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."

 

[Scribe]

I'm sure its not perfect. Nothing is, but it still scratches the appropriate itch, for me, and provides a path for ones +2 Str Halfling as well if they so desire. It simply has nothing to do with them being a halfing.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

I would rather the points system, like in videogames, with 16 as top-limit, and only one with 18 if it has the right combo of ASIs.

I don't like very much PC races without attributes modifiers, because these are as a mark to show those races aren't like "special humans" but without their own differences.

I have said not totally fixed ASIs neither totally ones, but something optional, like Pathfinder 2 where you can choose between +2A, +B or (+2A+2B-C).

* Why not to allow those racial traits based in "narture" to be replaced with "upbringing feats"? For example bow training replaced with a catrip, because elf wizards don't use bow and arrows very much.

 

[bedir than]

I would rather the points system, like in videogames, with 16 as top-limit, and only one with 18 if it has the right combo of ASIs.

Point Buy is AL legal, and one of the three systems to generate attributes given in the Player's Handbook.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yes, this is an issue that stood out to me. My suggestion was to have "cultural packages" (high elf culture, mountain dwarf culture, etc.) that you can choose from or fully customize. This would be great just from a world building perspective.

It was what I liked about the Ancestry and Culture books.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I agree that this might be the way to do it, and it's not a huge stretch from the existing paradigm. "Race" maps pretty well to "species" (or some more fantasy friendly term like "ancestry" or "lineage"), and "subrace" (horrible term) maps pretty well to culture or ethnicity.

Of course, that requires a shuffle of traits between species and culture . . . .

A few of the 3rd party options already take this approach, notably "Ancestry & Culture" from Arcanist Press.

Which, just as a note, I had heard everyone praising this, so I bought it...

And I'm kind of disappointed. It really was just the most basic version of what I thought it could be imaginable, doing exactly what I could have done myself if I had had the willpower to right it out.

For all the praise, I thought they had designed something, not just took the PHB options and pulled them apart.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I see your point, but WotC themselves haven't really done any better (better than they used to, but still not great). I would have loved to see lineage a la carte options in Tasha's, that had every trait pointed out so you could make a unique lineage for your character. The custom race option they included was weak tea at best.

 

[Scribe]

I see your point, but WotC themselves haven't really done any better (better than they used to, but still not great). I would have loved to see lineage a la carte options in Tasha's, that had every trait pointed out so you could make a unique lineage for your character. The custom race option they included was weak tea at best.

So, you mean a 'create your own species' tool? With Darkvision costing X and Fey Step costing Y ?

 

[humble minion]

So, you mean a 'create your own species' tool? With Darkvision costing X and Fey Step costing Y ?

I'd ... kinda hate to see that, to be honest.

It'd really promote the sort of min-maxing character optimisation attitude that caused so many problems in 3e and which 5e has deliberately avoided so far (more decision points in a character build means more scope for finding power combos), and it'd make the character build process even more frontloaded.

Not to mention that it'd be a more daunting hurdle for new players to clear. Choose a race/lineage/culture, i can deal with for a first-time player. Building your whole species from scratch from 17 pages of tables listing every imaginable trait ... not so much.

 

[Alzrius]

I'd ... kinda hate to see that, to be honest.

It'd really promote the sort of min-maxing character optimisation attitude that caused so many problems in 3e and which 5e has deliberately avoided so far (more decision points in a character build means more scope for finding power combos), and it'd make the character build process even more frontloaded.

Not to mention that it'd be a more daunting hurdle for new players to clear. Choose a race/lineage/culture, i can deal with for a first-time player. Building your whole species from scratch from 17 pages of tables listing every imaginable trait ... not so much.

But wouldn't building a list of PC-available species be something that the DM does, rather than the players?

 

[humble minion]

But wouldn't building a list of PC-available species be something that the DM does, rather than the players?

The post i was replying to was replying to another post that said the players would design their lineage.

Anywat i'd be wary of putting all responsibility on the DM ahead of time, given than this is all about how players can represent the variety of ancestries of their characters. DMs have enough on their plate. Dhampir of dragonborn ancestry? Offspring of drow and high elf? Half-dwarf-half-orc? Prideful phoenix cursed by a god to live in goblin form, but whose phoenixy nature leaks out from time to time? PCs are very weird, and either the GM has to cover all possible bases when doing campaign planning, or else there has to be some sort of negotiation process between player and DM once the player has come up with a concept. Neither of which is gamebreaking, and I'd be all alongside option 2 as a very very optional rule for experienced groups, but neither is real beginner-friendly.