a druid to focus on druid-y things with as high a Wisdom score as they can have than than try to have a good/decent Charisma bonus so that they can also do the role of the Charisma-based classes. Leave that to Bard/Paladin/Swashbuckler or Assassin Rogue/Warlock/Sorcerer. You focusing on doing your job as effectively as you possibly can is more beneficial to the party than you also trying to do my job as well.

Bingo. I stated this in another comment prior to you commenting on this post. It varied by table. Since you already know this, then you should probably be in favor of the floating ASI as an optional rule - because it varies by table.

I also stated this in that other post. But in your post, you go on to talk about how charisma is almost equally important, and how wisdom can be beneficial. So it is clear you understand that these other attributes can be helpful to a character. And since you understand that, I would ask you to consider this - maybe those characters that are helped by other attributes find something even more fun they didn't expect in their character. I have seen it happen, and it lead down an extremely fun experience. Never would have happened had the player solely focused on their two key attributes.

The importance of different ability scores overall will differ from table to table, but not the importance of those ability scores to your class. An Artificer in any campaign that is trying to be good at being an Artificer will want as high an Intelligence bonus as they can possibly get. That doesn't vary between tables.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Not "in my opinion". Based off of evidence and logical arguments. There's no "opinion" on this matter. It's objective fact that a +1/+2 to one of your main ability scores will more often than not be more beneficial for your character than a bonus to an ability score not vital to your class's mechanical effectiveness. It's better for a druid to focus on druid-y things with as high a Wisdom score as they can have than than try to have a good/decent Charisma bonus so that they can also do the role of the Charisma-based classes. Leave that to Bard/Paladin/Swashbuckler or Assassin Rogue/Warlock/Sorcerer. You focusing on doing your job as effectively as you possibly can is more beneficial to the party than you also trying to do my job as well.

The importance of different ability scores overall will differ from table to table, but not the importance of those ability scores to your class. An Artificer in any campaign that is trying to be good at being an Artificer will want as high an Intelligence bonus as they can possibly get. That doesn't vary between tables.

First player to create a character for my new campaign made a rogue who has charisma as their highest score...

 

[Guest 6801328]

He may have been exaggerating, or he may have tried to downplay what happened when people pointed out how abusive it was. We have no way to know, obviously. But we can say what he did was pretty horrible, since you don't just throw something at a kid and tell them "figure it out yourself" and still call it a "teaching moment." Since, you know, there was no teaching involved.

It may have been a learning experience, but not a teaching one.

 

[Guest 6801328]

First player to create a character for my new campaign made a rogue who has charisma as their highest score...

I know a rescue worker who tells a story of a motorcyclist who went down, slid across the road, bounced over the curb, and caught the edge of his helmet on the curb, which broke his neck and killed him. This was his evidence that it’s dangerous to wear a helmet when riding motorcycles.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

First player to create a character for my new campaign made a rogue who has charisma as their highest score...

Great. All power to them. However, that doesn't help them use their Rogue features (unless they are multiclassed with Hexblade).

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Great. All power to them. However, that doesn't help them use their Rogue features (unless they are multiclassed with Hexblade).

Yes it does. Expertise in charisma skills.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Yes it does. Expertise in charisma skills.

Expertise enhances their Deception ability, not the other way around. There are no base rogue features based off of Charisma.