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."

 

[Laurefindel]

I can see in 6e them rewriting backgrounds to accommodate this stuff, with a bunch of general ones in the PH, and campaign-specific ones in setting sourcebooks, with rules to make your own in the core. But, because they are making a pretty significant change to character creation and race/species in the middle of an edition, the cascade changes are difficult to square with what's come before. Regardless of species, I think it should matter what culture you were raised in, in a way that is reflected mechanically.

Yes, I agree that the transition will most likely appear clunky/clumsy until 6e standardizes it all.

 

[Scribe]

Lineage, ones biology.
Background, ones experience per adventurer.
Class.
Culture, the larger environment in which one is raised. Language, assumed weapon profs, etc.

That last one would be extremely setting specific.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I feel like they should have just bit the bullet and announced new printings of the core, a "5.5" if you will, to make these changes more cleanly. It would have given them an opportunity to address the culture question rather than ignore it and cut out a part of character creation. The rules would still have been compatible with the previous stuff, more or less, so they could have their cake and eat it too. Have their streamers and social media outlets shill for them, and those new players they're chasing would have eaten it up. This series of half-measures mostly serves to irritate both sides.

 

[Horwath]

I still want to know how we're supposed to represent cultural traits in character creation going forward. You can't put everything into class, and expanding background to accommodate it creates two different kinds of backgrounds. Throwing it out entirely, as WotC seems to be doing, limits character concepts mechanically.

simple.

We should determine what is "genetic" and what is "learned" or "cultural" trait.

I.E:
Elves:
genetics: boost to ability scores, darkvision, proficiency in Perception, "elven trance", resistance to enchantment, faster movement, etc...

cultural: languages, weapon and/or tool proficiencies, extra skills, extra cantrips,

 

[Micah Sweet]

simple.

We should determine what is "genetic" and what is "learned" or "cultural" trait.

I.E:
Elves:
genetics: boost to ability scores, darkvision, proficiency in Perception, "elven trance", resistance to enchantment, faster movement, etc...

cultural: languages, weapon and/or tool proficiencies, extra skills, extra cantrips,

The mix and match method, like the Ancestry and Culture series. I like that, but it does not jive with WotC's current direction of ignoring cultural traits altogether, and making lineages that apparently (?) take that into account, per the UA.

 

[Scribe]

The mix and match method, like the Ancestry and Culture series. I like that, but it does not jive with WotC's current direction of ignoring cultural traits altogether, and making lineages that apparently (?) take that into account, per the UA.

To be fair, this UA is not 'normal' lineages at all. The rules couldnt really apply to this in the same way.

 

[Horwath]

The mix and match method, like the Ancestry and Culture series. I like that, but it does not jive with WotC's current direction of ignoring cultural traits altogether, and making lineages that apparently (?) take that into account, per the UA.

yeah, they should have taken PF1 approach with Advance Race Guide.

You dont want your elf to be good in spellcraft as you have no need for it? Make them better at fast stealth instead.

Don't want your HalfOrc aggressive? have it get bonus skill points.

 

[Micah Sweet]

To be fair, this UA is not 'normal' lineages at all. The rules couldnt really apply to this in the same way.

I agree, but they also said they are ignoring cultural contributions to character creation for all lineages going forward. I just wonder how they are going to represent an actual race/lineage that should have those things. I also wonder how 6e is going to handle it, since they've shifted gears mid-edition.

 

[Micah Sweet]

yeah, they should have taken PF1 approach with Advance Race Guide.

You dont want your elf to be good in spellcraft as you have no need for it? Make them better at fast stealth instead.

Don't want your HalfOrc aggressive? have it get bonus skill points.

An a la carte lineage system in Tasha's would have been really great.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I agree, but they also said they are ignoring cultural contributions to character creation for all lineages going forward. I just wonder how they are going to represent an actual race/lineage that should have those things. I also wonder how 6e is going to handle it, since they've shifted gears mid-edition.

What do you mean "an actual race/lineage that should have those things"?

Superficially that doesn't make any sense. No lineage would inherent have cultural things by definition. Cultural things are cultural things. Lineage things are lineage things. By definition. It's like saying "What about the square things that should be circles?!".

I imagine in a 6E they'll have some optional "cultural" layer or something, or just freely let you choose a bit more stuff than you can now in D&D.