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]

What are you talking about? Can you explain a bit more. Are you talking about the UA?

Yes. Apologies I'm on my phone. But in the UA it states that you just roll with the Tasha's system, and these races are done in a 2/1 system, no?

 

[Dausuul]

The dhampir and the hexblood are pretty nifty. I especially like the hexblood, but then playing casters is my jam and the dhampir is more of a melee warrior. Is the first 5E example of using Constitution as an attack stat?

The reborn... meh. I realize they were trying to fit in all the "undead template" abilities, and that doesn't leave a lot of room for other powerful features, but they still ended up with a whole lot of boring passive bonuses. And one boring active bonus. It needs some less powerful but more flavorful traits.

As for the floating bonuses debate, I wish they had given us some rules for reanimated mounts. It would be nice to have something useful to do with this dead horse.

 

[dave2008]

Yes. Apologies I'm on my phone. But in the UA it states that you just roll with the Tasha's system, and these races are done in a 2/1 system, no?

OK, as I mentioned no races have ability restrictions in 5e, they have racial ability bonuses. Currently the UA races have several bonuses, some of which are really cool, but they give no bonus to the ability scores. They do get to apply ability bonuses wherever they want though.

If and when these get published, this will probably be the case. But it has no effect on the 43 races that are already available.

EDIT: I also think it is trivial easy to assign these floating bonuses to a race if you want to. The benefit of that is you can do it how you want and it is not dictate by WotC. They almost always get it wrong.

 

[Micah Sweet]

More freedom of choice is the low hanging fruit. FYI, they are not removing them, they are just letting you apply them as you see fit.

But they are not providing an option in these new lineages for cultural benefits; it's all physiological, plus the generic language and ASI. Where in the character creation process can I get something from my years growing up with the elves? What are any of the classic races going to be like without the proficiencies, etc. that come from growing up in a culture? They're not left with much. What are those going to be replaced with in future lineages? What the heck are humans going to be like? They basically get nothing physiologically.

 

[Scribe]

OK, as I mentioned no races have ability restrictions in 5e, they have racial ability bonuses. Currently the UA races have several bonuses, some of which are really cool, but they the race give no bonus to the ability scores. They do get to apply ability bonuses wherever they want though.

If and when these get published, this will probably be the case. But it has no effect on the 43 races that are already available.

Right, thats what I'm talking about, not restrictions, but bonus' that applied to some attributes, but not others. Thats the pre-Tasha's 5e system.

The UA states.

Ability Score Increases
When you determine your ability scores, increase one of those scores by 2, and increase a different one by 1. These increases can’t raise a score above 20. You follow this rule regardless of the method you use to determine the scores, such as rolling or point buy. If you are replacing your race with a lineage, replace any Ability Score Increases you previously had with these.

Which, as we know, is the Tasha's system.

So, there is no level 1, 'starting as X lineage' from this UA, pre-Tasha's system. Its simply, Tasha's. And considering this, also from the UA.

Following in that book’s footsteps, the race options in this article and in future D&D books lack the Ability Score Increase trait...

So again, to be clear.

1. I do not care that others get to have a system that better reflects how they desire their games to be ran. Tasha's, or homebrew.
2. I will not care when that is the official stance (as noted it will be) going forward.
3. I simply would like to have the system pre-Tasha's, also reflected, as an optional, but still printed by Wizard's, option so that I do not need to do the work that Wizard's previously was providing a system for, and has for (not forever) an extremely long time in some way or another.

Fair?

 

[dave2008]

But they are not providing an option in these new lineages for cultural benefits; it's all physiological, plus the generic language and ASI. Where in the character creation process can I get something from my years growing up with the elves? What are any of the classic races going to be like without the proficiencies, etc. that come from growing up in a culture? They're not left with much. What are those going to be replaced with in future lineages? What the heck are humans going to be like? They basically get nothing physiologically.

None of the existing races change, so whatever they have now they still have. When this eventually changes for the published races who knows. They are clearly still working on it and trying to figure it out. Fill out the survey when it comes out and make your concerns heard.

If you want to see a way if could be handled go check out Origins for A5e / LevelUP by EnWorld Publishing.

 

[Scribe]

EDIT: I also think it is trivial easy to assign these floating bonuses to a race if you want to. The benefit of that is you can do it how you want and it is not dictate by WotC. They almost always get it wrong.

You are correct, but would it not be infinitely easier to not just say 'Dont like this system? Apply a global +2/+1 at your discretion.'?

Of course it would.

Imagine if this was the way it was (or how it will be) going forward. Instead of Wizards doing the work for as you noted 43 races, we will be expected to do it ourselves.

Why is it acceptable to say "just do the work as you like" when its unacceptable to say "Just apply a global 2/1 split." and clearly it WAS unacceptable, as the Tasha's reviews noted many times over. Not even an OPTION was acceptable, for some reason, and instead, those of us who wish to have ASI tied to race, need to lose our system?

Seems like a double standard at best.

 

[Micah Sweet]

None of the existing races change, so whatever they have now they still have. When this eventually changes for the published races who knows. They are clearly still working on it and trying to figure it out. Fill out the survey when it comes out and make your concerns heard.

If you want to see a way if could be handled go check out Origins for A5e / LevelUP by EnWorld Publishing.

Fair enough. I think I need to see their version of a lineage that doesn't obviously have a built-in way to be used after character creation (as all of three of these do) to see what they intend.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

The dhampir and the hexblood are pretty nifty. I especially like the hexblood, but then playing casters is my jam and the dhampir is more of a melee warrior. Is the first 5E example of using Constitution as an attack stat?

Yeah, it is. If/when this becomes official, if it still uses Con (it should, IMO), all 6 ability scores will be able to be used for attack/damage rolls with weapon attacks.

Anyone can use STR for weapons/unarmed strikes, anyone can use DEX with finesse/ranged weapons, Battle Smiths/Armorers can use INT for their weapon attacks, anyone with Shillelagh can use WIS for club/quarterstaff attacks, and Hexblades/Tomelocks can use Charisma for weapon attacks. So, if this is official, it will complete it, in a way. (STR still can't be used to cast spells, though.)

 

[Argyle King]

But what you're saying is that you want the rules to support your world, not every world.

Perhaps I'm mistaken, but it sounds as though you're making the same argument that you're criticizing -just from the opposing viewpoint.

Personally -as I've mentioned in several threads- I'm fine with getting away from racial score adjustments. However, I believe that doing so requires handling race very differently from 5th Edition.


additional thoughts:

-As I see it, "race" in the context of D&D denotes physiological differences between species. While there may very well be a legendary halfling strongman or an ogre ballet prodigy, I would posit that those are outliers who likely needed to work hard -or have some special out-sound-the-norm ability- to rise to their station and defy real (not imagined or socially-constructed) differences.

In my own day-to-day life, I sometimes desire to fly like a bird, but I would still likely break my legs if I were to jump from my roof and flap my arms. If transported to a fantasy realm -and still human, I would (I believe) need to learn magic or some other avenue to approach flight. I'm inclined to believe I would not have the abilities of an Aarakocra simply because I desired them.

-D&D's core books do assume a specific world: Forgotten Realms. If a player and/group of players wants their game world to look differently, D&D is designed to allow that. At the same time, criticizing one particular world's design because it doesn't fit your vision seems somewhat counterintuitive to the position (which I agree with) posited: that your own world should be allowed to be different.

If there is a desire for D&D to assume a generic baseline, I believe that is possible. Games such as GURPS, Genesys, and various others do that. The core books do not assume a setting and simply list options. Then, later books mold the options to the specific setting desired.

I could see D&D 6th Edition being built that way. The basic rules could come in a boxed set designed to teach the game or perhaps even be available as a generic and free pdf. Then individual setting lines could tailor the rules to their respective approaches.