D&D 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.

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.

 

[Parmandur]

To me, it's an exploit to have High Elves be better artificers than Rock Gnomes, who literally have a feature named after being artificers. High Elves trading all their weapons for 4 tool proficiencies while a rock gnome is limited to 1 seems like an exploit to me.

Elves and Dwarves are master crafters who live hundreds of years. It's mostly fluff anyways, so "exploit" is not really an accurate term.

 

[Remathilis]

To me, it's an exploit to have High Elves be better artificers than Rock Gnomes, who literally have a feature named after being artificers. High Elves trading all their weapons for 4 tool proficiencies while a rock gnome is limited to 1 seems like an exploit to me.

It's almost like racial abilities were designed to compliment each other and not be taken ala carte.

Given how simple these rules are, there are going to be exploits, optimal combos, and synergy never accounted for. Unless one of them is game-breaking, I don't think WotC has the will to check to see if some races profit from these exchanges or not. This is the price paid for retooling existing rules to make them more diverse.

I'm sure when 6e comes out and they can rebuild the race/lineage rules from scratch, they will be a lot more fair. Until then, accept that exploits can and will be used, consciously or not.

 

[Ogre Mage]

No, it's not going to break anything, but I feel I'll start seeing a lot more cheeto eating munchkins rock up to my table with +2 Int mountain dwarf Wizards in half plate and shields.

The mountain dwarf's proficiency in medium armor does not provide shield proficiency. It works differently from the Moderately Armored feat.

If I play a Mountain Dwarf with Heavily Armored feat, am I meant to use a shield?

 

[Azzy]

To me, it's an exploit to have High Elves be better artificers than Rock Gnomes, who literally have a feature named after being artificers. High Elves trading all their weapons for 4 tool proficiencies while a rock gnome is limited to 1 seems like an exploit to me.

Considering that the rock gnome was never designed with the artificer in mind and that the tinker thing is pretty new to this edition (apparently being inspired by Dragonlance), I see no reason why elves shouldn't be better artificers than gnomes if they dump all of their resources into it or how this could be considered an exploit.

 

[Weiley31]

I mean, I see nothing wrong with a character trading in all weapon training to be a boss at using tools or a trade. It would be an interesting rp thing, especially if they were strictly magic.

 

[Dire Bare]

Considering that the rock gnome was never designed with the artificer in mind and that the tinker thing is pretty new to this edition (apparently being inspired by Dragonlance), I see no reason why elves shouldn't be better artificers than gnomes if they dump all of their resources into it or how this could be considered an exploit.

Elves aren't stereotypical steampunky style artificers . . . but they ARE stereotypical magical artisans. From a purely stereotypical fantasy perspective, I don't see why elves can't make great artificers.

Besides, the entire point of this optional rules modules in Tasha's is to help break fantasy racial stereotypes. So, bravo!

And . . . having some characters with a plethora of tool proficiencies is hardly game-breaking, IMO.

 

[Hussar]

... is hardly game-breaking, IMO.

This is pretty much what could be said about this whole thread. People freaking out that some races will be too powerful, when, on examination, it looks like there is pretty much zero problem.

Almost like WotC uses professional game designers when they write books.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

This is pretty much what could be said about this whole thread. People freaking out that some races will be too powerful, when, on examination, it looks like there is pretty much zero problem.

Almost like WotC uses professional game designers when they write books.

Yeah. I don't think there will be many balance problems. It's an optional rule, after all. I just think the number of potential tool proficiencies is a bit silly. Whatever. It's just an option, and I don't have to use it.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

This is pretty much what could be said about this whole thread. People freaking out that some races will be too powerful, when, on examination, it looks like there is pretty much zero problem.

But that was the situation before this rule too.

 

[Mecheon]

Yuan-Ti, Satyr and V-Human still reign supreme with the changes. No big shift of things at the backend, just throws a few of the middling ones a bit higher