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."

 

[Stefano Rinaldelli]

You know what's absurd?

A halfling, a gnome, a human, and elf, an orc, and a goliath require exactly the same amount of food and water per day, despite a range of multiple feet and hundreds of pounds.

But I'm pretty sure no one wants BMI and caloric intake rules, despite "reality".

So, bring you consideration to the end point: why no dispute on food rate and a dispute on ASI?

 

[Scott Christian]

So let me get this straight: even when just about every Dwarf in the world that you encounter is strong and tough, your suspension of disbelief is shattered simply because when you roll a Dwarf PC, you are given the option of putting your +2/+1, for that one specific Dwarf, into any of the six attributes?

Wow. That sucks.

Is that any different than your game being ruined because you have a 15 strength instead of a 16?

 

[Arial Black]

Elephant-folk.


This is when I like to point out that in the real world, chimpanzees, despite being generally smaller and lighter than humans, a lot stronger than us (depending on the source, from half-again as strong to four times as strong), because of how their muscles are built and attached to their bones. Now imagine a chimp that's decided to work out.

And as I and others have noted, the player characters are unique or at least pretty rare, the vast majority of NPC mice--or halflings or humans--are going to be weaker than the average minotaur, and by the rules, all races have a maximum of 20 Strength anyway so it doesn't matter. If a mouse gets up high enough in level, or gets the right magical equipment, or gets a wish, if could have a Strength of 20.

Yeah, that's my point! Chimps are physiologically stronger than humans!

In D&D, that would be represented as giving chimp PCs +2 Str. That would not mean that every chimp is stronger than every human, but it would mean that chimps as a race/species are stronger than humans.

Bingo! The mechanics work! They model (however abstractly and imperfectly) that chimps are indeed physiologically stronger than humans.

Making floating racial bonuses to ability scores means that no race is stronger or weaker on average than any other race. This fails! As a way to model the difference in races, this fails!

The fact that some races get +2 Str in no way means that PC are not unique!

 

[Faolyn]

* Your Dwarven PC won't be any hardier than any other races though, so if you picked Dwarf in order to be hardier than an Elf, you're SOL. Enjoy!

How many people are picking a race just to be better at something than another race?

 

[Guest 6801328]

I would really like to address this.
An extra +1 to hit and +1 damage at first level has some effect. Your group of two fighters is engaged with a darkmantle. AC 11, HP 22. The difference between a +4 to hit and a +5 to hit is the difference between rolling a 7 versus a 6. We will say the combat lasts four rounds. (Run simulator) In ten different, four round fights against a darkmantle, the amount of times the +5 fighter outpaces the +4 fighter is 2. So there are two rounds that the +5 fighter hits and the +4 fighter doesn't. In 40 rounds!
The difference in damage is even more minimal. As the +5 fighter will have done approximately 2 more points of damage than the +4 fighter. In 40 rounds! 2 points - 40 rounds.
And if we move them up to level 4 and have one take a feat and the other doesn't, well, there is no math for that. And that is point, everyone argues that the +1 is such a big deal. It isn't.
What it does do is it creates a clear path for people to see what they think is "better." For others, it creates a path for them to see beyond the +1, and focus on something different.

As has been explained many times, it's not about the math it's about the perception. The reality remains that players tend to only choose races that let them start with a 16 in their primary stat. D&DBeyond data bears this out.

Want to go out and persuade the entire D&D community that they should stop doing this? Be my guest.

 

[Stefano Rinaldelli]

Constitution is not the only mechanic that can make Dwarves hardier, and in fact, is currently not the only racial feature dwarves have that make them hardier.

And this is true for many other races, so, why get the rid of ASI?

 

[Scott Christian]

No, see that is exactly the problem.

I do not want to play a ranged warrior. I want to play a halfling with a bigass hammer and no regard for human safety or decency. And I want to be mechanically competent at it.

You can. Choose a halfling fighter. You will have proficiency with your warhammer. You can also have a 15 strength. You can wear heavy armor. You can do all those things.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Yeah, that's my point! Chimps are physiologically stronger than humans!

In D&D, that would be represented as giving chimp PCs +2 Str. That would not mean that every chimp is stronger than every human, but it would mean that chimps as a race/species are stronger than humans.

Bingo! The mechanics work! They model (however abstractly and imperfectly) that chimps are indeed physiologically stronger than humans.

It's already been done. The stat block for Ape (sorry, no Chimp) gives them a 16 Strength. The stat block for Commoner gives them a 10 Strength. No ASIs needed.

Making floating racial bonuses to ability scores means that no race is stronger or weaker on average than any other race. This fails! As a way to model the difference is races, this fails!

The fact that some races get +2 Str in no way means that PC are not unique!

Not all humans (or dwarves, or chimpanzees) are player characters. In fact, very, very, very few of them are.

 

[Stefano Rinaldelli]

Like....the way so many people keep looking for a whiff of political correctness in the arguments against racial ASIs?

Again...

 

[Guest 6801328]

And this is true for many other races, so, why get the rid of ASI?

Because ASIs tend to cause people to always choose the same, boring race/class combinations. Abilities like Lucky and Dwarven Resilience do not have that effect. (Caveat: I would not expect them to; I have no proof, of course. Evidence might be found in reading the various class guides that the optimizers write.)