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

Russ Morrissey


log in or register to remove this ad



variant

Adventurer
This lineage system just ruins any chance of anyone playing a human. This kinda crap has been banned in my campaigns since 2e Skills & Powers hit the market and everyone just used it to min-max their character further.
 

But, I'm not talking about your game, I'm talking about the game as presented, which means point buy or standard array. Die rolling PC's has largely fallen out of fashion. And, again, you moved the goalposts. I don't WANT a "faster and harder to hit" elf. I want a clumsy elf. So, why is my clumsy elf getting a +2 on his Dex? Why are you forcing me to play to your concepts but, refuse to allow me to play to mine?

You folks are the ones insisting that this is purely for optimization and is going to break the game.

That sounds a bit paranoid. You can do whatever you want. If you want to read into what I wrote that I come to your table and use force to make you play something you don't want to, you have other problems than some written rule. I am honestly worried about you.
 
Last edited:

Hussar

Legend
That sounds a bit paranoid. You can do whatever you want. If you want to read into what I wrote that I come to your table and use force to make you play something you don't want to, you have other problems than some written rule. I am honestly worried about you.

Reads this then reads the post immediately above it

This lineage system just ruins any chance of anyone playing a human. This kinda crap has been banned in my campaigns since 2e Skills & Powers hit the market and everyone just used it to min-max their character further.

Umm...

Over thirty pages now of people talking about how this is all to "pander to powergamers". Pander was the specific word used some pages ago. Page after page of people wringing their hands how this will massively change the game. It will mean that no one ever plays humans (never minding that humans are BY FAR the most popular option right now and I highly doubt that that's going to change). It means that everyone will play dwarven wizards, despite the fact, as @Choasmancer points out, better options have existed in the game for a couple of years now and no one is playing that.

Methinks your teacup runneth over with tempest.
 

Reads this then reads the post immediately above it

And still... no one comes to your house to force you into something.

Also, you already could play as you wanted before such a rule as presented. So please take care of yourself.
You already could play an elf with 1 Dexterity. I think if you tell your DM you want to play one, he probably won't disallow it. That is even more freeform than the rule presented.
Rules are only suggestions. You can do house rules as much as you want. It is even encouraged.

That does not mean, that everyone has to like an official (but probably optional) rule, because they think it does not do what it promises it to do.
 

Iry

Hero
The main thing I want out of the Lineage System is good phrasing. As in "You are a dwarf and get +2 Con. You were raised in an X culture so you get +2 Y, and training in Z cultural tool."
 

Hussar

Legend
And still... no one comes to your house to force you into something.

Also, you already could play as you wanted before such a rule as presented. So please take care of yourself.
You already could play an elf with 1 Dexterity. I think if you tell your DM you want to play one, he probably won't disallow it. That is even more freeform than the rule presented.
Rules are only suggestions. You can do house rules as much as you want. It is even encouraged.

That does not mean, that everyone has to like an official (but probably optional) rule, because they think it does not do what it promises it to do.

Ahh, Stormwind. Thy breath ever smell so sweet.
 

Oofta

Title? I don't need no stinkin' title.
But, I'm not talking about your game, I'm talking about the game as presented, which means point buy or standard array. Die rolling PC's has largely fallen out of fashion. And, again, you moved the goalposts. I don't WANT a "faster and harder to hit" elf. I want a clumsy elf. So, why is my clumsy elf getting a +2 on his Dex? Why are you forcing me to play to your concepts but, refuse to allow me to play to mine?

You folks are the ones insisting that this is purely for optimization and is going to break the game.

Well, compared to the average elf, an elf with a 10 dexterity could be considered clumsy. Things like that are all a matter of perspective. For that matter, most non-elves would be considered clumsy. Just like we're poor climbers compared to chimpanzees. But given the way that point buy works though, you'll never have a spectacularly clumsy PC of any race.

As far as "purely for optimization and is going to break the game", all I can say is that for me that's not it. As I said earlier I'm not completely opposed to the change and my next mountain dwarf wizard arcane craftsman may put their +2 into intelligence instead of strength. I'm still on the fence whether or not to use it for home games.

For me it's more that the modifications to ability scores reinforces the idea that different races are not just humans in costumes. They are physiologically different species and simply built different.
 



Stormwind only applies if something is actually broken. Nothing is broken here. At all. This is purely a like/dislike thing.
Ah. Stormwind fallacy. Thank you. :) I could not make sense of what @Hussar said.

I am not even sure if Stormwind* fallcy can apply to a Pen and Paper RPG. Most things are preferences and it is impossible to cater to any special flower. The biggest mistake of many designers (for example in 4e) was listening to the loudest people.

Most people play for fun and if something does not work, they are taking responsibility for themselves and adapt the game to their tastes.

Edit: oh... I mixed up oberoni fallacy with Stormwind fallacy... Now I really can't make sense of @Hussar.

*Edit 2: I think I also have Oberoni fallacy wrong in mind. It is adressing real loopholes that need to be fixed. Yes that should be... But I have seen it used at wrong places so often, that I remembered it wrong.
 
Last edited:



Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
Ah. Stormwind fallacy. Thank you. :) I could not make sense of what @Hussar said.

I am not even sure if Stormwind* fallcy can apply to a Pen and Paper RPG. Most things are preferences and it is impossible to cater to any special flower. The biggest mistake of many designers (for example in 4e) was listening to the loudest people.

Most people play for fun and if something does not work, they are taking responsibility for themselves and adapt the game to their tastes.

Edit: oh... I mixed up oberoni fallacy with Stormwind fallacy... Now I really can't make sense of @Hussar.

*Edit 2: I think I also have Oberoni fallacy wrong in mind. It is adressing real loopholes that need to be fixed. Yes that should be... But I have seen it used at wrong places so often, that I mixed that I remembered it wrong.
Oh, right. I mixed those two up as well. Now he's lost me with that comment as well. LOL

Maybe he mixed them up as well which is causing the confusion.
 

You dumped DEX and seemed to accept most of the consequences, but one of them really bothered you. Too bad--it's part of the game.

Obviously you don't care about or need my approval, so why ask? Again, happy gaming.


The amusing thing is dumping Dex was the right move, mechanically.

Rock Gnomes don't get bonuses to Dex or Strength. Therefore, I would have had to raise either stat the exact same way, and to wear Heavy Armor and get the most AC, I needed strength, to use the better weapons with only simple weapons, I needed strength.

Yes, that crossbow bothered me. I can't help but mention it. But, you seem to be awfully fixated on "I dumped dex" when having a higher strength makes the most sense for the options I had available. But, even if it was the best move, it wasn't a fun move.


This lineage system just ruins any chance of anyone playing a human. This kinda crap has been banned in my campaigns since 2e Skills & Powers hit the market and everyone just used it to min-max their character further.


I can only assume you mean non-variant human, because Variant human can already end up with a +2/+1 in any stat based on their feat choice. And feats are still one of the most powerful things you can get at level 1


Well we finally see the hierarchy of proficiency

  1. Skills
  2. Martial Weapons
  3. Simple Weapons or Tools
  4. Languages

Yes, but interestingly, you can't learn weapon profs through training like you can with tools and languages (and I think skills?)

And, if this hierarchy is true, it highlights even more how utterly terrible Weapon Master is. 4 Martial weapons for a feat, or 3 Skills for a feat.


But, just because I wanted to work this out. Let me go ahead and make a Wood Elf Rogue with these rules. I'm going to keep the Longbow, but I don't need or want Shortbows, shortswords or Longswords. So, I will trade them out for Poisoner's Kit, Disguise Kit, and Forgery Kit. I use the rule (can't remember if it is homebrew or not) that if you get prof on a tool from two sources, you can pick a new one, so I can also get Thieves Tools and Alchemists Tools by taking Urchin background.

Utilizing Xanathar's rules, and just some basic stuff to allow tools to actually matter for crafting, I now have a crazy good Rogue, at level 1. I can make disguises, forge documents, set traps, create poison, I've got the ability to make smokescreens with Xanathars.


Honestly, this is the sleeper agent power of this rule update, and kind of a stealth boost to martials. Every Elf and Dwarf martial is going to have the ability to get 4 new tools.
 

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
Yes, but interestingly, you can't learn weapon profs through training like you can with tools and languages (and I think skills?)

And, if this hierarchy is true, it highlights even more how utterly terrible Weapon Master is. 4 Martial weapons for a feat, or 3 Skills for a feat.
Probably Skill and martial weapon are equal but on a different scale.

Weapon master gives you a +1 ASI
A Feat is worth +2 to an ability.

Skllled is 3 skills. So it's +2 for 3 skills. A skill is worth 66% of an +1 ASI
Weapon master is +1 ASI and 4 martial weapons. So a martial weapon is worth 25% of a +1 ASI
Linguist is +1 ASI, 3 langauges and a cipher. So 4 languages? So a language is worth 25% of an ASI. But that can't be right. So mayble the cipher counts as double for a rare language and is 20% of a +1.

So really you should be able to trade +2 Dex for 8 martial weapons or 10 common languages.

There's wiggle room for simple weapons and tools. +2 for 9 simple weapons or tools for 22.2%?
 

Weapon master gives you a +1 ASI
A Feat is worth +2 to an ability.

Skllled is 3 skills. So it's +2 for 3 skills. A skill is worth 66% of an +1 ASI
Weapon master is +1 ASI and 4 martial weapons. So a martial weapon is worth 25% of a +1 ASI
Linguist is +1 ASI, 3 langauges and a cipher. So 4 languages? So a language is worth 25% of an ASI. But that can't be right. So mayble the cipher counts as double for a rare language and is 20% of a +1.

So really you should be able to trade +2 Dex for 8 martial weapons or 10 common languages.

There's wiggle room for simple weapons and tools. +2 for 9 simple weapons or tools for 22.2%?

Ok. You got me. I tried to trick you all...
 

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
If you really think about it

Armor, shield and saving trow proficiency are the top tier proficiency based on the feats. Proficiency with a tier of armor, shields, or a saving throw is worth a +1.
But I can understand why WOTC doesn't let you swap these or trade down for redundant armor profs.
Because Mountain dwarves would have two +2s and two+1s.

That's your answer why they didn't do racial point buy.
 

Halloween Horror For 5E

Advertisement1

Latest threads

Halloween Horror For 5E

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top