log in or register to remove this ad

 

5E A First Look at Tasha’s Lineage System In AL Player’s Guide - Customizing Your Origin In D&D

The new player’s guide for the D&D Adventurers League has been released. Appendix 1 includes the new info from Tasha’s Cauldron on customizing your origin. It‘s a one-page appendix.

38384683-0EFA-4481-8D96-3C033B9F7F03.jpeg

The D&D Adventurers League now uses this variant system from Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything since it allows for a greater degree of customization. For ease of reference, the relevant information is included as an appendix to this document and doesn’t count against the PH + 1 rule.

You can do any of the following (obviously the full document has more detail):

1. Move your race ability score increases wherever your want to. “...take any ability score increase you gain in your race or subrace and apply it to an ability score of your choice.”​

2. Replace each language from your race with any language from a set list.​

3. Swap each proficiency for another of the same type.​

4. Alter behaviour/personality race-based descriptions.​

Its not clear if that’s the whole Lineage system or just part of it. You can download the player’s guide here.
 
Russ Morrissey

Comments


log in or register to remove this ad

ChaosOS

Hero
Supporter
So, the only point that's potentially persuaded me that Mountain Dwarf's +2/+2 is uniquely valuable beyond being 2 more points spread across your three bottom stats is that it allows a 17/17 start to roll into +1/+1 tier up. My issue is I'm not sure what two stats you'd want to do that with - if it's Spellcasting Stat+Dex, you're wasting the medium armor proficiency. I'd really like to see someone actually work out a build that leverages the 18/18 at level 4 well. Otherwise, I'm still waiting to hear how mountain dwarf is better than high elf.
 

Its wild how violently explosive people get over +2 to an ability score. Reading through this thread, some people seem so absolutely terrified of the idea of a player having +1 to their spell save DC or attack rolls that they just cannot stomach the idea. Some you have actually said this is a terrible and horribly balanced rule that ruins the game. Crazy. Juuuuuuuuuuust crazy.
 

Crimson Longinus

Adventurer
So, the only point that's potentially persuaded me that Mountain Dwarf's +2/+2 is uniquely valuable beyond being 2 more points spread across your three bottom stats is that it allows a 17/17 start to roll into +1/+1 tier up. My issue is I'm not sure what two stats you'd want to do that with - if it's Spellcasting Stat+Dex, you're wasting the medium armor proficiency. I'd really like to see someone actually work out a build that leverages the 18/18 at level 4 well. Otherwise, I'm still waiting to hear how mountain dwarf is better than high elf.
Your casting stat and con definitely.
 


dnd4vr

The Smurfiest Wizard Ever!
If you can't imagine a world where a dwarf wizard can start with a 17 like a gnome wizard can without rolling, that's not my problem. Some people like playing that way, and it's not going to break any of D&D's supposed "realism" by letting a player have more options for being good at their job.
But I'm leaving it at that. This argument has been done so many times it is sickening. We've had numerous threads about it and there is no point rehashing the same arguments over and over.
washes hands of whole thing...
 

Zarithar

Adventurer
Nerd Immersion does a preview here. Start at the 3 minute mark. Seems like a preview of what we'll expect in Tasha's

Hmm. This actually seems very similar to what they did with World of Warcraft back in the day... and suddenly Tauren paladins were running around everywhere.
 


What I am asking is you why you think that someone who put a number considerably higher than average into their Strength ability score should not think of their character as "strong".
It's a line. Is the line arbitrary and subjective? Absolutely. Any sort of line like that will be. It's based on personal experiences, subjective evaluations, and a rough comparison to easily comparable alternatives. That doesn't make the line less real for the people who see it as existing.

I think that a lot of the people who required the level of optimisation of an ability being maxed out otherwise it is 'mechanically deficient', are simply going to gravitate to their mechanically enforced racial essentialism as represented by other racial traits.
My experience is that optimization is a diminishing returns endeavor. The higher you go the less return you get and the more people reach a point where they say "good enough" and stop.

Having a racial ASI in your class's main stat is the low hanging fruit. It's easy, it's obvious, and a lot of people feel like the difference is obvious in play. Having racial abilities that synergize with your class is a tier above that. Some people will aim for it, the same as they already do. Other people will feel like racial abilities are minor enough to just take what's offered and prioritize character identity, once racial ASI are off the table. It's that group that I fall into, and I don't seem to be alone in it.
 

ChaosOS

Hero
Supporter
Your casting stat and con definitely.
So +1 hp per level, and +1 on concentration saves. Not bad, but I'm not sure it's a huge buff outside of gish. I can see a mountain dwarf bladesinger post-Tasha's being pretty fun, but I'm still going to hold out on that actually being OP rather than just finally viable.
 



Its wild how violently explosive people get over +2 to an ability score. Reading through this thread, some people seem so absolutely terrified of the idea of a player having +1 to their spell save DC or attack rolls that they just cannot stomach the idea. Some you have actually said this is a terrible and horribly balanced rule that ruins the game. Crazy. Juuuuuuuuuuust crazy.
That is not my problem at all. It is the idea of opening the door for even more min/max ***, I don´t play point buy character creation RPGs and we dismissed skills and powers custom point buy race building for good reasons: you get eve more uniform characters instead of more diverse ones, because you stop having tradeoffs and always pick the best few combinations. The mountain dwarf wizard is just an example: why take something different than a dwarf that has +2 int, +2 con and medium armor proficiency if you want to bring the best wizard possible? If you don´t care about bringing the absolutely best? Then why start tinkering with races at all?
Replacing a minor feature here and there because story reasons? Yes please! Changing parts of the ability scores for story reasons? Yes, not problem! But not: I wan to play a dwarf but I actually don´t care about anything but the 2 +2s and the armor proficiency.
 

TwoSix

Unserious gamer
Supporter
So, the only point that's potentially persuaded me that Mountain Dwarf's +2/+2 is uniquely valuable beyond being 2 more points spread across your three bottom stats is that it allows a 17/17 start to roll into +1/+1 tier up. My issue is I'm not sure what two stats you'd want to do that with - if it's Spellcasting Stat+Dex, you're wasting the medium armor proficiency. I'd really like to see someone actually work out a build that leverages the 18/18 at level 4 well. Otherwise, I'm still waiting to hear how mountain dwarf is better than high elf.
I can see some classes that would love to get double 18s at level 4; Str/Cha on paladin or Dex/Wis on monk. I don't know how many combinations can also leverage the armor proficiency. Usually classes that need an attack stat and a casting stat already have armor proficiency.
 


Okay, I'm used to Passive Perception, but this is the first time I'm seeing Passive Insight and Passive Investigation.

How do you determine Passive Insight and Passive Investigation?
The same as passive stealth and passive deception... 10+proficiency bonus with advantage translating into a +5 bonus and disadvantage into -5 penalty. Sometimes a different way to have a check autosucceed. Probably best used, when you don´t want to have too many rolls. I use them for contests and regarding investigation I use them to notice that something is amiss, and insight as deception radar. I usually don´t tell what exactly is strange, but telle the player, that something seems strange. In my book, an active check is needed to find more details.
Note, that there are 2 autosucceed conditions in the DMG which are optional. If you succeed with those conditions, no further roll is needed.
 

DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
Its wild how violently explosive people get over +2 to an ability score. Reading through this thread, some people seem so absolutely terrified of the idea of a player having +1 to their spell save DC or attack rolls that they just cannot stomach the idea. Some you have actually said this is a terrible and horribly balanced rule that ruins the game. Crazy. Juuuuuuuuuuust crazy.
Of course they do! That's why we've had 5 years worth of threads here on the boards of player and after player decrying the +1 magic weapon, because it unbalances the PC that gets it compared to all the other characters that didn't! What was WotC thinking?!?

Oh wait... we haven't had that? Sorry! My mistake!
 

ChaosOS

Hero
Supporter
I can see some classes that would love to get double 18s at level 4; Str/Cha on paladin or Dex/Wis on monk. I don't know how many combinations can also leverage the armor proficiency. Usually classes that need an attack stat and a casting stat already have armor proficiency.
Yeah that's what sticks with me - is getting that double 18 worth sacrificing most other race features, like not getting a single skill proficiency?
 

That is not my problem at all. It is the idea of opening the door for even more min/max ***, I don´t play point buy character creation RPGs and we dismissed skills and powers custom point buy race building for good reasons: you get eve more uniform characters instead of more diverse ones, because you stop having tradeoffs and always pick the best few combinations. The mountain dwarf wizard is just an example: why take something different than a dwarf that has +2 int, +2 con and medium armor proficiency if you want to bring the best wizard possible? If you don´t care about bringing the absolutely best? Then why start tinkering with races at all?
Replacing a minor feature here and there because story reasons? Yes please! Changing parts of the ability scores for story reasons? Yes, not problem! But not: I wan to play a dwarf but I actually don´t care about anything but the 2 +2s and the armor proficiency.
What if...I don't want to play a dwarf? Are we ignoring the RP part of this RPG?
 

What if...I don't want to play a dwarf? Are we ignoring the RP part of this RPG?
Yes? That is what min/maxin does...

OR: No. If a newer player asks me I would probably allow, but not in combination with point buy. But with standard array or rolled stats, why not. Maybe with rolled stats I would allow it for players who rolled badly and nt for the ones rolling good stats.
 

COMING SOON: 5 Plug-In Settlements for your 5E Game

Advertisement1

COMING SOON: 5 Plug-In Settlements for your 5E Game

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top