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."

 

[Aldarc]

More like Numenera, then? (That's the closest analogue that comes to mind.)

The one key difference I suspect is that the stat pools would likely not also double as HP in @doctorbadwolf's system.

I haven't played Numenera because its the only kind of sci-fantasy I don't like, so I don't know, but yeah I think it works much better to use stats as a resource, in a way that never limits character concept.

The Cypher System is more generic than Numenera. Some Cypher System fantasy settings apart from Numenera include Gods of the Fall, Ptolus (WIP), Godforsaken, Diamond Throne (WIP), and We Are All Mad Here (fairy tale).

I've been thinking about shrinking the attribute list down to Fitness, Wits, and Will, but I haven't decided yet if I want to.

Cypher System: Might, Speed, Intellect
Blades in the Dark: Insight, Prowess, Resolve

Anyway, yeah, Numenara just...it's a sci-fi setting pretending to be a fantasy setting, and to me, that hook only works about once in a given world. From then on, we all know it's all tech, but the world keeps trying to act like it's magic, and I just would rather play star wars or something at that point.

IMO, you got it mixed up: It's a fantasy setting pretending to be a sci-fi setting. The underpinnings of Numenera is D&D dungeon delving.

In terms of setting I found the Torment: Tides of Numenera Explorers Guide to be the best setting book for the game. It's developed a lot more than the rest of the line (as it was developed for the computer game) and is about the right size for a campaign, without being overdeveloped. It's also relatively seperate from the rest of the setting.

I'm a sucker for the Trilling Shard booklet that was released as a Numenera 2 Kickstarter exclusive. I would love to run a West Marches sandbox campaign using the village of Ellomyr as the initial base that the characters build up over the course of their adventures. I also highly recommend the Jade Colossus as it has rules and roll charts for creating randomly generated "dungeons."

I was never really happy with the way 'magic' worked in Numenera, just making it nanotech didn't really work for me. Personally I'd go with a situation in which some past civilisation 'cracked' the world in some way by opening it up to other dimensions and that's why magic works.

It can be whatever. I don't think that the "magic" in the Ninth World is limited to just nano-machines. In fact, it may be that there is more to it than that, but that the residents of the Ninth World find this the most compelling hypothesis so far.

 

[Don Durito]

It can be whatever. I don't think that the "magic" in the Ninth World is limited to just nano-machines. In fact, it may be that there is more to it than that, but that the residents of the Ninth World find this the most compelling hypothesis so far.

That's kind of my issue with it to be honest. I would much prefer it was nano-technology that everyone thought was magic, rather than magic that people think is nanotechnology.

Or in other words I would buy the idea that magic was really technology more if the setting managed to convince me that the characters can believe it is magic, and not understand it as technology.

 

[Aldarc]

That's kind of my issue with it to be honest. I would much prefer it was nano-technology that everyone thought was magic, rather than magic that people think is nanotechnology.

Or in other words I would buy the idea that magic was really technology more, if the setting managed to convince me that the characters can believe it is magic, and not understand it as technology.

It's a trifling change for your games as it has no actual bearing on the mechanics.

 

[Minigiant]

So when we getting Frankenstein's Monster lineage?

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

So when we getting Frankenstein's Monster lineage?

That is one of the suggestions for Reborn.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I thought we went through this earlier. How many racial feats can you come up with until they start to lean heavily towards a specific class? I think we got up to four or five, then it all started to lean. There are only so many things on the character sheet to play with. That is one of the reasons removing ASIs homogenizes things.

Here is an example:
Wood elf barbarian: +2 strength but also gets to heal in four hours. For some tables that is god-like. And keen senses, darkvision and fey ancestry. Oh, and they get a cantrip and an extra language, or keen senses, run 35', and mask of the wild. I mean, it is a min/maxers dream at some tables to heal in four hours while reducing damage during rage and getting a strength bonus.

But I get it. Having all those things and only starting with a 15 strength is unfair.

It might help if you had a better understanding of the rules. Wood Elves don't get cantrips and extra languages, that is High Elves, unless you are talking about the Wood Elf Magic feat, but you don't mention any of the other benefits of that feat (which by the way, are fairly general in usage) so I don't believe that is the case. They also do not currently get a +2 strength unless you play with Tasha's.

Also the "heal in four hours" is A) DM dependent, B) Useless if you have a party with non-elves C) Still something you can do only once per 24 hour period.

So, yes, an Elf can get an extra four hours in camp to do... something. I had an elf ranger who tried to take advantage of that. Unfortuanetly, my DM hated the idea of me crafting or doing anything at all during camp time, so I was relegated to a double watch and that was it.

And Mask of the Wild can be great.... if the DM actually ever uses it. Hiding in a bush is something anyone can do. And I've... yeah I've never once been in a DnD game where it was raining, snowing or foggy, let alone during a time I could have used stealth.

So, perception, 35 ft of movement, DM dependent extra 4 hours of activity during a cut scene, DM dependent ability to hide in situations where you can probably hide anyways, no extra cantrip unless you take a feat (and let us not forget, anyone can take feats to gain cantrips), no extra language, and no +2 strength. Unless we play with Tasha's rules. A very different picture than what you just tried to paint, isn't it?

 

[Chaosmancer]

Chaos, sorry I used the term delusional. I meant it in the most informal sense as possible. It is a slang term amongst my friends. So I apologize.

And I agree with most of your sentiment, especially this one. I mean, the groups I play with take it seriously, but we play for fun. A min/maxed character is fun for us, but a sub-optimized character that is min/maxed in something else is even more fun. When you can surprise other players, it is cool. I mean, there are campaigns we haven't even told one another our classes or races prior to gameplay. That is fun. Sometimes you get two or three bards. But it is also fun to meta-plot the perfect party.

In the end, I just hope everyone finds a good table. One they are comfortable with. Because, in my personal belief, even with all this rhetoric in these messages, I doubt anyone from one side or the other would have a terrible time playing at a table on the other side.

I tend to agree that I doubt people would truly have a terrible time whether or not they were using Tasha's.

I also want to acknowledge that people have been claiming that exactly. That if anyone at the table was using Tasha's rules, it would ruin their fun. And I think that is a fundamental disconnect between these two positions.

I want Tasha's because I want to have more freedom in my race/class combos without feeling like I'm making a mistake and dragging down the group.

Other people say that they don't want Tasha's because someone else playing a character with a 16 in a non-canon stat ruins their ability to engage with the world.


Which amuses me to no end, because the "default" stat generation method is rolling dice. The default system allows for 18 strength halflings, it just requires luck to match with the desire and overwhelm the fact that you could be playing a 20 Dex rogue instead of an 18 strength Barbarian.

But, the disconnect is still one side is talking about how they want to build their own characters, and the other is talking about how other people building their characters certain ways is bad for the game. Whether that is because we now have a slippery slope to a classless buffet game, because now everyone should have 30's in ever stat, because the world is now a joke because little things are as strong as big things, there have been dozens of reasons.

And our side has remained the same. We want to build our characters to match the stories we want to tell.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Let's presume that Wizards produces a sourcebook that has, say, several brand new character races - not the lineages in the UA, but something new to 5E, like (random choices) Mystara's lupin and diabolus. And those writeups don't have any ability score suggestions. Are you arguing that there's nothing unfortunate about my friend having a harder time figuring out how to play these character races in a way he thinks is unusual and interesting? When a single sidebar with non-binding suggestions would solve all these problems for him and players like him?

Why are you assuming such a sidebar won't exist?

But, more importantly, am I supposed to feel there is something unfortunate in the fact that your friend can't find a way to play a human in away that is unusual and interesting? It is literally the same argument. There is no side bar telling you where to put your stats for playing a human, so your friend must struggle to find ways to play interesting human characters. Should we give a side bar to humans to give them static ASIs?

Personally, I just looked at the Lupin and a dog man who is potentially descended from Gnolls has so many potential interesting hooks for me that I literally cannot fathom why the ability score improvements matter to your friend. I mean, it does, and so I feel bad that they may struggle in the future with utilizing the new products, but it isn't like there are not races printed that they struggle with in the exact same manner, so I don't feel that bad.

You're partly correct, they aren't choosing, specifically, to play an unoptimized combo. They're choosing to play a halfling that is a barbarian. They like having guidelines that say "halflings are usually like this" and playing within those guidelines, but combining it with an unexpected class choice (the barbarian). It's a role-playing decision, made so he can play against expectations, so he can struggle against those limits and make his victories all the more interesting and creative. That's what makes that character fun for him. But for him to continue making characters like that, he needs to have expectations to play against. That's what will be lost if Wizards doesn't have recommended defaults.

You know what is interesting about calling it a roleplaying decision? It isn't the only RP decision that can be made.

Halflings are normally generous farming folk who would give you the shirt off their back if you were cold. Play a halfling who is a greedy mercenary rogue and you've played against what halflings are normally like.

Gnomes are bright and cheerful individuals with a love of pranks. Play a dour faced gnome who is a necromancer and you've played against type.

Races are more than their stat bonuses. Even with things as broad as the Dhampir, one of the concepts with their hunger is that it is a bad thing. What if you played a Dhampir who ate sadness and grief? That is not what you'd expect from the write-up, and actually it reminds me of a character I'm reading about and would be incredibly fascinating to try and play.

So, if his entire think is being unexpected... then there are ways to do that that don't involve needing a 15 as their highest stat.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Yes, I agree: halflings, as a people, are on average biologically more agile than humans, mysteriously as strong as humans, and not as strong as goliaths. But your halfling PC is not an average member of their species. By definition, PCs extraordinary people who are generally physically and mentally more capable of surviving the monster-filled world of D&Dland than anyone else and are among the few people in the world who can use magic or fight demons and survive.

But there are people who in fact claiming that no halfling (or human, or elf, or aasimar, or triton) should be extraordinary statwise because... somehow it's wrong. It doesn't make sense to them, and they can't seem to understand or don't care, no matter how many times I've said it, that I'm talking about PCs and not entire races.

Yes, there are some people saying that it should be literally impossible for any halfling to be stronger than average, no matter what the circumstances or the weird magic in their background or anything else.

They can be significantly stronger than average, they can be extraordinary. 15 means that. How hard can this be to get? And whatever special justifications you might apply to the halfling, you could apply to the goliath as well, and logically they would then be even stronger.

Also the game has rules for representing special godly favours, they're in Theros. They should not be part of standard character generation method, they should be something intentionally chosen to be used in the campaign.

And seriously, completely irrespective of how one feels about the end results, having point buy and then freely assignable ASIs on top of that is just ugly confused design. The point buy already represents individual variation, adding another separate system on top of that that also represents the same thing is just kludgy as hell.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

But, the disconnect is still one side is talking about how they want to build their own characters, and the other is talking about how other people building their characters certain ways is bad for the game. Whether that is because we now have a slippery slope to a classless buffet game, because now everyone should have 30's in ever stat, because the world is now a joke because little things are as strong as big things, there have been dozens of reasons.

And our side has remained the same. We want to build our characters to match the stories we want to tell.

Then why you play a rigid class based game in the first place? The whole bloody concept relies on choosing predetermined archetypical splats.