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."

 

[Chaosmancer]

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.

I think you completely missed the actual point I was making.

Take the Shifters for example. They have:
Con +2 / Str +1
Str +2/ Dex +1
Dex +2 / Cha +1
Wis +2 / Dex +1

None of them share the same value of a score. The closest you can get is that three of them have some sort of dexterity mod, but two of those are +1's and one is a +2


Looking at the Kreen example, some of them are massive beasts made for war (+2 Con, +1 Str) some are highly intelligent spellcasters and diplomats (+2 Int, +1 Cha), some are our traditional scouts and warriors (+2 Dex, +1 Wis). With this as the case... what static ASI could we give them all? What single score defines them above anything else? I can't think of one.

So, how would it be bad to give them floating scores? Sure, it could allow for edge cases, a +2 Con, +1 Cha version that doesn't quite fit into any of the categories. but making one version of them static is also a bad route that does the same thing, forcing concepts that don't have that trait to have it.

We already have elves, dwarves, halflings, gnomes, minotaurs, goliaths, ect. Those races aren't being printed and designed again, they already exist. So, what in the future do we have that is going to be so terrible to have floating ASIs for? That would not end up needing multiple subraces or concepts left on the cutting room floor?

 

[Arial Black]

Based on an exchange I had on this thread on Thursday, I suggested a houserule to the guy who's going to start the Dragon Heist campaign on Wednesday. In the campaign document he shared with us today, this is included:-

"If you so wish, I would allow a racial bonus of +2 to any ability score to be swapped for a feat for which you qualify. However, if your chosen race already has floating bonuses (such as half elves) then this would not be allowed."

Since a player can choose a half feat, this means that any race can get a 16 in any ability score at 1st level (satisfying those who want such flexibility), while at the same time each race as a whole still has those iconic bonuses (satisfying those who want these things to make sense). It also opens up the chance to get a feat at first level beyond humans.

I haven't taken advantage of it myself, but that is because I already have my character concept worked out and I'm happy with it. But it must be said that the reason I started making a human character is because I wanted to start with a certain feat, and no other race gets a feat at 1st level. Had I known about this option sooner, would I have made a different PC or chosen a different race? I cannot know.

I haven't got any feedback from the other players yet, but I'll let you guys know after Wednesday's session zero.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Please assume the following are written without priority given to one approach or the other, or indeed, you may prioritize the floating option as the 'Official' variant. (Please dont mind the templating, I'm sure it can be corrected.)



"While your physical appearance would seem to indicate you are a member of a specific race, your unique lineage has dramatically reinforced your physical form.

You may put your ability scores within Str, Dex, Con, or Cha, in any combination not with no increase greater than 2, up to a total of 4 ASI."

So, my psychic concepts don't get support for Intelligence? You don't think feeding on psychic energy would be excellent for Intelligence?

I mean, you basically gave "floating ASIs" but cut out Intelligence and Wisdom.

"You may place a +2 in any attribute, and an additional +2 may be put in any other attribute or 2 other attributes may be increased by 1."

How is this different from floating ASIs? This sounds exactly like floating ASI's.

The downside, is that by default, an Elf should be more Dexterous than a Dwarf at level one if the elf wishes to focus on Dexterity, a Dwarf should be hardier than an Elf at level one if they focus on Dexterity, and a Goliath should have a higher strength, than a Halfling, if it desires to focus on Strength.

The 'why' behind those statements has been beaten into that horse shaped pile you see in the corner, I see no further value in splitting hairs on that.

Both systems can coexist, that is all I ask at this point.

Both systems do exist. Let us say the Dhampir is printed right this second.

You would go to your PHB and find Elves have a +2 to Dex and Dwarves have a +2 to Con. Nothing has changed.

What is changing is that in the future, future concepts will be printed with floating ASIs, so who is going to be printed that is so terrible to have that? Elves are printed. Dwarves are printed. Halflings are printed. Goliaths are printed. So, all of the things you listed are printed under your preferred system.

So you have exactly what you want.

 

[Arial Black]

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

I, and the Cha 16 rogue swashbuckler I'm currently making, beg to differ. : )

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I, and the Cha 16 rogue swashbuckler I'm currently making, beg to differ. : )

I said "base rogue features". The Swashbuckler is a subclass, and therefore not the "base rogue".

You either misread my post or did a strawman argument.

 

[Scott Christian]

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.

With that logic, then they should not allow dice rolling for attributes. I mean, if it is an "objective fact" that the extra +1 a player gets is better, then rolling will most likely produce an unfair advantage.

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.

I bolded your excellent word choice. It is true, players will try to get that attribute as high as they can, be it a 15, 16, or 17. And if a table can't live with the 15, then they should have an optional rule in place for them to redistribute their ASI. (And they did implement the rule. And now, they made it the rule.)

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

With that logic, then they should not allow dice rolling for attributes. I mean, if it is an "objective fact" that the extra +1 a player gets is better, then rolling will most likely produce an unfair advantage.

Uh, not at all. Stop with the strawmen, please. D&D is based around randomness (to an extent). I never argued against removing randomness from the game, just having the firbolg rogue be just as effective of a rogue as a halfling.

 

[Scribe]

What is changing is that in the future, future concepts will be printed with floating ASIs, so who is going to be printed that is so terrible to have that? Elves are printed. Dwarves are printed. Halflings are printed. Goliaths are printed. So, all of the things you listed are printed under your preferred system.

So you have exactly what you want.

Until next edition, yes, unless there are new races, like we are going to see, which will not be covered in the way I would prefer.

I will not have exactly what I want, because going forward, it will all be floating, which I do not want.

And yes, I basically gave floating ASI, cutting out Wis/Int because I prefer restrictions, to pure floating. In my mind, its due to the typical tropes of vampires. Stronger, faster, harder to kill, and with the 'charm' of Charisma.

I then describe how you could just use floating, to cover any other creation myth you wish to embrace.

Both systems can exist. Mine, will not. That is fully, and entirely my issue with this. I do not care if you prefer floating, you will have it. Official restrictions WILL go away at some point in the future, if this system is accepted and presented by Wizards as the only option. It is not complicated.

 

[Scott Christian]

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

Deception, intimidation, performance and persuasion are all under the Rogue feature skills. So he can have a bonus for four skills, one in his mind his character might use just as much. But, he obviously has no idea how to play.

Look, for a side that argues vehemently that without floating ASIs they can't realize and fully flesh out their character, this seems to be an awfully limited view.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Uh, not at all. Stop with the strawmen, please. D&D is based around randomness (to an extent). I never argued against removing randomness from the game, just having the firbolg rogue be just as effective of a rogue as a halfling.

But with random stat generation they probably aren't, were there static ASIs or no. One of them will just randomly be better. To me that is far worse than a discrepancy caused by intentionally choosing it. A pointless random imbalance that simulates nothing (except perhaps that life isn't fair.)