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

Charlaquin · Jan 28, 2021

Scott Christian said:
And that is one point - by level 12 it does not matter. At all. Not even a little.

This is not a compelling argument when the vast majority of games end by level 11.

Charlaquin · Jan 28, 2021

Scott Christian said:
Hmmm...
I'm gonna try to explain a different side.
Fixing a stat mod is already done, it just happens at a later level for some. Do you feel that hindered by a +1 difference? (5%?)

Yes.

Scott Christian said:
This doesn't even consider the racial feats that come into play by playing offbeat race/class combos. Want a wizard that gets knocked to zero and then pops up again to cast one last fireball? Hire the half-orc wizard. Want a barbarian that can run 80', 120 with a sprint, by third level? Hire the wood elf barbarian. Want a sorcerer with massive amounts of hit points? Hire the hill dwarf sorcerer.

Those are all cool, interesting differences. 5% accuracy is not cool or interesting.

Scott Christian said:
To say it from another angle, do you automatically insist that your character, at level four, bump their primary?

Sometimes I’ll take a Feat at 4th level instead, but that’s a choice I make voluntarily, not one forced on me as an inevitable consequence of my race choice.

Scott Christian said:
Would it be wrong of game designers to let a wizard reach level 12 without having a 20 intelligence?

Not at all. The problem isn’t that some characters don’t get to 20 in their primary score before level 12, it’s that characters of some races can and characters of other races can’t, and in the mean time, the latter characters are stuck being a step behind the former.

Scott Christian said:
That is essentially the argument being made. The fact that it is level one versus level twelve means very little. A level is a level. It comes with perks. It also comes with hardships.

Except most games never even get to level 12. Hypothetically being able to catch up to the rest of the party a month after the campaign has ended doesn’t make up for having been behind during the entire actual campaign. Even if the campaign does make it all the way to level 20, catching up more than half way through doesn’t make up for having been behind the other half.

Scott Christian said:
From another angle, are class hit points not fair either? I mean, shouldn't the players start out on equal footing? And by level 12, don't even get me started on the difference between a high con barbarian and a high elf wizard. I mean, even at level 20 the high elf wizard will have fewer hit points than the level 12 high con barbarian.

All characters of the same class get the same hit points, so this analogy doesn’t work.

Scott Christian said:
Now if you just want to min/max then this rule is great. Go for it. But I am just trying to present an opposing viewpoint.

Great. Thanks for sharing.

Argyle King · Jan 28, 2021

Umbran said:
Yes. And it is also an easy trap for older fans to get wrapped up in every change they don't happen to like, and treat it like it is some essential game element. It is a very human trap - overall, we don't react to change very well.

Thing is, I don't expect +2 Str is really an important part of the game's identity.

I agree. However, having character options which are tangibly different is. The "races" have established identities which are part of the overall game's identity.

Charlaquin · Jan 28, 2021

Argyle King said:
I agree. However, having character options which are tangibly different is. The "races" have established identities which are part of the overall game's identity.

I don’t think anyone is trying to take that away. I’m pretty sure everyone on the anti-ASI side would agree that we like races having distinct identities, we just think ASIs are the least interesting (not to mention least effective) way to achieve that, and mostly only serve to make certain race/class combos less appealing. Most, if not all of us, would be in favor of more unique racial features in place of ASIs.

Argyle King · Jan 28, 2021

PsyzhranV2 said:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm very much not interested in a Star Wars argument, but against my better judgment I feel the need to comment here anyway, so I'll say this (which I hope shouldn't prove too controversial): a lot of what went awry with the Sequel trilogy came down to the studio not having a clear vision of what they actually wanted to do with the movies, instead writing by the seat of their pants. If there was a more robust story outline from the outset, if the directors and producers better communicated with each other, and if the studio stuck to their guns rather than collapsing at the first sign of fan backlash, we might have gotten a more coherent series of films than... whatever it was we got.

I somewhat agree (though I somewhat see the fan backlash as being valid response in that particular example).

I think that's something which D&D can learn from, as it sometimes seems as though there's a lack of clear vision.

I've said elsewhere that I believe designing a ttrpg could benefit from having a "setting bible" like that of many television shows.

Argyle King · Jan 28, 2021

Charlaquin said:
I don’t think anyone is trying to take that away. I’m pretty sure everyone on the anti-ASI side would agree that we like races having distinct identities, we just think ASIs are the least interesting way to achieve that, and mostly only serve to make certain race/class combos less appealing. Most, of nor all of us, would be in favor of more unique racial features in place of ASIs.

I've supported that as well (even in this very thread). (I also support similar changes in how magic items are handled)

However, there are also some who appear to have the position that any species being bigger/faster/different ruins their ability to enjoy the game.

Assuming that my understanding of that said position is accurate, I am interesting in hearing how that is reconciled with maintaining the identity associated with D&D races.

If my understanding of that said position is not accurate, I am interesting in learning more about the position, so that I may better comprehend how others see the game and the component parts of the game.

Remathilis · Jan 28, 2021

Don Durito said:
However, if WOTC really does want to move forward maybe the should consider whether it's time to develop a new campaign world for real.

Unfortunately, Wizards is in the unenvious position that most people believe D&D is a generic fantasy simulator and howl and wail whenever a default setting influences the core rules. Check out how many people (wrongly) say the 5e PHB is Forgotten Realms inspired, or who hated the Nerath setting of 4e rewriting the lore.

Other settings can have a default setting, like Pathfinder has Golarion. But not D&D; people will scream bloody murder if any setting (new or old) becomes a default. The only two options D&D has is Straddle the line using the multiverse as the metasetting or utterly remove all setting elements and be a fairly bland SRD/rule compendium rules reference.

Charlaquin · Jan 28, 2021

Argyle King said:
I've supported that as well (even in this very thread). (I also support similar changes in how magic items are handled)

However, there are also some who appear to have the position that any species being bigger/faster/different ruins their ability to enjoy the game.

Assuming that my understanding of that said position is accurate, I am interesting in hearing how that is reconciled with maintaining the identity associated with D&D races.

If my understanding of that said position is not accurate, I am interesting in learning more about the position, so that I may better comprehend how others see the game and the component parts of the game.

I can only speak for myself of course, but my perception is that your understanding of that position is not accurate. Certainly it isn’t a position I hold. If anyone does, I hope they speak up.

Charlaquin · Jan 28, 2021

Remathilis said:
Unfortunately, Wizards is in the unenvious position that most people believe D&D is a generic fantasy simulator and howl and wail whenever a default setting influences the core rules. Check out how many people (wrongly) say the 5e PHB is Forgotten Realms inspired, or who hated the Nerath setting of 4e rewriting the lore.

Other settings can have a default setting, like Pathfinder has Golarion. But not D&D; people will scream bloody murder if any setting (new or old) becomes a default. The only two options D&D has is Straddle the line using the multiverse as the metasetting or utterly remove all setting elements and be a fairly bland SRD/rule compendium rules reference.

I don’t know if this is really the majority stance any more. It’s hard to overstate the influx of new players 5e has brought in, who don’t have the same baggage that the folks who shunned 4e did.

Remathilis · Jan 28, 2021

Charlaquin said:
I don’t know if this is really the majority stance any more. It’s hard to overstate the influx of new players 5e has brought in, who don’t have the same baggage that the folks who shunned 4e did.

I imagine it's not us grognards who are buying up Wildemont, Ravnica and Theros guides. Apparently, their is an appetite for settings. If there wasn't, we'd probably have seen more Forgotten Realms expansion.

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

News Archive | Dungeons and Dragons

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)

Argyle King

Legend

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)

Argyle King

Legend

Argyle King

Legend

Remathilis

Legend

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)

Remathilis

Legend

Similar Threads

Related Articles