D&D 5E Unearthed Arcana: Gothic Lineages & New Race/Culture Distinction

LuisCarlos17f said:

What is the difference between genetic/biology/lineage/ancestry and nurture/culture? Let's imagine two twin brothers, when they are little children there is a forest fire. They are accidentally separated and one of them find a planar gate. To survive the fire enters and go to other world, with a different culture. A decade later both they are together, and the lost brother find the planar gate again and returns to his home. Both brothers meet each other again. How should be the stats of these characters?

Click to expand...

Wildly different. They've had vastly different experiences which would have molded them very differently.

Assume one goes to a savage world, is raised by Barbarians and chained to the Wheel of Pain for 10 years after being captured by James Earl Jones waving some two headed snake banner, and having his village massacred. He's then tossed into a fighting pit to fight for his life, and trained by the finest swordsmen of Khitai. He lives to hear the lamentations of his enemies women, and to see people driven before him.

The other guy is adopted by a culture that appreciates fine art and scholarly pursuits and neglects any physical training in lieu of attaining a degree in Astrophysics and fine Art, before becoming a vegetarian, travelling the world, and studying philosophy at the feet of a great scholar for years.

When they meet up 10 years later, they're going to have very different stats indeed.

Cleric: I'll turn undead...
Dhampir/ Reborn: No, wait!

Also.. what happens if you strike a Dhampir with Blackrazor?

Anyone?

You're both an undead creature... and not an undead creature.

Flamestrike said:

Cleric: I'll turn undead...
Dhampir/ Reborn: No, wait!

Also.. what happens if you strike a Dhampir with Blackrazor?

Anyone?

You're both an undead creature... and not an undead creature.

Click to expand...

The text says:

. If an effect works on at least one of a creature’s types, that effect can work on that creature.

Click to expand...

So the "if the target is undead" effect of Blackrazor triggers. The Dhampir is healed and the wielder is harmed.

However, it doesn't say "the undead takes no damage" - they are both damaged and healed.

Sabathius42 said:

I hate to break it to you....but before TCoE was released a halfling could have a 20STR and no more.

Click to expand...

Level 20 halfling barbarian could have a strength of 24.

Scribe said:

If the edition is not changed, and in fact once it is changed, every race updated or released will be under this new approach, and the system I prefer is essentially discontinued and no option will be provided outside of my own homebrew or 3rd party.

I mean that's it really, unless someone at Wizards says 'let people have a choice' then this UA telegraphs that I won't even be given an option.

All because an option for others, wasn't good enough for them.

Click to expand...

And this means you'll decide not to play the new version, and probably stick with 5E.

And there's nothing wrong with that.

There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that a person play the "newest" edition of the game. If they choose to... it's because they want to. There are probable conveniences that come with that-- larger playerbase, new items being published, common talking points etc.-- but there is absolutely no reason they need to, are forced to, nor do they get "brownie points" from anyone for doing so.

So if you get "left behind" with this eventual shift... you will join the hundreds of thousands of players who have been "left behind" with every other edition change in the game. That's just what happens. People see beloved rules or rules they think were essential to their gaming go away... and they then have to decide whether those rules were so important that they just can't play the new version. And that is exactly what some people do-- we have a number of players here on the boards that are still playing 4E as we speak because 5E moved on everything they liked. But for the rest of us? I think we all learn rather quickly when we play the new versions that the stuff we thought was important in the "rules"... just really don't matter in the long run. All the other stuff mentioned-- the playerbase, publishing, being part of the current collective-- all end up being more important to us and keep us playing the new version... even if there are specific rules we don't like.

Cause we can always change those rules in our games and put them back the way we used to like them. And it ISN'T a big deal to do so... despite much of the hemming and hawing here from some people making seem like it is. So you are not special. You too will see "important" game rules moved on from. It is to be expected, and should not be surprising in the least. It's the way the game is made. Accept it or dig in your heels, your choice.

Alzrius said:

Actually, it's commonly acknowledged that there are non-fallacious uses of the slippery slope argument.

Click to expand...

Cutting any slippery slope argument as intrinsecally fallacious will lead to ignore any non fallacious slippery slope argument. Slippery slope squared!

Stefano Rinaldelli said:

Cutting any slippery slope argument as intrinsecally fallacious will lead to ignore any non fallacious slippery slope argument. Slippery slope squared!

Click to expand...

Is that like the MC Escher perpetual slippery slope picture?

Flamestrike said:

Wut. The Dhampirs bite ability looks insanely broken.

As a simple weapon, Paladins can smite with their Bites.

Click to expand...

I'm struggling to see a way to make the ability more than occasionally useful for the empower effect, let alone see some broken combo.

Nathaniel Lee said:

I imagine that in a game where the DM decides that they're not going to use the Tasha's way of handling the existing race options, it's going to be left to the DM to determine what the default ASIs, languages, and skills are going to be for any future race options since Wizards has explicitly stated that they will not provide these. So in that scenario anyone playing an elf, dwarf, tabaxi, loxodon, etc. sticks with the defined ASIs and such, and anyone playing a dhampir either gets to choose their own or accepts whatever the DM gives them. I guess?

Click to expand...

You can both not use Tasha's (so no existing races are affected) optional rule and use these races as presented. There is no mechanical conflict there.

TwoSix said:

I'm struggling to see a way to make the ability more than occasionally useful for the empower effect, let alone see some broken combo.

Click to expand...

It could cause the multiverse to implode due to reaching critical mass of silliness.

BTW, does anyone know what "Esoteric Humors" are? Are they like jokes that are so clever that no one understands them?