I think the UA needs to be more explicit that it's the case (as I've said maybe here and definitely elsewhere this seems early drawing board at least in presentation), but I'm in agreement with those in the Tortle case that the UA as written means the Shell armor is lost in "the becoming" of a Gothline (portmanteau of Gothic and Lineage, it works, use it). Story wise it's not hard to claim the living vitality that grants the Tortle natural armor when in pure humanoid form is lost to whatever gives it undead vitality so while there may be some apparent shell to its appearance, the function is lost to undeath or Fey transformation in the case of the Hexblood. I'm not sure where Gnome illusions would land, but I could see in the case of the Reborn a stance being made that the Reborn is in itself a grand illusion of death appearing as life.
As for the what about race specific feats. Good question, lineages could free that up. Someone else I think Gvyari suggested feats based on nature (humanoid, undead, fiend, etc.). And that is a good intuitive move, though the present feat system doesn't have any feats that work like that yet, so as I've said, lots of work to be done. I can say I'm interested in where it's going though.
And again, at least in terms of a "reconciled" or "consolidated" ruleset merging PHB with Tasha's I think "both" would be the answer, with stock templates of PHB style races showing how lineages are usually expressed in FR or other published campaign worlds. I still think the level of customization being strived for isn't a universal appeal. Some new players I work with want to get into crunchy building, others prefer something closer to pre-gen where the choices are a bit simpler. I don't see any reason why the future of 5e can't or shouldn't support both.
I think potential controversy may be reconciling the presently declared future that it's "+2 and +1" (and maybe someone more knowledgeable to mechanic rationales can explain to me why we can't just have 3 +1s that can be done as such or +2 and +1) with legacy races that have +2 +2, etc. or +1 across the board humans. What I feel needs to be done is a calculus in the mechanics where x# of +1s = darkvision or natural armor, etc. But that's just because I like diverse options BUT also a level playing field.
Fortunately, +2 score is worth a feat, and +1 score is worth a half-feat. So the calculus for swapping for darkvision, natural armor, etcetera is already in place, by swapping them in via feats.
Darkvision is interesting, because it is in some sense equivalent to a skill proficiency. Perhaps even a background could grant darkvision in a balanced way. I can imagine a town that magically imbues darkvision to police officers, for example, for a special background.
All I think is that the system as published in Tasha's is not complete, they really need to tie it in with racial choice and that is based on the wording in this last UA. 1) I really think it should go you pick your race Gnome, Dwarf whatever granting you your size and base movement and any abilities based on the race darkvision and such as detailed in the UA. 2) Then you choose your lineage of the 3 from the UA or the custom one in Tasha's.
Both the Custom Lineage and the UA Gothic Lineages determine your size and your speed. Custom Lineage determines whether you have Darkvision or not, the Gothic Lineages specify you only get their racial traits and none of the traits your possible previous race had. What exactly is the purpose of your first step, given everything the lineages trump anyway?
Why race matters is with custom lineage or any of the gothic ones, you cannot have the halflings luck, the forest gnomes minor illusion, the high elf cantrip. If it is going to be these new lineages only then WotC need never actually create a new race as you cannot have any racial benefits.
Fortunately, +2 score is worth a feat, and +1 score is worth a half-feat. So the calculus for swapping for darkvision, natural armor, etcetera is already in place, by swapping them in via feats.
Darkvision is interesting, because it is in some sense equivalent to a skill proficiency. Perhaps even a background could grant darkvision in a balanced way. I can imagine a town that magically imbues darkvision to police officers, for example, for a special background.
So as not much of a dedicated theory crafter, I want to make sure I'm clear. When you're talking about feats and half feats. A feat is one of those feats that in conventional character progression a character would not take an ASI and, just going alphabetical so I land on [feat]Alert[/feat], the PC gets some sort of feature but no ability score increase whatsoever. Whereas a half feat would be something like Actor, where you get a (bound) +1 and two proficiencies; but I'm thinking in your interpretation there'd be a the possibility of getting the proficiencies and the +1s sort of can be floater or something used to purchase another half feat? This half feat / feat thing is an extrapolation of by some of the crafting community not something that's discussed explicitly in RAW and def not supporting on DDB? I'm not asking to confront, I do like the idea and could see it being very instrumental for a full bore lineage system, I'm just not familiar with making a distinction between feats and half feats and whether it's actually a practice officially and clearly endorsed in RAW.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Obviously, you can still put whatever restrictions you want in your campaign. If that means keeping the "old school" races as they were, then you can do that. Nobody is stopping you. By offering an official alternative to these old restrictions, the game developers are nudging the "default" toward a more nuanced style of role play. I applaud it wholeheartedly. The game is infinitely more interesting when neither PCs nor NPCs are pigeonholed into stereotypes in the name of "tradition".
But regardless of any opinion expressed here or elsewhere, the rules you're referring to in TCoE (along with literally every other rule offered in any book) are optional. If they don't work for you, then don't use them at your table. It's as simple as that.
Obviously, you can still put whatever restrictions you want in your campaign. If that means keeping the "old school" races as they were, then you can do that. Nobody is stopping you. By offering an official alternative to these old restrictions, the game developers are nudging the "default" toward a more nuanced style of role play. I applaud it wholeheartedly. The game is infinitely more interesting when neither PCs nor NPCs are pigeonholed into stereotypes in the name of "tradition".
But regardless of any opinion expressed here or elsewhere, the rules you're referring to in TCoE (along with literally every other rule offered in any book) are optional. If they don't work for you, then don't use them at your table. It's as simple as that.
Well, it's not really that simple. It's optional in that, if the boilerplate lineage notes in the recent UA are anything go by, you have the option to not bother investing in future sourcebooks containing race/lineage options as they'll all be done in line with the Tasha's rules. I think I like where it's going but clearly somewhere on this course there should be a reconciled core rules where it's more explicit this is both/and not an either/or system.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Obviously, you can still put whatever restrictions you want in your campaign. If that means keeping the "old school" races as they were, then you can do that. Nobody is stopping you. By offering an official alternative to these old restrictions, the game developers are nudging the "default" toward a more nuanced style of role play. I applaud it wholeheartedly. The game is infinitely more interesting when neither PCs nor NPCs are pigeonholed into stereotypes in the name of "tradition".
But regardless of any opinion expressed here or elsewhere, the rules you're referring to in TCoE (along with literally every other rule offered in any book) are optional. If they don't work for you, then don't use them at your table. It's as simple as that.
Well, it's not really that simple. It's optional in that, if the boilerplate lineage notes in the recent UA are anything go by, you have the option to not bother investing in future sourcebooks containing race/lineage options as they'll all be done in line with the Tasha's rules. I think I like where it's going but clearly somewhere on this course there should be a reconciled core rules where it's more explicit this is both/and not an either/or system.
I think you're right.
As much as I LOVE Tasha's, they REALLY screwed the pooch by adding a feat to the Custom Lineage, in my opinion. Not because it's bad or unbalanced, but because a feat at 1st level is SUCH an amazing option for build diversity that it's almost too good to pass up.
I feel like not allowing all characters to take a feat at first level as a part of the official rule set was a MASSIVE oversight.
As much as I love the additional options we're getting, this is starting to feel a bit incoherent.
This is why I don't allow Variant Humans or Custom Lineage and give everyone a Feat at first level.
If everyone gets a Feat then the Variant Human and Custom Lineage is subpar compared to everything else anyway.
but what does it mean for this website? i mean they change the site to adjust towards the newest rules. if DnD moves towards 5.5E...what does that mean for those of us that prefer to use this site to help run our games?
I'm assuming you mean "what does this mean for people that use the site and prefer pre-Tasha stuff," so I will speak in that manner.
Well, there's several ways this could go about. They could simply make it a subrace option, much like we have with alternative tieflings and half-elves from SCAG. They could have a toggle switch at the beginning of character generation "Do you want Tasha options enabled?" Just like we have "Use Homebrew?" and "Use Critical Role?" options. We will have to wait and see how things are implemented - right now, it could go in any number of ways.
Or, you could just eyeball it - with standard array, its not difficult to eyeball the stats and make sure they're placed correctly. A bit longer with rolled, but still pretty easy. I find I have to check that anyways, just in case someone fudged the numbers.
In the end, the biggest issue will be for gathering people to play and agreeing on the same rules.
well that and....at what point on this website will the rules change so much that they need to make some global toggle or different website....i mean what happens to dnd beyond when 6th edition comes out?
but what does it mean for this website? i mean they change the site to adjust towards the newest rules. if DnD moves towards 5.5E...what does that mean for those of us that prefer to use this site to help run our games?
I'm assuming you mean "what does this mean for people that use the site and prefer pre-Tasha stuff," so I will speak in that manner.
Well, there's several ways this could go about. They could simply make it a subrace option, much like we have with alternative tieflings and half-elves from SCAG. They could have a toggle switch at the beginning of character generation "Do you want Tasha options enabled?" Just like we have "Use Homebrew?" and "Use Critical Role?" options. We will have to wait and see how things are implemented - right now, it could go in any number of ways.
Or, you could just eyeball it - with standard array, its not difficult to eyeball the stats and make sure they're placed correctly. A bit longer with rolled, but still pretty easy. I find I have to check that anyways, just in case someone fudged the numbers.
In the end, the biggest issue will be for gathering people to play and agreeing on the same rules.
well that and....at what point on this website will the rules change so much that they need to make some global toggle or different website....i mean what happens to dnd beyond when 6th edition comes out?
This is going a bit far afield from the focus of this thread, and is more a costumer service than a community response thing, so to prevent further drift the last time I saw a response from the D&D Beyond Team re: this question was this post in the thread "What happens to things I buy on DnD Beyond when the editions change?":
Obviously, you can still put whatever restrictions you want in your campaign. If that means keeping the "old school" races as they were, then you can do that. Nobody is stopping you. By offering an official alternative to these old restrictions, the game developers are nudging the "default" toward a more nuanced style of role play. I applaud it wholeheartedly. The game is infinitely more interesting when neither PCs nor NPCs are pigeonholed into stereotypes in the name of "tradition".
But regardless of any opinion expressed here or elsewhere, the rules you're referring to in TCoE (along with literally every other rule offered in any book) are optional. If they don't work for you, then don't use them at your table. It's as simple as that.
Well, it's not really that simple. It's optional in that, if the boilerplate lineage notes in the recent UA are anything go by, you have the option to not bother investing in future sourcebooks containing race/lineage options as they'll all be done in line with the Tasha's rules. I think I like where it's going but clearly somewhere on this course there should be a reconciled core rules where it's more explicit this is both/and not an either/or system.
I think you're right.
As much as I LOVE Tasha's, they REALLY screwed the pooch by adding a feat to the Custom Lineage, in my opinion. Not because it's bad or unbalanced, but because a feat at 1st level is SUCH an amazing option for build diversity that it's almost too good to pass up.
I feel like not allowing all characters to take a feat at first level as a part of the official rule set was a MASSIVE oversight.
As much as I love the additional options we're getting, this is starting to feel a bit incoherent.
I like some of where they seem to be headed with "race" options, but it looks like they are going beyond what Tasha's did. To the part I bolded above, I have to agree. So at this point you have a few options at character creation.
Option 1: Use the PHB and Pre-Tasha's sourcebook races as written.
Option 2: Tasha's Customizing your Origin. You select a race per Option 1, but you can place your Ability Score Modifiers where you like, Swap out Languages for other Languages, and Swap out Proficiencies (Weapon, Armor, Skill, Tool) for another per the Proficiency Swaps table. And ignore personality descriptions in Option 1.
Option 3: Tasha's Custom Lineage. Skip Options 1 & 2 and create your own race/lineage. You're a Humanoid. Choose your size (S or M), Speed 30 feet, Add +2 to a single ability score, Get a Feat, Choose Darkvision or a Skill proficiency, and you have languages: Common and 1 of your choice. Edit: This does give a lot of flexibility in determining who your character is. You can even be a race not in the books with DM approval.
Option 4: Gothic Lineages. You are one of the three lineages in the UA. It gives you your creature type, speed, You choose size (S or M), and lists what traits you have (magical and physical, but not cultural). You can choose this at character creation or at any time during a campaign (with DM approval, I assume)
Option 5. The upcoming Lineage system. Basically scraps Options 1 & 2 because they contain cultural traits. Will follow along the lines of Gothic Lineages (not sure if it is limited to selecting at character creation or if future lineages can be selected at later levels). I assume it will give you your creature type, size, speed, and traits. But nothing cultural, which is fine.
My question is, what will determine cultural traits and which are inborn? Edit: And will the new system give tips on how to adjust existing races if you want to use the new lineage system yet still play an Elf or Dwarf? Elves have Keen Senses which gives proficiency in the Perception skill. Is this learned (cultural) and removed? Or is it biological (Legolas, what do your elf eyes see?). What about the trance? Will this stay or go? And will there be options in character creation where you can select these traits if you like that as part of your elven lineage or are they gone for good? We just have too little information at this time about how the new lineage system will work and will it work alongside the other options or just replace them? I doubt they will go back and rewrite pre Tasha's sourcebooks to bring it in line with the new system.
Edit: with the removal of cultural traits, will names have to be changed? Can you truly be a Mountain Dwarf or a Forest Gnome under the new system. Or will there just be Dwarf, Gnome, Elf, etc. and then have cultural options to fit your needs (basically get rid of subraces)
I don't know if I'm missing something, it could be because I haven't played an awful lot and started last year.
But I fail to see what the problems are that people are getting worked up about - if you want the old traditional races then just choose to put your +2 into constitution if you're a dwarf. If you'd rather it be in Wisdom because you're a wizard then you can do that too.
Surely just adding additional options means that it works for everybody and it's not pigeon-holing people into a niche.
All I think is that the system as published in Tasha's is not complete, they really need to tie it in with racial choice and that is based on the wording in this last UA. 1) I really think it should go you pick your race Gnome, Dwarf whatever granting you your size and base movement and any abilities based on the race darkvision and such as detailed in the UA. 2) Then you choose your lineage of the 3 from the UA or the custom one in Tasha's.
Both the Custom Lineage and the UA Gothic Lineages determine your size and your speed. Custom Lineage determines whether you have Darkvision or not, the Gothic Lineages specify you only get their racial traits and none of the traits your possible previous race had. What exactly is the purpose of your first step, given everything the lineages trump anyway?
Why race matters is with custom lineage or any of the gothic ones, you cannot have the halflings luck, the forest gnomes minor illusion, the high elf cantrip. If it is going to be these new lineages only then WotC need never actually create a new race as you cannot have any racial benefits.
Honestly I'm fine with the races losing minor traits. They have to still be balanced, and taking rid of the base traits helps to do that. You could flavor at is vampirism taking away innate magic, or the dice gods no longer favoring your character due to their changes. It's the large stuff, like centaurs and tortles that bothers. I still think the system is usable, but it need refining.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
The main issue is that some people enjoy being pigeon-holed into a niche, or want to know what the specific "niche" of a race is without having to make up their own.
At least I think that's what the issue is, I'm not entirely certain not going to lie. While I agree with the changes, I do think it's probably good to just compromise and have the ability to customize, and then have a variant "recommended racial ASI" or something.
The main issue is that some people enjoy being pigeon-holed into a niche, or want to know what the specific "niche" of a race is without having to make up their own.
At least I think that's what the issue is, I'm not entirely certain not going to lie. While I agree with the changes, I do think it's probably good to just compromise and have the ability to customize, and then have a variant "recommended racial ASI" or something.
Pigeon-holed has a pretty negative connotation. Nobody wants that. Species identity is kind of a thing though.
ASIs aside, a lot of races seem to have mostly innate racial traits (although a number are a bit unclear and would need sorting out by WotC). For a number the "cultural" traits are probably a fairly significant part of the standard package though. What is supposed to happen there? Do they get anything in return? Do they get to pick from a bunch of generic cultural stuff? Does all cultural stuff become available to all races? If so, could a character pick up say, Nimble Escape from having spent time among goblins but also Skill Versatility from summer vacations with half-elves and maybe Dwarven Combat Training from a correspondance course? If new PC races won't be getting any specific cultural traits, are the designers even going to bother establishing significant cultural identity any more? Moving all this to Backgrounds begs a bunch of questions as well. How does this balance out? Is mixing and matching still possible? How many backgrounds are needed then?
Thinking of ASIs as cultural rather than physiological feels weird to begin with. Sure, it only matters for PCs who are supposed to be exceptional but it borders on becoming a freakshow given that most players will combine their best stats with their ASIs. Halflings might get to start with Str 20. Elves with Con 20. Half-Orcs with Int 20. Is it important that this is possible? I don't know. I think at that point I'd rather not have ASIs at all during character creation.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Pigeonholed does have a pretty negative connotation. It's also kind of exactly what's happening to people. All the folks who keep arguing (and arguing, and arguing, and frickin' arguing) for a "strong species identity" are doing so at the cost of character identity. All characters MUST correspond exactly to their bog-standard species archetypes or The World Is Chaos. Halflings (and gnomes, and goblins, and whatever else) MUST treat Dexterity as their highest score and Strength as their lowest score, and each gets a different version of the Quirky Little Guy tropes. Elves MUST be creatures of Serene, Timeless Grace(TM) with breathtaking superiority complexes and an inability to treat any other species as adult people. Dwarves MUST be max-Con balls of armor-plated pseudo-Viking boisterousness with genetic alcoholism that treat their beards as more important than their lives. Orcs (and half-orcs) MUST be near-mindless savages overcome with bloodlust and battle-rage they can only keep in check with the most strenuous effort of wills, as scornful of civilization as they are of pants. And all other species can basically not exist.
Somehow, for these folks, trying to "play against type" is the sign of an immature edgelord nonsense player, and only those players who wholeheartedly embrace the tired old overplayed worn-out fantasy tropes are True Roleplayers. Subsuming their character's identity wholly and entirely into their species' cultural norms is the only way to properly play, and anyone who does anything different for any reason not only has to eat a mechanical punishment for doing so, but gets to deal with the DM Fry Meming them the entire time.
I know you don't care about any of that, Pang. But man. If you get to scorn and denigrate the people who want other species to have the same cultural freedom as humanity for any of a dozen valid reasons, those people get their turn to riff back. Frankly, I'd be all for putting all the numbers into the "figure out your numbers" step of the game and attaching none of them to species, background, or culture. Let all of that be free for players to decide as they see fit, instead of punishing players who don't play to the Faerunian norms for their species even if their character has never heard of Faerun before.
I think cultures should be established by setting. For example, in Forgotten Realms dwarven culture gives Stone Cunning, Dwarven Combat Training and Tool Proficiency but in Dark Sun they get features better suited to living in the harsh desert sun. They should also provide a number of general Cultures based around Sea Faring, Nomads, and Magocracies for example, while also providing guidance on "Custom Cultures" in the same way the do Custom Backgrounds.
1) Pigeonholed does have a pretty negative connotation. It's also kind of exactly what's happening to people. All the folks who keep arguing (and arguing, and arguing, and frickin' arguing) for a "strong species identity" are doing so at the cost of character identity. All characters MUST correspond exactly to their bog-standard species archetypes or The World Is Chaos. Halflings (and gnomes, and goblins, and whatever else) MUST treat Dexterity as their highest score and Strength as their lowest score, and each gets a different version of the Quirky Little Guy tropes. Elves MUST be creatures of Serene, Timeless Grace(TM) with breathtaking superiority complexes and an inability to treat any other species as adult people. Dwarves MUST be max-Con balls of armor-plated pseudo-Viking boisterousness with genetic alcoholism that treat their beards as more important than their lives. Orcs (and half-orcs) MUST be near-mindless savages overcome with bloodlust and battle-rage they can only keep in check with the most strenuous effort of wills, as scornful of civilization as they are of pants. And all other species can basically not exist.
2) Somehow, for these folks, trying to "play against type" is the sign of an immature edgelord nonsense player, and only those players who wholeheartedly embrace the tired old overplayed worn-out fantasy tropes are True Roleplayers. Subsuming their character's identity wholly and entirely into their species' cultural norms is the only way to properly play, and anyone who does anything different for any reason not only has to eat a mechanical punishment for doing so, but gets to deal with the DM Fry Meming them the entire time.
3) I know you don't care about any of that, Pang. But man. If you get to scorn and denigrate the people who want other species to have the same cultural freedom as humanity for any of a dozen valid reasons, those people get their turn to riff back. Frankly, I'd be all for putting all the numbers into the "figure out your numbers" step of the game and attaching none of them to species, background, or culture. Let all of that be free for players to decide as they see fit, instead of punishing players who don't play to the Faerunian norms for their species even if their character has never heard of Faerun before.
1) Erm. Where, either in the rules or in my comments, does it say halflings must put their highest ability score in Dex? Or that elves all have a superiority complex and dwarves abuse their livers? If you feel pigeon-holed by what the rules actually say, that's one thing. No need to pretend or delude yourself to think all characters must be racial carbon copies though. That's on you mate, don't project those hangups on the rest of us.
2) Oh, so it's not the rules. I see. It's those pesky heavy-handed grognards. Riiiiiight. I suppose you think of me as a DM who just hands out pregens during session zero and is the only one who gets to speak.
3) The rules, as they are and were pre-Tasha's, leave quite a lot of cultural freedom. Probably not as much as you'd like, but they do. Most races don't have more than one or two culturally determined traits. Some don't have any, other than ASI (which is silly as a cultural trait) and language (which every DM I know will let you swap out if it matters for your backstory, if they don't just give you another one on top instead). Are you annoyed your dwarf has Stonecunning? Just scratch it out. Pretend it doesn't exist. No DM is going to force you to play your dwarf as a rock whisperer.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Looks like Yurei and Pang are at it again. I was hoping this thread might be more constructive than the last one but I guess I was wrong. Can we maybe pull it back before mods lock this one too?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Fortunately, +2 score is worth a feat, and +1 score is worth a half-feat. So the calculus for swapping for darkvision, natural armor, etcetera is already in place, by swapping them in via feats.
Darkvision is interesting, because it is in some sense equivalent to a skill proficiency. Perhaps even a background could grant darkvision in a balanced way. I can imagine a town that magically imbues darkvision to police officers, for example, for a special background.
he / him
Why race matters is with custom lineage or any of the gothic ones, you cannot have the halflings luck, the forest gnomes minor illusion, the high elf cantrip. If it is going to be these new lineages only then WotC need never actually create a new race as you cannot have any racial benefits.
Which is part of why I oppose the whole thing.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
So as not much of a dedicated theory crafter, I want to make sure I'm clear. When you're talking about feats and half feats. A feat is one of those feats that in conventional character progression a character would not take an ASI and, just going alphabetical so I land on [feat]Alert[/feat], the PC gets some sort of feature but no ability score increase whatsoever. Whereas a half feat would be something like Actor, where you get a (bound) +1 and two proficiencies; but I'm thinking in your interpretation there'd be a the possibility of getting the proficiencies and the +1s sort of can be floater or something used to purchase another half feat? This half feat / feat thing is an extrapolation of by some of the crafting community not something that's discussed explicitly in RAW and def not supporting on DDB? I'm not asking to confront, I do like the idea and could see it being very instrumental for a full bore lineage system, I'm just not familiar with making a distinction between feats and half feats and whether it's actually a practice officially and clearly endorsed in RAW.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
If your race has to have Feats to function, then your race is broken.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
Obviously, you can still put whatever restrictions you want in your campaign. If that means keeping the "old school" races as they were, then you can do that. Nobody is stopping you. By offering an official alternative to these old restrictions, the game developers are nudging the "default" toward a more nuanced style of role play. I applaud it wholeheartedly. The game is infinitely more interesting when neither PCs nor NPCs are pigeonholed into stereotypes in the name of "tradition".
But regardless of any opinion expressed here or elsewhere, the rules you're referring to in TCoE (along with literally every other rule offered in any book) are optional. If they don't work for you, then don't use them at your table. It's as simple as that.
Well, it's not really that simple. It's optional in that, if the boilerplate lineage notes in the recent UA are anything go by, you have the option to not bother investing in future sourcebooks containing race/lineage options as they'll all be done in line with the Tasha's rules. I think I like where it's going but clearly somewhere on this course there should be a reconciled core rules where it's more explicit this is both/and not an either/or system.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
This is why I don't allow Variant Humans or Custom Lineage and give everyone a Feat at first level.
If everyone gets a Feat then the Variant Human and Custom Lineage is subpar compared to everything else anyway.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
well that and....at what point on this website will the rules change so much that they need to make some global toggle or different website....i mean what happens to dnd beyond when 6th edition comes out?
This is going a bit far afield from the focus of this thread, and is more a costumer service than a community response thing, so to prevent further drift the last time I saw a response from the D&D Beyond Team re: this question was this post in the thread "What happens to things I buy on DnD Beyond when the editions change?":
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/general-discussion/72492-what-happens-to-things-i-buy-on-dnd-beyond-when?comment=21
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I like some of where they seem to be headed with "race" options, but it looks like they are going beyond what Tasha's did. To the part I bolded above, I have to agree. So at this point you have a few options at character creation.
Option 1: Use the PHB and Pre-Tasha's sourcebook races as written.
Option 2: Tasha's Customizing your Origin. You select a race per Option 1, but you can place your Ability Score Modifiers where you like, Swap out Languages for other Languages, and Swap out Proficiencies (Weapon, Armor, Skill, Tool) for another per the Proficiency Swaps table. And ignore personality descriptions in Option 1.
Option 3: Tasha's Custom Lineage. Skip Options 1 & 2 and create your own race/lineage. You're a Humanoid. Choose your size (S or M), Speed 30 feet, Add +2 to a single ability score, Get a Feat, Choose Darkvision or a Skill proficiency, and you have languages: Common and 1 of your choice. Edit: This does give a lot of flexibility in determining who your character is. You can even be a race not in the books with DM approval.
Option 4: Gothic Lineages. You are one of the three lineages in the UA. It gives you your creature type, speed, You choose size (S or M), and lists what traits you have (magical and physical, but not cultural). You can choose this at character creation or at any time during a campaign (with DM approval, I assume)
Option 5. The upcoming Lineage system. Basically scraps Options 1 & 2 because they contain cultural traits. Will follow along the lines of Gothic Lineages (not sure if it is limited to selecting at character creation or if future lineages can be selected at later levels). I assume it will give you your creature type, size, speed, and traits. But nothing cultural, which is fine.
My question is, what will determine cultural traits and which are inborn? Edit: And will the new system give tips on how to adjust existing races if you want to use the new lineage system yet still play an Elf or Dwarf? Elves have Keen Senses which gives proficiency in the Perception skill. Is this learned (cultural) and removed? Or is it biological (Legolas, what do your elf eyes see?). What about the trance? Will this stay or go? And will there be options in character creation where you can select these traits if you like that as part of your elven lineage or are they gone for good? We just have too little information at this time about how the new lineage system will work and will it work alongside the other options or just replace them? I doubt they will go back and rewrite pre Tasha's sourcebooks to bring it in line with the new system.
Edit: with the removal of cultural traits, will names have to be changed? Can you truly be a Mountain Dwarf or a Forest Gnome under the new system. Or will there just be Dwarf, Gnome, Elf, etc. and then have cultural options to fit your needs (basically get rid of subraces)
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
I don't know if I'm missing something, it could be because I haven't played an awful lot and started last year.
But I fail to see what the problems are that people are getting worked up about - if you want the old traditional races then just choose to put your +2 into constitution if you're a dwarf. If you'd rather it be in Wisdom because you're a wizard then you can do that too.
Surely just adding additional options means that it works for everybody and it's not pigeon-holing people into a niche.
Honestly I'm fine with the races losing minor traits. They have to still be balanced, and taking rid of the base traits helps to do that. You could flavor at is vampirism taking away innate magic, or the dice gods no longer favoring your character due to their changes. It's the large stuff, like centaurs and tortles that bothers. I still think the system is usable, but it need refining.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
The main issue is that some people enjoy being pigeon-holed into a niche, or want to know what the specific "niche" of a race is without having to make up their own.
At least I think that's what the issue is, I'm not entirely certain not going to lie. While I agree with the changes, I do think it's probably good to just compromise and have the ability to customize, and then have a variant "recommended racial ASI" or something.
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
Well, some people have said that they like treating backgrounds and races like mini-classes....
Pigeon-holed has a pretty negative connotation. Nobody wants that. Species identity is kind of a thing though.
ASIs aside, a lot of races seem to have mostly innate racial traits (although a number are a bit unclear and would need sorting out by WotC). For a number the "cultural" traits are probably a fairly significant part of the standard package though. What is supposed to happen there? Do they get anything in return? Do they get to pick from a bunch of generic cultural stuff? Does all cultural stuff become available to all races? If so, could a character pick up say, Nimble Escape from having spent time among goblins but also Skill Versatility from summer vacations with half-elves and maybe Dwarven Combat Training from a correspondance course? If new PC races won't be getting any specific cultural traits, are the designers even going to bother establishing significant cultural identity any more? Moving all this to Backgrounds begs a bunch of questions as well. How does this balance out? Is mixing and matching still possible? How many backgrounds are needed then?
Thinking of ASIs as cultural rather than physiological feels weird to begin with. Sure, it only matters for PCs who are supposed to be exceptional but it borders on becoming a freakshow given that most players will combine their best stats with their ASIs. Halflings might get to start with Str 20. Elves with Con 20. Half-Orcs with Int 20. Is it important that this is possible? I don't know. I think at that point I'd rather not have ASIs at all during character creation.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Pigeonholed does have a pretty negative connotation. It's also kind of exactly what's happening to people. All the folks who keep arguing (and arguing, and arguing, and frickin' arguing) for a "strong species identity" are doing so at the cost of character identity. All characters MUST correspond exactly to their bog-standard species archetypes or The World Is Chaos. Halflings (and gnomes, and goblins, and whatever else) MUST treat Dexterity as their highest score and Strength as their lowest score, and each gets a different version of the Quirky Little Guy tropes. Elves MUST be creatures of Serene, Timeless Grace(TM) with breathtaking superiority complexes and an inability to treat any other species as adult people. Dwarves MUST be max-Con balls of armor-plated pseudo-Viking boisterousness with genetic alcoholism that treat their beards as more important than their lives. Orcs (and half-orcs) MUST be near-mindless savages overcome with bloodlust and battle-rage they can only keep in check with the most strenuous effort of wills, as scornful of civilization as they are of pants. And all other species can basically not exist.
Somehow, for these folks, trying to "play against type" is the sign of an immature edgelord nonsense player, and only those players who wholeheartedly embrace the tired old overplayed worn-out fantasy tropes are True Roleplayers. Subsuming their character's identity wholly and entirely into their species' cultural norms is the only way to properly play, and anyone who does anything different for any reason not only has to eat a mechanical punishment for doing so, but gets to deal with the DM Fry Meming them the entire time.
I know you don't care about any of that, Pang. But man. If you get to scorn and denigrate the people who want other species to have the same cultural freedom as humanity for any of a dozen valid reasons, those people get their turn to riff back. Frankly, I'd be all for putting all the numbers into the "figure out your numbers" step of the game and attaching none of them to species, background, or culture. Let all of that be free for players to decide as they see fit, instead of punishing players who don't play to the Faerunian norms for their species even if their character has never heard of Faerun before.
Please do not contact or message me.
I think cultures should be established by setting. For example, in Forgotten Realms dwarven culture gives Stone Cunning, Dwarven Combat Training and Tool Proficiency but in Dark Sun they get features better suited to living in the harsh desert sun. They should also provide a number of general Cultures based around Sea Faring, Nomads, and Magocracies for example, while also providing guidance on "Custom Cultures" in the same way the do Custom Backgrounds.
This is just a very rough idea of course.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
1) Erm. Where, either in the rules or in my comments, does it say halflings must put their highest ability score in Dex? Or that elves all have a superiority complex and dwarves abuse their livers? If you feel pigeon-holed by what the rules actually say, that's one thing. No need to pretend or delude yourself to think all characters must be racial carbon copies though. That's on you mate, don't project those hangups on the rest of us.
2) Oh, so it's not the rules. I see. It's those pesky heavy-handed grognards. Riiiiiight. I suppose you think of me as a DM who just hands out pregens during session zero and is the only one who gets to speak.
3) The rules, as they are and were pre-Tasha's, leave quite a lot of cultural freedom. Probably not as much as you'd like, but they do. Most races don't have more than one or two culturally determined traits. Some don't have any, other than ASI (which is silly as a cultural trait) and language (which every DM I know will let you swap out if it matters for your backstory, if they don't just give you another one on top instead). Are you annoyed your dwarf has Stonecunning? Just scratch it out. Pretend it doesn't exist. No DM is going to force you to play your dwarf as a rock whisperer.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Looks like Yurei and Pang are at it again. I was hoping this thread might be more constructive than the last one but I guess I was wrong. Can we maybe pull it back before mods lock this one too?
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club