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."

 

[Faolyn]

But the most relevant to this discussion is from the PHB

Your character race not only affects your ability scores and traits but also provides the cues for building your character’s story. Each race’s description in this chapter includes information to help you roleplay a character of that race, including personality, physical appearance, features of society, and racial alignment tendencies. These details are suggestions to help you think about your character; adventurers can deviate widely from the norm for their race. It’s worthwhile to consider why your character is different, as a helpful way to think about your character’s background and personality.

Emphasis added as it has been ignored for 100+ pages

Thank you! I really don't know why the idea of an adventurer being unusual in some way is so anathema to so. Sure, you may have started as Joe Normal instead of the Hero of Hometown, but there's something about you that allowed you to survive your first random encounter when others would have died.

I dont like Intelligence as an Ability at all.

I'd go with Knowledge or Memory myself, since you can be not that smart but still know a lot.

 

[Chaosmancer]

My biggest issue with these lineages is nothing to do with ability scores or the new ability score rules, it's the way that these template-lineages have no connection with whatever the PC was before the event that caused them to assume the lineage. Obviously the choice of size is meant to be a nod to whatever your PC was 'before', but that's really as far as it goes, and there's a lot of questions left unanswered in the process. Not so much an issue for dhampirs of course, but what in-world reason is there for a dragonborn who makes a pact with a hag and becomes a hexblood losing its breath weapon? And why does a human who recovers after a long time petrified gain darkvision?

The logic holes there really bug me. I get what WotC are trying to do with lineages, and I heartily approve, but I wish the first brand new published lineages hadn't been these template-y ones, but just lineage implementations of more traditionally-structured D&D races. From a game mechanics design point of view, the whole lineage thing is still fairly new and unfamiliar, and it looks to me like WotC are trying to run before learning to walk here.

See to me, I think the idea is to fully allow DMs and Players to answer those questions.

I mean, the little mermaid shows us a story of a Sea Hag taking a voice in exchange for the pact, why not a breath weapon? What drove your character to give up something so fundamental to their body in exchange?

What happened as you were unpetrified to allow you to see in the dark? Was it a result of being stone, or a result of the magic? Are you perhaps turning into something else?


I know, usually we want all the answers given to us, but these are so broad they can't all be given to us. And maybe the DM decides that the Dragonborn gets to keep their breath weapon, it makes them more powerful, but maybe the DM is willing to do that.

 

[Scribe]

Right.

And, we were told this is the design going forward. In that sidebar that you are hung up on.

So, if they never release another purely biological entity again, what is the problem?

This being accepted as the only way for 6e as well?

See to me, I think the idea is to fully allow DMs and Players to answer those questions.

I know, usually we want all the answers given to us, but these are so broad they can't all be given to us. And maybe the DM decides that the Dragonborn gets to keep their breath weapon, it makes them more powerful, but maybe the DM is willing to do that.

I think we just stand a bit further apart on how much we want the game defined for us. I dont like having things wide open, at that point why am I not making my own rules?

I'm not saying your wrong, I'm just saying I dont think we can agree because we want different things.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I personally feel like that, since they had no problems with introducing stronger races options with some strong racial features like the Goblin, Yuan-Ti, Satyr/Centaur(because of their singular "Fey" typing), that WoTC has no problems with introducing the idea of an option being a bit more substantially powerful. The idea of a Hexblood Dwarf, even if he decided to trade his dwarven weapon familiarity for Elven Weapon familiarity to feel closer to his Fey heritage, suddenly forgetting how to use said weapons to be a bit stupid. Okay yeah you could make the argument that Fey stealing/taking memories as barter is a Fey thing to do

Plus, with the Lineage features overwriting the racial features, your pretty much "stuck" with whatever that Lineage is giving you. And if that option ends up being crappy, then your biting yourself in the foot.

The whole Dual-Typing thing also seems to be a weird take on trying to incorporate an idea of balance. But if you count as both types, in regards to stuff, then technically your getting double the weaknesses. Your Satyr Bard is gonna suddenly get turned by your Ancient Paladin, your Dhampir Rogue was hiding nearby and just got turned by the Party cleric. That undead slaying sword that accidently got tossed at your Dhampir Wizard, and scoring a crit hit on em while being low on health, just murdered the poor slob.

They should allow Lineage Features+Racial features and Single typing. Do it like Volo's where there is a disclaiming that states Hey some of these Lineage PCs may be a tad bit stronger compared to standard PCs so discuss it over with your DM or party first beforehand.

Or Tasha's it up abit by allowing the choice of Lineage Features+Racial Features or just Lineage Features.

I actually have been thinking about things like the Dwarf Reborn losing their weapons, armor and knowledge. And there are two ways to look at it.

The first is that, by choosing this at level 1, they aren't losing anything. They made this choice, and the rest is backstory.

The second is more... intriguing. I have often told my players "There are worse things than death I can do to you." I had a player who once stuck his hand in a wild magic nuclear reactor for the lulz. He survived, but I like the idea of him being transformed into a Reborn if he had failed, but not been destroyed. Yes, he lost things, he is damaged compared to how he was, but... those feels like good consequences, and then the story can also move forward with him looking for ways to heal and recover what he lost.

It can be a problem, but I think it offers a few advantages too, if used mid-way through a campaign.

 

[Chaosmancer]

This being accepted as the only way for 6e as well?

Show me where they are holding the playtest for 6e. Where are the documents telling us that this is how 6e will be going forward.

The UA is talking about 5e design. If you want to worry about 6e, feel free, but until they announce the 6e playtest, I'm going to assume that any design decisions for 5e are for 5e.

I think we just stand a bit further apart on how much we want the game defined for us. I dont like having things wide open, at that point why am I not making my own rules?

I'm not saying your wrong, I'm just saying I dont think we can agree because we want different things.

Which is fair. These three options aren't for you.

Maybe no race being printed going forward in 5e is for you. I didn't really like the Simic or the Verdalken or the Leonin when they were printed. Nothing says you have to like every race.

The problem is that you are going beyond "not liking them" and moving straight into these three races destroying and ruining halflings and goliaths. Those aren't being affected. They are the same now as they were in November as they were in March. Saying that this ruins those options is just flatly wrong.

 

[Scott Christian]

This is the thing that is frustrating me. People are arguing against Tasha's, not against this UA. Or they are assuming that going forward they are going to re-release gnomes and halflings, instead of new things. Or they are arguing that now 6e, something not being released or designed, is now ruined for them.

Bingo. The people arguing are thinking of what is to come. You may not be. You may only be arguing about a damphir. Because they are not arguing about your damphir does not invalidate their argument.

 

[Scribe]

@Chaosmancer The only point I've been focused on, is why only 1 option needs to be written into stone, and yes, because of the hypothetical of any new lineage that is not some mystical construct or rebirth, but just some natural biological fantasy entity.

I'm not saying this ruins prior options. I'm saying floating as the one and only truth, ruins (yep) my view of one of the facets that makes fantasy different from reality.

Thats all. I just want the 5e view on ASI to continue. Maybe they dont work for these templates? Fine! However that is not what the sidebar specifically states, and so I do not find it an unreasonable position to see what Wizards explicitly states as 'the way going forward' and raising concern about that.

Either way, enjoy the new lineages. I likely wont care, even though I have said several times that the Reborn is a really inspirational hook for me, because I'm not too into Gothic Horror anyway, but this is a nice preview of how templates from the past could be applied to characters. Great. Neat. Fantastic. I dont really care.

The people arguing are thinking of what is to come. You may not be. You may only be arguing about a damphir. Because they are not arguing about your damphir does not invalidate their argument.

Just this.

 

[Scott Christian]

Yes, because if you insist that halflings can't be as strong as goliaths because it doesn't make sense, then you can't be OK with other things that don't make sense.

Ask any child if a dragon can fly? Most will say yes. Because that is what we are sold from the very beginning.
Ask any child who is stronger, the 4', 90 pound man or the 7', 350 pound man. Most will say the 7' guy. Because that is what we are sold from the very beginning.

Because someone can point out something illogical doesn't mean they have proven the other side's argument wrong.

So, a very low probability. And again, you've never said: should a halfling PC be penalized if there are no goliaths in the party?

Um... correct. I haven't said that? Sorry, I am not following your argument. My apologies.
What I can say is that some do not see an extra +1 as being all that earth shattering, and for others, they apparently can't even play the race/class combo because it ruins the game for them.

Yes, you have the right. What you don't have the right to do is say that this thing can't and shouldn't be done because you don't like it--especially when your internal logic seems to only care about an arbitrary bonus to a stat and not about the illogic behind dragons, which you dismissed as a D&D Godwinning.

And the first objection doesn't make sense. D&D is a game of faux-medieval magical hero-types who slay monsters, solve puzzles, save kingdoms, and the like, where they can play as warriors or spellcasters either human or not. It's not, nor has it ever been billed as, a game where certain races get bonuses or penalties to their stats.

And you're ignoring that you can still have weaker halflings and stronger goliaths because the rules no longer force that as the only option.

My internal logic for D&D doesn't care. I find the rule change going forward clunky and arbitrary. I realize to WotC it is not arbitrary, but them thinking they are doing the right thing. And good for them. But you can only change a game so much before you start to lose its feel. I believe 4e (which I liked) proved that.
And yes, a person can still have a weaker halfling, but guess what? No one will. Not one player I have ever played with will voluntarily reduce their strength to 15 if they are a fighter. It will not happen. And what that does and means, is now some people won't learn how to focus on the other parts of their character.

 

[Azzy]

Bingo. The people arguing are thinking of what is to come. You may not be. You may only be arguing about a damphir. Because they are not arguing about your damphir does not invalidate their argument.

The problem with that is that you're arguing about what may or may not come to pass. Those windmills might be giants... or they may just be windmills.

 

[Faolyn]

OK, we may agree some "racial traits" aren't really inborn but based in traditional upbringing, and this detail can cause troubles if "transhumanist magic" is possible, I mean, trans humanism like Eclipse Phase RPG or Altered Carbone, when memories can be uploaded to "file" and this downloaded to a different body, maybe from a different race. It is not only possible thanks druid's reincarnation spell, but also Savage Species had got a special magic ritual using as example an ogre becoming an elf.

I actually have a character for an upcoming game that switched species (pre-start) due to reincarnation, and so became a transmuter wizard so he could figure out how to turn back.

My suggestion is allowing those "nurture" or traditional upbringing to be replaced with other options. Maybe with some special traits as the dragonmarks from Eberron, or "exclusive feats" only for members of a noble house, religious brotherhood, criminal guild or other faction.

Agreed. Those would be great cultures to go along with lineage. I did two forest-dwelling cultures earlier in the thread. However, care would have to be taken not to overlap these cultures with backgrounds too much.

* Who would want to play a halfling warrior? An otaku who loves the trope of kid hero, for example the main character of the videogame Dragon Quest V. Somebody love the trope of litle people defeating kaijus, giants, megafaun and other bigger enemies, but the little PC races weren't designed to be fighters but rogues or maybe spellcasters.

There are lots of reasons: fighting back against enemies who want to take over or have already taken over the character's homeland, a hunter who is responsible for feeding their family, a town guard turned adventurer, and so on. Plus, Small races include gnomes, goblins, and kobolds, not to mention a plethora of 3pp races.

* Besides dwarves and elves, what PC races have got racial traits based in "traditional upbringing"?

Depends. In the Ancestries and Lineages books by Arcanist Press, most racial spellcasting became a cultural thing, with the idea that (for instance) an air genasi raised by other races can't use their innate 1/rest levitation. That's definitely a possibility.

The main problem is that, except for the main PH races, none of the other races really have sub-races that are cultural. So going by the various races (and ignoring languages), other than halfling, elf, dwarf, and gnome, I'd say the following could be considered cultural traits (not not every race is here; some don't seem to have any cultural traits):

Bugbear: Sneay, Surprise Attack.
Centaur: Survivor.
Dragonborn (Draconblood): Forceful Presence.
Firbolg: Firbolg Magic, Speech of Beast and Leaf.
Githyanki: Decadent Mastery, Martial Prodigy.
Githzerai: Mental Discipline.
Goliath: Mountain Born.
Half-Orc: Menacing.
Hobgoblin: Martial Training, Saving Face.
Kenku: Expert Forgery, Kenku Training.
Kobold: Cower, Beg, and Grovel, Pack Tactics.
Lizardfolk: Cunning Artisan, Hunter's Lore.
Minotaur: Imposing Presence.
Orc: Aggressive, Primal Intuition.
Satyr: Reveler.
Tabaxi: Cat's Talents.
Triton: Emissary of the Seas.
Veldaken: Veldaken Dispassion, Tireless Precision.
Verdan: Persuasive.

Obviously, this is YMMV a lot. I didn't include innate spells because it's very unclear whether these are actually truly innate or if they are taught.