Snetterton’s an ass who goes around as the self appointed arbiter of what is or is not D&D.
I am simply asking why one would continue to play a game they don’t like. That’s like someone saying that they hate spinach but they eat it every day. Why? If you hate spinach, why not try broccoli or Brussels sprouts or perhaps some nice kale. Why subject oneself to something one dislikes? Especially as a recreational activity.
---snip---
But if someone doesn’t want to play a game they don’t like, then why do it? Is that not a valid question? Why play a game one doesn’t like, and then insist that game change to suite one’s tastes? How is that fair to those of us who don’t want the changes?
Or has my friend decided they are the arbiter of what I am or am not allowed to be curious about?
I agree with you on that first point, which is what confused me. One person was being an ass by saying that Eberron isn't "true D&D" because it wasn't Tolkien-ish, and you immediately called them out for gatekeeping (multiple times, too). Then when Yurei and some others express their dislike of Tolkien's take on races messing with the game in worlds that shouldn't be altered in any way by Tolkien, you switch sides and begin saying that the game 46 years ago was inspired and based off of Tolkien and that anyone that doesn't like it can leave. Maybe misinterpreted your side here, but that's what it looked like.
My rebuttal to that analogy is that D&D may have started out as Tolkien-Spinach, but it eventually grew into much more. The vast majority of D&D 5e classes, subclasses and races don't fit Tolkien at all. D&D isn't spinach anymore, no matter how many gatekeeping grognards (like Vince) insist that "true D&D" has to be spinach and can never be anything other than spinach. Now D&D is basically every spinach/lettuce group vegetable, like Mustard, Cabbage (heh), Broccoli, Brussel Sprouts, Kale, Cauliflower, and so on. D&D started as spinach, but is much more now. There are just a lot of people who don't want to get rid of the rules that restrict the game to being Tolkien-Spinach and only Tolkien-Spinach.
The game doesn't have to change if its mechanics are more open. Base Orcs in my world have a +2 to their Wisdom score and +1 to their Strength or Constitution score, instead of the normal +2 STR and +1 CON. This "lineage" system would help me have that supported mechanically and officially. My orcs aren't standard Tolkien orcs, and to let the game as a base support any kind of orc will improve the game, not ruin it.
I didn't mean to do anything of the sort. This sort of question comes often enough that the learned reflex is to react harshly to people telling us to go to a different game. If it was a genuine query, I apologize if I was a bit too blunt.
Thank you for trying to calm down this argument, Third. A couple other people seemed to be more focused on insulting each other than the actual discussion.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
All stars fade. Some stars forever fall. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Homebrew (Mostly Outdated):Magic Items,Monsters,Spells,Subclasses ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If there was no light, people wouldn't fear the dark.
I agree with you on that first point, which is what confused me. One person was being an ass by saying that Eberron isn't "true D&D" because it wasn't Tolkien-ish, and you immediately called them out for gatekeeping (multiple times, too). Then when Yurei and some others express their dislike of Tolkien's take on races messing with the game in worlds that shouldn't be altered in any way by Tolkien, you switch sides and begin saying that the game 46 years ago was inspired and based off of Tolkien and that anyone that doesn't like it can leave. Maybe misinterpreted your side here, but that's what it looked like.
My rebuttal to that analogy is that D&D may have started out as Tolkien-Spinach, but it eventually grew into much more. The vast majority of D&D 5e classes, subclasses and races don't fit Tolkien at all. D&D isn't spinach anymore, no matter how many gatekeeping grognards (like Vince) insist that "true D&D" has to be spinach and can never be anything other than spinach. Now D&D is basically every spinach/lettuce group vegetable, like Mustard, Cabbage (heh), Broccoli, Brussel Sprouts, Kale, Cauliflower, and so on. D&D started as spinach, but is much more now. There are just a lot of people who don't want to get rid of the rules that restrict the game to being Tolkien-Spinach and only Tolkien-Spinach.
The game doesn't have to change if its mechanics are more open. Base Orcs in my world have a +2 to their Wisdom score and +1 to their Strength or Constitution score, instead of the normal +2 STR and +1 CON. This "lineage" system would help me have that supported mechanically and officially. My orcs aren't standard Tolkien orcs, and to let the game as a base support any kind of orc will improve the game, not ruin it.
I didn't mean to do anything of the sort. This sort of question comes often enough that the learned reflex is to react harshly to people telling us to go to a different game. If it was a genuine query, I apologize if I was a bit too blunt.
Again, lemme explain:
I am not saying that if someone doesn’t like a Tolkien-esk fantasy world that they shouldn’t play D&D. What I am saying is this:
If someone says to you, “would you like to play a TRRPG that is primarily set in a Tolkien-esk setting?” And in your mind you think “heck no, that sounds boring as shit,” then why in they hell would you say “Yes, I would like to play that, but only if we change more than half of it.” 🤨
If someone asks me if I want to go camping I don’t say “Yes, but only if we eradicate mosquitoes and install a private toilet with a bidet for me.” I instead say “Heck no I don’t want to go camping.” If someone asks me if I want to go horseback riding I don’t say “Yes, but only if we get rid of the horses.” I instead say “Heck no I don’t want to go horseback riding.” If someone asks me if I want to go for a motorcycle ride, I don’t say “Yes, but first we have to add two wheels, encase the passenger compartment in a steel roll cage and make it as quiet as humanly possible.” I instead say “Heck no I don’t want to go for a motorcycle ride.”
Why? Because I dislike nature, don’t want to ride a creature with its own shit to do better than carry my fat ass around, and hate motorcycles. So I’m not gonna insist that people who like camping have to change camping to cater to me, I’ma just not go camping. I’m not gonna insist that horseback riders stop riding horses, I’ma just not ride a horse ever again if I can at all avoid it. And I’m not gonna insist that all motorcycles be turned into cars, I’ma just buy a car instead of a motorcycle.
And all power to your unexpectedly wise Orcs. Get down with your bad self. Rub some funk on it. I did that back in 3e. I didn’t need it to be “official” back then, so why do you need it now?!? Who gives a shit about “official?!?” Is this the AL?!? If it is where the hell are the exits?!? Lemme the hell outta here before I start to smoke like a Vampire in church.
The one good thing I see here is that they are starting to use that PB scaling features where they belong, with Races. Too bad I now have to homebrew rules for what their ASBs are going to be because of these so-called “optional” (Crawford, you’re dirty mother******* liar) lineage rules so now I need to homebrew shit just to make it match established RAW in the PHB.
The big issue is that these are basic like “Half-races” which means they should be useable as templates to apply to any race and that would just **** everything up. So basically, on top of everything else they ****ed this up too. Now your Race is Damphir, which means you can’t be a “Damphir-Elf” or a “Damphir-Hobgoblin.” In other words, this is me saying “You ****ed this up too Crawford. You suck.”
This is a pretty late response, but making a Damphir-Elf or Damphir-Hobgoblin is pretty easy. Take Hobgob for example. Play the Damphir lineage, select +2 to CON and +1 to INT, and that is a pretty good approximation of the combination.
Except for the Martial Training and Saving Face features.
Yeah, but you have to trade something for the sweet vampire features.
Then a Damphire Hobgoblin is no different than a Damphir-Human or a Damphire-Kobold or a Damphir-Centaur or a Damphir-Halfling. If they are all the same, then this is not a template that could be applied like that, it is its own thing, which is what these are.
Yeah, I'm not a fan of the idea that by becoming a Dhampir at level 6 I lose all the cultural knowledge I had prior. That's again just leaning into a specific vampire trope that's not always true for all vampires, so isn't much better than casting all orcs or all elves in the same light. I'm not sure how to fix it, and I wouldn't want to make it OP; the only things I can think of off the top of my head are either more mix-and-match or some way to slowly shift from one to the other over a certain number of levels, so the character's previous attachment to halfling culture fades as they become accustomed to their new life as a dhampir.
Also, going back to the note about floating ASIs, I'll also point out that being able to set that +2 to whatever you want to best benefit your character opens up an ASI for feats (if your campaign allows that, obviously). If your rock gnome rogue will already take an additional ASI to get up to 20, they might not have room to take that poisoner feat, or won't have room for it and mobile. Or even to take Linguist, for the ciphers. I would be really interested to see how this changes feat selection going forward.
I am not saying that if someone doesn’t like a Tolkien-esk fantasy world that they shouldn’t play D&D. What I am saying is this:
If someone says to you, “would you like to play a TRRPG that is primarily set in a Tolkien-esk setting?” And in your mind you think “heck no, that sounds boring as shit,” then why in they hell would you say “Yes, I would like to play that, but only if we change more than half of it.” 🤨
If someone asks me if I want to go camping I don’t say “Yes, but only if we eradicate mosquitoes and install a private toilet with a bidet for me.” I instead say “Heck no I don’t want to go camping.” If someone asks me if I want to go horseback riding I don’t say “Yes, but only if we get rid of the horses.” I instead say “Heck no I don’t want to go horseback riding.” If someone asks me if I want to go for a motorcycle ride, I don’t say “Yes, but first we have to add two wheels, encase the passenger compartment in a steel roll cage and make it as quiet as humanly possible.” I instead say “Heck no I don’t want to go for a motorcycle ride.”
Why? Because I dislike nature, don’t want to ride a creature with its own shit to do better than carry my fat ass around, and hate motorcycles. So I’m not gonna insist that people who like camping have to change camping to cater to me, I’ma just not go camping. I’m not gonna insist that horseback riders stop riding horses, I’ma just not ride a horse ever again if I can at all avoid it. And I’m not gonna insist that all motorcycles be turned into cars, I’ma just buy a car instead of a motorcycle.
I hate nature, too. I'm allergic to 110% of the things outdoors and have major back issues. I don't like camping because I don't find it fun. My point is that D&D isn't just camping, just like it isn't just Tolkien-Spinach. To me, this seems like a false-equivalency. D&D can already include more than just camping, it could include all kinds of wilderness activities, like hiking, fishing, hunting, or smore-roasting. I prefer the smore roasting over any of the other options, and though I could spend hours at work making my own Marshmallows and chocolate to bring to roast the smores, I would prefer if someone else (preferably a professional) could do it instead with me paying in exchange.
That's what this feels like to me. If someone else doesn't like smores for some reason (poor souls), they can just take their WotC made fishing-pole and go fishing.
And all power to your unexpectedly wise Orcs. Get down with your bad self. Rub some funk on it. I did that back in 3e. I didn’t need it to be “official” back then, so why do you need it now?!? Who gives a shit about “official?!?” Is this the AL?!? If it is where the hell are the exits?!? Lemme the hell outta here before I start to smoke like a Vampire in church.
I don't need it to be official, but it just helps and saves me a lot of time and effort. It's not going to matter as long as I'm the DM, but it would take much more work to try and convince a DM pre-Tasha's to allow me to replace the Orc's Strength bonus with Wisdom than it is post-Tasha's.
"Officialness" is just more convenient. Convenient enough that I would pay for it, just like anyone that wanted to roast smores would pay someone else to make the marshmallows, graham crackers, and chocolate bars.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Your racial choice is just a meat suit now. Bland and boring with the race you choose having no meaning. I am looking forward to the day you open the page to pick your race and it's just a list of names and a picture of a generic male and female with no information whatsoever because someone somewhere might find it prejudiced.
Also, going back to the note about floating ASIs, I'll also point out that being able to set that +2 to whatever you want to best benefit your character opens up an ASI for feats (if your campaign allows that, obviously). If your rock gnome rogue will already take an additional ASI to get up to 20, they might not have room to take that poisoner feat, or won't have room for it and mobile. Or even to take Linguist, for the ciphers. I would be really interested to see how this changes feat selection going forward.
Not much I assume. Seeing as most people who I've seen posting here seem to play with Standard Array I'd guess that lvl4 will be +2 to your main attribute, lvl8 is gonna depend on what your class/player wants/is most effective while still flavorful (+1/+1 or half-feat for MAD classes, full feats for most others), lvl12 is gonna be the same, lvl16 is not gonna matter because - once again according to an overwhelming amount of posts here - at this point you stop playing.
Heck some stuff is probably never gonna change. Wizard? lvl4 +2 INT, lvl8 Warcaster. Hexadin/Sorcadin? +2 CHA into Warcaster. At this point I think the only classes that have any Feat diversity that I have read on this Forum and others are martial classes like Barbarian, Fighter and Rogue. Or quirky shit like my friends Tortle Fighter/Spore Druid that went +2 STR, Dual Wielder, Tough, Crusher.
Then a Damphire Hobgoblin is no different than a Damphir-Human or a Damphire-Kobold or a Damphir-Centaur or a Damphir-Halfling. If they are all the same, then this is not a template that could be applied like that, it is its own thing, which is what these are.
Which is an issue with the current discrepancy between the base racial traits and lineage system traits. The UA outright says that cultural traits (like Hobgoblin Martial Training) will not be a part of any future lineages. If WotC redid the PHB now, culture would almost definitely be moved away from the race and to a background-like feature. (I do think that lineage templates should allow you to keep one of your base race's features, possibly in exchange for one of the template's features. Kind of like how the different subraces of Half-Elf work.)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Your racial choice is just a meat suit now. Bland and boring with the race you choose having no meaning. I am looking forward to the day you open the page to pick your race and it's just a list of names and a picture of a generic male and female with no information whatsoever because someone somewhere might find it prejudiced.
No, they still matter. It's just some are far more rigid than before. Racial ASIs aside...
A mountain dwarf fighter can start with 6 bonus tool proficiencies. But they can't trade out darkvision, dwarven resilience, or stonecunning. And tieflings can't change a darn thing.
So I think I like the philosophical stance this statement indicates. So NPC's no longer have "race" which is now a purely mechanical term that applies only to PCs. NPCs only have lineages and species. It kind of feels like they wanted to get rid of the term "race" entirely but couldn't do it, probably for backwards compatibility and/or tradition issues.
I like it, but of course it remains to be seen how it is implemented.
Also I am not going to remark on how it's going to affect the health of the game in general because I don't think I am the arbiter of the entire community nor do I speak for more than just my own likes and dislikes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Your racial choice is just a meat suit now. Bland and boring with the race you choose having no meaning. I am looking forward to the day you open the page to pick your race and it's just a list of names and a picture of a generic male and female with no information whatsoever because someone somewhere might find it prejudiced.
No, they still matter. It's just some are far more rigid than before. Racial ASIs aside...
A mountain dwarf fighter can start with 6 bonus tool proficiencies. But they can't trade out darkvision, dwarven resilience, or stonecunning. And tieflings can't change a darn thing.
Well, considering the tiefling subraces in Mordenkainen's and the 3 or 4 tiefling variant from other sources, I'd say they have plenty of options.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
All stars fade. Some stars forever fall. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Homebrew (Mostly Outdated):Magic Items,Monsters,Spells,Subclasses ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If there was no light, people wouldn't fear the dark.
The one good thing I see here is that they are starting to use that PB scaling features where they belong, with Races. Too bad I now have to homebrew rules for what their ASBs are going to be because of these so-called “optional” (Crawford, you’re dirty mother******* liar) lineage rules so now I need to homebrew shit just to make it match established RAW in the PHB.
The big issue is that these are basic like “Half-races” which means they should be useable as templates to apply to any race and that would just **** everything up. So basically, on top of everything else they ****ed this up too. Now your Race is Damphir, which means you can’t be a “Damphir-Elf” or a “Damphir-Hobgoblin.” In other words, this is me saying “You ****ed this up too Crawford. You suck.”
This is a pretty late response, but making a Damphir-Elf or Damphir-Hobgoblin is pretty easy. Take Hobgob for example. Play the Damphir lineage, select +2 to CON and +1 to INT, and that is a pretty good approximation of the combination.
Except for the Martial Training and Saving Face features.
Yeah, but you have to trade something for the sweet vampire features.
Then a Damphire Hobgoblin is no different than a Damphir-Human or a Damphire-Kobold or a Damphir-Centaur or a Damphir-Halfling. If they are all the same, then this is not a template that could be applied like that, it is its own thing, which is what these are.
This is my issue, and I’m saying this as someone who wants more customization and would love more templates like these (planar touched and half dragon PC templates would be sweet). This just feels like a lazy way to handle racial choices in a system that more and more seems to be too basic and inflexible to make this sort of thing work smoothly and meaningfully. On top of that, this makes those “optional” rules in Tasha’s seem a little less optional if new content is being designed around this system instead of the standard system. I don’t care personally but Wizards can’t have their cake and eat it too. They will not please everyone by half assing this and trying to change things inch by inch. They need to either buckle down and decide that they like the current game design or actually make real tangible changes. How many people were disappointed that all the new subclasses in Tasha’s got all these neat and updated mechanics but then many of the older subclasses weren’t updated to fit with the new scale? They will not make everyone happy. Their community is too big with too many varying opinions.
I don’t know, maybe I’m rambling but I’m going to need to see more before I’m convinced that this will be a truly worthwhile change for the game as a whole. Right now it feels like a lackluster coat of uninventive paint. I really want to be proven wrong as I’m not usually pessimistic. At the very least I do think the Gothic lineage options are cool even if how they function mechanically frustrates me and they just seem like Custom Lineage 2, 3, and 4 at the moment.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
I think the issue really boils down to the fact that WotC sees that the market is changing but they are afraid that if they move on from 5e to 5.5e or 6e they risk killing their cash cow. So instead they are trying a bunch of half ass, noncommittal optional rules that do more harm than good.
I like the Lineage option in this UA, but it is only half of a rule set. They need to beef up the Backgrounds or add a fourth step in the process where you select a Culture. I would prefer that they just add meat to the Backgrounds and leave Culture alone as just fluffy lore stuff. Regardless, they need to commit to a path and stick to it.
I think the issue really boils down to the fact that WotC sees that the market is changing but they are afraid that if they move on from 5e to 5.5e or 6e they risk killing their cash cow. So instead they are trying a bunch of half ass, noncommittal optional rules that do more harm than good.
I like the Lineage option in this UA, but it is only half of a rule set. They need to beef up the Backgrounds or add a fourth step in the process where you select a Culture. I would prefer that they just add meat to the Backgrounds and leave Culture alone as just fluffy lore stuff. Regardless, they need to commit to a path and stick to it.
Well that is categorically untrue, especially when you consider Pre-D&D Blackmoor, Greyhawk and 3LBB/OD&D. Yes, they had Tolkien elements in them (Elves, Hobbits, Dwarves, Balrogs, Nazgul and Ents), but they also had: - Edgar Rice Burroughs Barsoom with Mars was an adventuring location table with Banths, Tharks, Martians, etc. There is even suggestions for handling adventures in space, on whether it has breathable atmosphere or whatever (literally predating Spelljammer by a decade and a half) - Clerics and Turn Undead were based on Hammer Films Dracula movies where Van Helsing uses a Cross to force the undead back (organized religion, other than worship of Morgoth/Sauron was entirely absent in Middle-Earth) - Magic-Users were based on Jack Vance's Dying Earth series including a number of spells such as Prismatic Spray, etc as well as the entire "Fire and Forget" aspect and not remotely like Tolkien's magicians and/or wizards (considering Gandalf could remember every spell ever used for Opening in all the tongues of Men, Elves and Orcs) - Rangers weren't even in OD&D and weren't added until after they were published in The Strategic Review vol.1 #2 - Thieves, which were introduced in Supplement 1 - Greyhawk, were based on Friz Leiber's The Gray Mouser far more than Burglar Baggins - Paladins were also introduced in Supplement 1 - Greyhawk and were straight up cribbed from Poul Anderson's Three Hearts and Three Lions (there is nothing remotely like them in Tolkien) - Monks were introduced in Supplement 2 - Blackmoor and were about as far from anything remotely Tolkien as one can get - Druids were introduced in Supplement 3 -Eldritch Wizardryand were only tangentially similar to Tolkien's wizards (some of their later spells were basically copied from ones used by Gandalf in both The Hobbit and Galadriel in The Lord of the Rings) - Supplement 2 - Blackmoor included the very first adventuring module: The Temple of the Frog and the Frog Cultists were lead by spacemen that were using genetic experiments to breed killer frogs - There are so many Cthulhu mythos inspired monsters, more than you can shake a stick at, that its not remotely like Tolkien. - There were suggestions for running into dinosaurs and "lost worlds" where you could run from/avoid being eaten by as well as battle all manner of extinct critters. - The Alignment System was basically lifted from Poul Anderson's Three Hearts and Three Lions and Moorcock's Elric of Melniboné novels. In fact, even after multiple iterations and editions, its still basically the same system just slightly modified by adding more variation than Law, Neutral, Chaos. The entire Cosmology is based on these 3 alignments.
Dungeons & Dragons always certainly had the patina of High Fantasy (though Middle-Earth is far more Mythic Fantasy than High), but that's just looking at the surface and not any deeper. Its willful ignorance. - Blackmoor has steam, clockwork and early firearms technology in the hands of Dwarves and Gnomes as well as the crazy Cult of Brr’bb’t and their space alien masters helping to breed man-eating frogs. - Greyhawk not only had portals to different dimensions (Alice in Wonderland, King Kong, Barsoom/Mars), it had a crashed spaceship in the Barrier Peaks. The City of Greyhawk was heavily inspired by Fritz Leiber's Lankhmar, City of Thieves. Despite claims by the know-nothings, Drow were basically a dark faerie version of the citizens of the City of Imrryr from the Elric of Melniboné novels, just with inky black skin instead of pale. Given the fact Greyhawk is a post-apocalyptic humanocentric setting, its basically a gonzo Swords & Sorcery setting with a patina of High Fantasy. The Known World/Mystara had flying ships (The Princess Ark), Gnomish biplanes, detailed rules for attaining divine rank/deity status (AD&D 1E also had somewhat fleshed out rules for such a thing in Deities & Demigods: Cyclopedia for Gods and Heroes of Myth and Legend)
I think the issue really boils down to the fact that WotC sees that the market is changing but they are afraid that if they move on from 5e to 5.5e or 6e they risk killing their cash cow. So instead they are trying a bunch of half ass, noncommittal optional rules that do more harm than good.
I'm sure they prefer D&D making more money than it did early on in 5E, but it's not their cash cow. Compared to M:tG D&D is still small potatoes. Regardless, unless they pull another 4E I doubt a sweeping review of the ruleset would dent D&D's popularity as long as a couple of big influencers are on board. That's how it works nowadays.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Thank you for trying to calm down this argument, Third. A couple other people seemed to be more focused on insulting each other than the actual discussion.
All stars fade. Some stars forever fall.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homebrew (Mostly Outdated): Magic Items, Monsters, Spells, Subclasses
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If there was no light, people wouldn't fear the dark.
Again, lemme explain:
I am not saying that if someone doesn’t like a Tolkien-esk fantasy world that they shouldn’t play D&D. What I am saying is this:
If someone says to you, “would you like to play a TRRPG that is primarily set in a Tolkien-esk setting?” And in your mind you think “heck no, that sounds boring as shit,” then why in they hell would you say “Yes, I would like to play that, but only if we change more than half of it.” 🤨
If someone asks me if I want to go camping I don’t say “Yes, but only if we eradicate mosquitoes and install a private toilet with a bidet for me.” I instead say “Heck no I don’t want to go camping.” If someone asks me if I want to go horseback riding I don’t say “Yes, but only if we get rid of the horses.” I instead say “Heck no I don’t want to go horseback riding.” If someone asks me if I want to go for a motorcycle ride, I don’t say “Yes, but first we have to add two wheels, encase the passenger compartment in a steel roll cage and make it as quiet as humanly possible.” I instead say “Heck no I don’t want to go for a motorcycle ride.”
Why? Because I dislike nature, don’t want to ride a creature with its own shit to do better than carry my fat ass around, and hate motorcycles. So I’m not gonna insist that people who like camping have to change camping to cater to me, I’ma just not go camping. I’m not gonna insist that horseback riders stop riding horses, I’ma just not ride a horse ever again if I can at all avoid it. And I’m not gonna insist that all motorcycles be turned into cars, I’ma just buy a car instead of a motorcycle.
And all power to your unexpectedly wise Orcs. Get down with your bad self. Rub some funk on it. I did that back in 3e. I didn’t need it to be “official” back then, so why do you need it now?!? Who gives a shit about “official?!?” Is this the AL?!? If it is where the hell are the exits?!? Lemme the hell outta here before I start to smoke like a Vampire in church.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Then a Damphire Hobgoblin is no different than a Damphir-Human or a Damphire-Kobold or a Damphir-Centaur or a Damphir-Halfling. If they are all the same, then this is not a template that could be applied like that, it is its own thing, which is what these are.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I backed the SWADE Kickstarter. And the Deadlands one, too. Still waiting on my boxes to ship.
Yeah, I'm not a fan of the idea that by becoming a Dhampir at level 6 I lose all the cultural knowledge I had prior. That's again just leaning into a specific vampire trope that's not always true for all vampires, so isn't much better than casting all orcs or all elves in the same light. I'm not sure how to fix it, and I wouldn't want to make it OP; the only things I can think of off the top of my head are either more mix-and-match or some way to slowly shift from one to the other over a certain number of levels, so the character's previous attachment to halfling culture fades as they become accustomed to their new life as a dhampir.
Also, going back to the note about floating ASIs, I'll also point out that being able to set that +2 to whatever you want to best benefit your character opens up an ASI for feats (if your campaign allows that, obviously). If your rock gnome rogue will already take an additional ASI to get up to 20, they might not have room to take that poisoner feat, or won't have room for it and mobile. Or even to take Linguist, for the ciphers. I would be really interested to see how this changes feat selection going forward.
Birgit | Shifter | Sorcerer | Dragonlords
Shayone | Hobgoblin | Sorcerer | Netherdeep
I hate nature, too. I'm allergic to 110% of the things outdoors and have major back issues. I don't like camping because I don't find it fun. My point is that D&D isn't just camping, just like it isn't just Tolkien-Spinach. To me, this seems like a false-equivalency. D&D can already include more than just camping, it could include all kinds of wilderness activities, like hiking, fishing, hunting, or smore-roasting. I prefer the smore roasting over any of the other options, and though I could spend hours at work making my own Marshmallows and chocolate to bring to roast the smores, I would prefer if someone else (preferably a professional) could do it instead with me paying in exchange.
That's what this feels like to me. If someone else doesn't like smores for some reason (poor souls), they can just take their WotC made fishing-pole and go fishing.
I don't need it to be official, but it just helps and saves me a lot of time and effort. It's not going to matter as long as I'm the DM, but it would take much more work to try and convince a DM pre-Tasha's to allow me to replace the Orc's Strength bonus with Wisdom than it is post-Tasha's.
"Officialness" is just more convenient. Convenient enough that I would pay for it, just like anyone that wanted to roast smores would pay someone else to make the marshmallows, graham crackers, and chocolate bars.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Your racial choice is just a meat suit now. Bland and boring with the race you choose having no meaning. I am looking forward to the day you open the page to pick your race and it's just a list of names and a picture of a generic male and female with no information whatsoever because someone somewhere might find it prejudiced.
Not much I assume. Seeing as most people who I've seen posting here seem to play with Standard Array I'd guess that lvl4 will be +2 to your main attribute, lvl8 is gonna depend on what your class/player wants/is most effective while still flavorful (+1/+1 or half-feat for MAD classes, full feats for most others), lvl12 is gonna be the same, lvl16 is not gonna matter because - once again according to an overwhelming amount of posts here - at this point you stop playing.
Heck some stuff is probably never gonna change. Wizard? lvl4 +2 INT, lvl8 Warcaster. Hexadin/Sorcadin? +2 CHA into Warcaster. At this point I think the only classes that have any Feat diversity that I have read on this Forum and others are martial classes like Barbarian, Fighter and Rogue. Or quirky shit like my friends Tortle Fighter/Spore Druid that went +2 STR, Dual Wielder, Tough, Crusher.
#OpenDnD
Which is an issue with the current discrepancy between the base racial traits and lineage system traits. The UA outright says that cultural traits (like Hobgoblin Martial Training) will not be a part of any future lineages. If WotC redid the PHB now, culture would almost definitely be moved away from the race and to a background-like feature. (I do think that lineage templates should allow you to keep one of your base race's features, possibly in exchange for one of the template's features. Kind of like how the different subraces of Half-Elf work.)
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
This powerfully reminds me of when Coca-cola changed their formula to appeal to Pepsi drinkers... and thus was born the New Coke.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
OMG!!! You’re so right!
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
No, they still matter. It's just some are far more rigid than before. Racial ASIs aside...
A mountain dwarf fighter can start with 6 bonus tool proficiencies. But they can't trade out darkvision, dwarven resilience, or stonecunning. And tieflings can't change a darn thing.
So I think I like the philosophical stance this statement indicates. So NPC's no longer have "race" which is now a purely mechanical term that applies only to PCs. NPCs only have lineages and species. It kind of feels like they wanted to get rid of the term "race" entirely but couldn't do it, probably for backwards compatibility and/or tradition issues.
I like it, but of course it remains to be seen how it is implemented.
Also I am not going to remark on how it's going to affect the health of the game in general because I don't think I am the arbiter of the entire community nor do I speak for more than just my own likes and dislikes.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Well, considering the tiefling subraces in Mordenkainen's and the 3 or 4 tiefling variant from other sources, I'd say they have plenty of options.
All stars fade. Some stars forever fall.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homebrew (Mostly Outdated): Magic Items, Monsters, Spells, Subclasses
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If there was no light, people wouldn't fear the dark.
This is my issue, and I’m saying this as someone who wants more customization and would love more templates like these (planar touched and half dragon PC templates would be sweet). This just feels like a lazy way to handle racial choices in a system that more and more seems to be too basic and inflexible to make this sort of thing work smoothly and meaningfully. On top of that, this makes those “optional” rules in Tasha’s seem a little less optional if new content is being designed around this system instead of the standard system. I don’t care personally but Wizards can’t have their cake and eat it too. They will not please everyone by half assing this and trying to change things inch by inch. They need to either buckle down and decide that they like the current game design or actually make real tangible changes. How many people were disappointed that all the new subclasses in Tasha’s got all these neat and updated mechanics but then many of the older subclasses weren’t updated to fit with the new scale? They will not make everyone happy. Their community is too big with too many varying opinions.
I don’t know, maybe I’m rambling but I’m going to need to see more before I’m convinced that this will be a truly worthwhile change for the game as a whole. Right now it feels like a lackluster coat of uninventive paint. I really want to be proven wrong as I’m not usually pessimistic. At the very least I do think the Gothic lineage options are cool even if how they function mechanically frustrates me and they just seem like Custom Lineage 2, 3, and 4 at the moment.
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
Characters for Tenebris Sine Fine
RoughCoronet's Greater Wills
I think the issue really boils down to the fact that WotC sees that the market is changing but they are afraid that if they move on from 5e to 5.5e or 6e they risk killing their cash cow. So instead they are trying a bunch of half ass, noncommittal optional rules that do more harm than good.
I like the Lineage option in this UA, but it is only half of a rule set. They need to beef up the Backgrounds or add a fourth step in the process where you select a Culture. I would prefer that they just add meat to the Backgrounds and leave Culture alone as just fluffy lore stuff. Regardless, they need to commit to a path and stick to it.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Yes!
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Well that is categorically untrue, especially when you consider Pre-D&D Blackmoor, Greyhawk and 3LBB/OD&D. Yes, they had Tolkien elements in them (Elves, Hobbits, Dwarves, Balrogs, Nazgul and Ents), but they also had:
- Edgar Rice Burroughs Barsoom with Mars was an adventuring location table with Banths, Tharks, Martians, etc. There is even suggestions for handling adventures in space, on whether it has breathable atmosphere or whatever (literally predating Spelljammer by a decade and a half)
- Clerics and Turn Undead were based on Hammer Films Dracula movies where Van Helsing uses a Cross to force the undead back (organized religion, other than worship of Morgoth/Sauron was entirely absent in Middle-Earth)
- Magic-Users were based on Jack Vance's Dying Earth series including a number of spells such as Prismatic Spray, etc as well as the entire "Fire and Forget" aspect and not remotely like Tolkien's magicians and/or wizards (considering Gandalf could remember every spell ever used for Opening in all the tongues of Men, Elves and Orcs)
- Rangers weren't even in OD&D and weren't added until after they were published in The Strategic Review vol.1 #2
- Thieves, which were introduced in Supplement 1 - Greyhawk, were based on Friz Leiber's The Gray Mouser far more than Burglar Baggins
- Paladins were also introduced in Supplement 1 - Greyhawk and were straight up cribbed from Poul Anderson's Three Hearts and Three Lions (there is nothing remotely like them in Tolkien)
- Monks were introduced in Supplement 2 - Blackmoor and were about as far from anything remotely Tolkien as one can get
- Druids were introduced in Supplement 3 - Eldritch Wizardry and were only tangentially similar to Tolkien's wizards (some of their later spells were basically copied from ones used by Gandalf in both The Hobbit and Galadriel in The Lord of the Rings)
- Supplement 2 - Blackmoor included the very first adventuring module: The Temple of the Frog and the Frog Cultists were lead by spacemen that were using genetic experiments to breed killer frogs
- There are so many Cthulhu mythos inspired monsters, more than you can shake a stick at, that its not remotely like Tolkien.
- There were suggestions for running into dinosaurs and "lost worlds" where you could run from/avoid being eaten by as well as battle all manner of extinct critters.
- The Alignment System was basically lifted from Poul Anderson's Three Hearts and Three Lions and Moorcock's Elric of Melniboné novels. In fact, even after multiple iterations and editions, its still basically the same system just slightly modified by adding more variation than Law, Neutral, Chaos. The entire Cosmology is based on these 3 alignments.
Dungeons & Dragons always certainly had the patina of High Fantasy (though Middle-Earth is far more Mythic Fantasy than High), but that's just looking at the surface and not any deeper. Its willful ignorance.
- Blackmoor has steam, clockwork and early firearms technology in the hands of Dwarves and Gnomes as well as the crazy Cult of Brr’bb’t and their space alien masters helping to breed man-eating frogs.
- Greyhawk not only had portals to different dimensions (Alice in Wonderland, King Kong, Barsoom/Mars), it had a crashed spaceship in the Barrier Peaks. The City of Greyhawk was heavily inspired by Fritz Leiber's Lankhmar, City of Thieves. Despite claims by the know-nothings, Drow were basically a dark faerie version of the citizens of the City of Imrryr from the Elric of Melniboné novels, just with inky black skin instead of pale. Given the fact Greyhawk is a post-apocalyptic humanocentric setting, its basically a gonzo Swords & Sorcery setting with a patina of High Fantasy.
The Known World/Mystara had flying ships (The Princess Ark), Gnomish biplanes, detailed rules for attaining divine rank/deity status (AD&D 1E also had somewhat fleshed out rules for such a thing in Deities & Demigods: Cyclopedia for Gods and Heroes of Myth and Legend)
It's really only relevant if it's legal in AL, otherwise it falls under the discrimination and creativity of private groups, as it always has...
I'm sure they prefer D&D making more money than it did early on in 5E, but it's not their cash cow. Compared to M:tG D&D is still small potatoes. Regardless, unless they pull another 4E I doubt a sweeping review of the ruleset would dent D&D's popularity as long as a couple of big influencers are on board. That's how it works nowadays.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].