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

The latest Unearthed Arcana contains the Dhampir, Reborn, and Hexblood races. The Dhampir is a half-vampire; the Hexblood is a character which has made a pact with a hag; and the Reborn is somebody brought back to life.

News Archive | Dungeons and Dragons

Read the full archives of Dungeons & Dragons news, Sage Advice, Unearthed Arcana, and D&D Studio Blogs.

dnd.wizards.com

Perhaps the bigger news is this declaration on how race is to be handled in future D&D books as it joins other games by stating that:

"...the race options in this article and in future D&D books lack the Ability Score Increase trait, the Language trait, the Alignment trait, and any other trait that is purely cultural. Racial traits henceforth reflect only the physical or magical realities of being a player character who’s a member of a particular lineage. Such traits include things like darkvision, a breath weapon (as in the dragonborn), or innate magical ability (as in the forest gnome). Such traits don’t include cultural characteristics, like language or training with a weapon or a tool, and the traits also don’t include an alignment suggestion, since alignment is a choice for each individual, not a characteristic shared by a lineage."

 

[Don Durito]

Wisdom is tough, Charisma is easy, but intelligence is pretty mind boggling that its still a thing. I dont know what I would replace it with, but out of the basic Attributes its easily the worst for me to logic my way through.

Is it Analysis? Maybe? Is it knowledge? Not really, but maybe? Is it education? Nope, but thats part (now define education within the context) ect ect.

I dont like Intelligence as an Ability at all.

If it wasn't for Investigate it would be easy to replace it with "Education". All the other intelligence skills are highly associated with some degree of scholarly education.

That's really how I've played for a long time. Just as Wisdom is really mostly perception, Intelligence is mostly Education. Or in other words - it's not so much your intelligence but your education and corresponding ability to appear intelligent.

This way the Half-Orc barbarian who really has no option to have a high intelligence score is merely uneducated (which actually makes some kind of sense).

 

[Faolyn]

At level 1? There can, at your table.

So imagine you have a party with one halfling and one goliath. Imagine they use stat array, and the halfling's player, who wants to be a fighter, chooses to put the 15 in Strength and the goliath's player, who wants to be a wizard, chooses to put the 8 in Strength.

Should this be allowed at every table, or is this something that should be disallowed because goliaths are stronger than halflings but I can houserule it in?

And if this should be allowed at every table--seeing how this has been RAW since stat array became a thing--then why is it suddenly so bad for a halfling to get an additional +2? After all, they're already going to have a halfling stronger than the goliath, and the DM can give NPC goliaths any Strength score they want.

 

[Don Durito]

And that's why orcs, goliaths, and others have that Powerful Build trait, and why half-orcs do extra damage on crits.

Those abilities are completely apart from a +2 Strength bonus, and those races will continue to have those traits to represent their might no matter where they put their +2 bonus.

So instead of being stronger they will have traits to represent that they are stronger?

Wait is some races being stronger than others are bad thing or not?

 

[Scribe]

And if this should be allowed at every table--seeing how this has been RAW since stat array became a thing--then why is it suddenly so bad for a halfling to get an additional +2? After all, they're already going to have a halfling stronger than the goliath, and the DM can give NPC goliaths any Strength score they want.

Because, if the Goliath wasnt scholarly, and actually applied themselves physically, they would naturally be at a higher strength than the Halfing, every.single.time.

So instead of being stronger they will have traits to represent that they are stronger?

Wait is some races being stronger than others are bad thing or not?

Indeed, and this is the ultimate end. "Wait, that Half Orc has attributes which still make it better racially at killing, I still need to minmax away from my halfling, Wizards is still pushing some races towards specific classes! SOMEONE HELP!"

 

[Minigiant]

So instead of being stronger they will have traits to represent that they are stronger?

Wait is some races being stronger than others are bad thing or not?

I think it's a class effectiveness thing.

-2 STR makes you a bad barbarian
Disadvantage on shoves and lower carrying capacity doesn't make you suck at barbarianism.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

So the problem is that given a clear option, it was not good enough and needs to be rendered the only option?

Why? Why was Tasha's being 'optional' not only not good enough, but it needed to be the ONLY official option?


That simply is not how it works at all. If Tasha's as optional was not good enough (and it being made the only way forward seems to indicate that is true) then saying its good enough for people that didnt want it screams hypocrisy.

Anyone know where to grab the latest SRD? EDIT: Nevermind, 5.1, I think I found it.

View attachment 132288

What point are you trying to make with your quotation of the SRD?

Look, literally all you have “lost”, is the ability to tell players in a game you’re running that they have to have certain bonuses because the rules say so. Now you have to say that it’s because that’s how you run your game.

That is literally the only change, and even that is questionable because until that UA sidebar gets printed in a book...the Tasha’s rule is completely optional.
So...some new races will not work how you prefer. Oh no!

 

[Catulle]

RI think it's a class effectiveness thing.

-2 STR makes you a bad barbarian
Disadvantage on shoves and lower carrying capacity doesn't make you suck at barbarianism.

Yep.

It makes no sense to me, why would anybody want to insist that other players shouldn't play x "race" as y class (aesthetic concerns) and be as effective? Why not permit both?

Control/authority.

 

[Scribe]

@doctorbadwolf can you tell me exactly what the harm is, in having both systems (Floating vs Fixed) 'official' and supported, yes even for new races, going forward?

 

[Catulle]

To be more tedious, and come back to Earthdawn (which does do "racial" ability mods, though in a more math-y fashion, as it Earthdawn's wont), the defining trait to me for playing an orc was gahad - a kind of emotional hangover that they got for not acting immediately on a few (player-defined) prompts. I've used it playing DnD/PF half orcs since as a guide, first instinct is to find an aggressive approach, then de-escalate from there. It was always way more helpful for creating game than a neg 2 to an ability. Or two, since systems really want to punish the poor half-orc...

 

[Crimson Longinus]

To be more tedious, and come back to Earthdawn (which does do "racial" ability mods, though in a more math-y fashion, as it Earthdawn's wont), the defining trait to me for playing an orc was gahad - a kind of emotional hangover that they got for not acting immediately on a few (player-defined) prompts. I've used it playing DnD/PF half orcs since as as a kind of, first instinct is to find a violent approach, then de-escalate from there. It was always way more helpful for creating game than a neg 2 to an ability. Or two, since systems really want to punish the poor half-orc...

That has pretty high chance of coming across as problematic.