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."

 

[Don Durito]

It really is not. You can get int to 14 without terrible sacrifices. Granted, one thing that I don't like in the current system, is how the higher scores costing more rather heavily disincentivises using any of those double cost points on the stats that are not absolutely vital. The standard human funnily enough is best for such concepts, as you can get any stat up to 14 without that double cost.

They are significant sacrifices. And what do you get for those sacrifices? You get a number on your character sheet.

Does a character with a 14 Intelligence feel particularly intelligent? Not really. They have a +2 to certain skills (They are 10% more likely to succeed at some skill rolls). Now maybe it gives you permission to not play your character like Ug the Brute. But that's perverse. Why not just give that permission explicilty and let them dump Intelligence if they need to to buy the things that make their class fun to play?

Plus Ug the Brute is pretty boring. Whenever something comes up that requires planning or thinking by the players Ug the brute cannot contribute without breaking character. Being dumb is not an interesting character trait.

 

[Scribe]

They are significant sacrifices. And what do you get for those sacrifices? You get a number on your character sheet.

Does a character with a 14 Intelligence feel particularly intelligent? Not really. They have a +2 to certain skills (They are 10% more likely to succeed at some skill rolls). Now maybe it gives you permission to not play your character like Ug the Brute. But that's perverse. Why not just give that permission explicilty and let them dump Intelligence if they need to to buy the things that make their class fun to play?

Plus Ug the Brute is pretty boring. Whenever something comes up that requires planning or thinking by the players Ug the brute cannot contribute without breaking character. Being dumb is not an interesting character trait.

Ug may not enjoy tackling math problems, or solving puzzles in their spare time, but even a lower Int does not reflect an inability to plan. Perhaps they simply are not quick on their feet, but when given time, can provide insightful answers?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

They are significant sacrifices. And what do you get for those sacrifices? You get a number on your character sheet.

Does a character with a 14 Intelligence feel particularly intelligent? Not really. They have a +2 to certain skills (They are 10% more likely to succeed at some skill rolls). Now maybe it gives you permission to not play your character like Ug the Brute. But that's perverse. Why not just give that permission explicilty and let them dump Intelligence if they need to to buy the things that make their class fun to play?

Plus Ug the Brute is pretty boring. Whenever something comes up that requires planning or thinking by the players Ug the brute cannot contribute without breaking character. Being dumb is not an interesting character trait.

Why do you need to have a high intelligence score to not to be a brute? You can easily put a ten to it, and be of average intelligence, even twelve is super easy. Now if you put that 14 to it, I'd expect you to want to actually do something with it, like use your background to get some intelligence skills.

EDIT: Also why 10% increased success chance in skill rolls is nothing, whilst 5% bigger increase in hit rolls is a basis of hundred pages of arguments?

 

[Don Durito]

Why do you need to have a high intelligence score to not to be a brute? You can easily put a ten to it, and be of average intelligence, even twelve is super easy. Now if you put that 14 to it, I'd expect you to want to actually do something with it, like use your background to get some intelligence skills.

EDIT: Also why 10% increased success chance in skill rolls is nothing, whilst 5% bigger increase in hit rolls is a basis of hundred pages of arguments?

1) You make a lot more attack rolls then you do individual skill roles - especially intelligence skill roles. How many times a game session do you roll History? It's obviously not rational to trade off two hit points a level for a frontline warrior in order to get a 10% bonus to the occasional history roll.

2) I personally have said I don't think the 5% is really all that big a deal and the difference is mostly psychological not real - so the idea that I am somehow inconsistent is ridiculous.

 

[Don Durito]

Ug may not enjoy tackling math problems, or solving puzzles in their spare time, but even a lower Int does not reflect an inability to plan. Perhaps they simply are not quick on their feet, but when given time, can provide insightful answers?

Why do you need to have a high intelligence score to not to be a brute? You can easily put a ten to it, and be of average intelligence, even twelve is super easy. Now if you put that 14 to it, I'd expect you to want to actually do something with it, like use your background to get some intelligence skills.

EDIT: Also why 10% increased success chance in skill rolls is nothing, whilst 5% bigger increase in hit rolls is a basis of hundred pages of arguments?

Look either you play your intelligence or you don't. If you don't you have only the elements to consider, and they're generally not worth the trade off unless your class needs intelligence.

If the mechanical incentive isn't sufficient then you're putting points into the ability score purely to play the character the way you want to play. That's stupid!

 

[Crimson Longinus]

1) You make a lot more attack rolls then you do individual skill roles - especially intelligence skill roles. How many times a game session do you roll History? It's obviously not rational to trade off two hit points a level for a frontline warrior in order to get a 10% bonus to the occasional history roll.

Single hit roll won't win you the combat though. However, a single skill roll might solve an encounter, or at least very significantly affect it. Like succeeding in that one investigation check might net you the loot right away or perhaps open a passage to bypass several potential combats. Combat is far less binary. Yes, with lower bonus you don't hit quite so often, but you still do hit. So in that sense I feel that bonus in skill rolls is more significant, not less.

2) I personally have said I don't think the 5% is really all that big a deal and the difference is mostly psychological not really - so the idea that I am somehow inconsistent is ridiculous.

Fair.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Look either you play your intelligence or you don't. If you don't you have only the elements to consider, and they're generally not worth the trade off unless your class needs intelligence.

If the mechanical incentive isn't sufficient then you're putting points into the ability score purely to play the character the way you want to play. That's stupid!

But that applies to all mental scores. Certainly your charisma and wisdom affect what sort of person the character is too?

I don't really see this as a problem in itself, though I agree that the point buy is a bit too stingy, and there should be more ways to utilise ability scores not not directly tied to your class' core competence.

 

[Don Durito]

But that applies to all mental scores. Certainly your charisma and wisdom affect what sort of person the character is too?

I don't really see this as a problem in itself, though I agree that the point buy is a bit too stingy, and there should be more ways to utilise ability scores not not directly tied to your class' core competence.

Charisma and Charisma skills are largely interchangeable. It's hard to imagine a charismatic person who is not good at persuading, intimidating and decieving because that's basically what the game percieves Charisma as being.

Wisdom is sort of different in that it's so nebulous these days that it basically no longer has any conception to the concept of 'wise' but means a combination of willpower and perception. But certainly if your conception of your character is either strongwilled or perceptive then putting points in Wisdom gives you a very clear mechanical boost to those elements.

Intelligence (in the usual sense of it's meaning) and most of the intelligence skills are not very clearly connected (or rather the connection only goes one way). It's very easy to imagine a smart outlander who never had any formal education but is nevertheless smart. Should this character have any training in knowledge skills like Arcana, History and Religion not necessarily. So the question then becomes if, seeing as I don't need any of these skills for my character I drop my Int to 8 - should I have to play my character as dumb? Why? I've already accepted the mechanical penalty for dumping Intelligence which is the penalty to certain skills - but if you tell me I can't contribute to solving a puzzle because of the mechanical choices I made (which were strongly determined by my choice of class), then I'm out.

 

[Bagpuss]

Singe hit roll won't win you the combat though. However, a single skill roll might solve an encounter, or at least very significantly affect it. Like succeeding in that one investigation check might net you the loot right away or perhaps open a passage to bypass several potential combats. Combat is far less binary. Yes, with lower bonus you don't hit quite so often, but you still do hit. So in that sense I feel that bonus in skill rolls is more significant, not less.

I'd agree, except normally in a party someone else has got you covered, so being a generalist doesn't help, especially when it means a determent to your core role. D&D is very much designed for a group of different individuals with working together none of them on their own can cover all the bases but together as a team they do. D&D if you try and be a Jack of All trades you tend to find you are a master of none, and someone else in the party is a Master of whatever "trade" is needed at the time.

I think it is an active design choice that you don't have Fighters that are skilled or particularly intelligent, as it protects the niche for Rogues and Wizards. Similarly they don't get lots of hit points or AC.

Because of this design choice it is really hard to make the renaissance man type hero that is pretty common in fiction, fiction that often only has one or at most two main protagonists so they need to be good at everything.

 

[Don Durito]

I think it is an active design choice that you don't have Fighters that are skilled or particularly intelligent, as it protects the niche for Rogues and Wizards. Similarly they don't get lots of hit points or AC.

Yes. It is. It's a design decision on the same order as encouraging Dwarves to be Fighters, Half-Orcs and Goliaths to be Barbarians, and Halflings to be Rogues.

Basically, it's been clear to anyone who's paid attention over the last couple of editions that encouraging archetypes is something that WOTC have not just allowed to continue but have actively worked to do until their sudden turnaround in the last year.

But this problem is the larger one because it goes deeper and is more real.