Hi. I'm wondering if Natural Armor is something you would keep if your Dhampir character's base race is a tortle or lizardfolk. It seems like something you would retain, because a lizardfolk would essentially still have it's scales. What are your thoughts? I know movement speeds and skills are kept, but I feel like darkvision and natural armor should also be kept from your base race. If you can apply previous race Natural Armor to a Dhampir, you could play a Tortle that has darkvision and Spider Climbing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Brains over brawn? Mind over matter? These canny warriors rightly answer, "Why not both?" - Tasha
It makes logical sense, but by RAW, no, you don’t keep natural armor. It’s pretty specific what you can keep:
If you replace a race with this lineage, you can keep the following elements of that race: any skill proficiencies you gained from it and any climbing, flying, or swimming speed you gained from it.
So in the case of tortles, you get survival proficiency, and that’s about it. Though you may be able to convince your DM to let you keep the natural armor, too.
Keeping movement speeds already makes them some of the most powerful race options. For the sake of game balance, they should not get every trait of another race in addition to new ones.
Keeping movement speeds already makes them some of the most powerful race options. For the sake of game balance, they should not get every trait of another race in addition to new ones.
I guess keeping movement speed from your previous races opens up a lot of min-maxing opportunities (Aarakocra), but what do you think about darkvision. It usually doesn't matter, because the Dhampir gets darkvision. This is for if you are playing a Reborn Elf for example. Darkvision doesn't make you overpowered, it's a basic nessacity that keeps you from being essentially disabled in darkness. And it negates the requirement for a light source.
Darkvision doesn't make you overpowered, it's a basic nessacity that keeps you from being essentially disabled in darkness. And it negates the requirement for a light source.
Many races don't have darkvision. It isn't a necessity at all for an adventurer.
Keeping movement speeds already makes them some of the most powerful race options. For the sake of game balance, they should not get every trait of another race in addition to new ones.
I guess keeping movement speed from your previous races opens up a lot of min-maxing opportunities (Aarakocra), but what do you think about darkvision. It usually doesn't matter, because the Dhampir gets darkvision. This is for if you are playing a Reborn Elf for example. Darkvision doesn't make you overpowered, it's a basic nessacity that keeps you from being essentially disabled in darkness. And it negates the requirement for a light source.
I mean, literally every starting equipment come with a light source. And a light source is more of a necessity than darkvision since even darkvision can't see color in darkness. But besides that, there are several sub/classes and magic items that give darkvision. And several magic items and spells that emit light.
It is very, very far from a disability. That is like saying only knowing common is a disability.
Keeping movement speeds already makes them some of the most powerful race options. For the sake of game balance, they should not get every trait of another race in addition to new ones.
I guess keeping movement speed from your previous races opens up a lot of min-maxing opportunities (Aarakocra), but what do you think about darkvision. It usually doesn't matter, because the Dhampir gets darkvision. This is for if you are playing a Reborn Elf for example. Darkvision doesn't make you overpowered, it's a basic nessacity that keeps you from being essentially disabled in darkness. And it negates the requirement for a light source.
I mean, literally every starting equipment come with a light source. And a light source is more of a necessity than darkvision since even darkvision can't see color in darkness. But besides that, there are several sub/classes and magic items that give darkvision. And several magic items and spells that emit light.
It is very, very far from a disability. That is like saying only knowing common is a disability.
But in an Underdark-themed campaign like Out of The Abyss or Waterdeep: Dungeon of The MadMage,having to carry a light source around just to be able to function fully will give away your position. Lighting up the environment will also hinder certain players, most notably Gloom Stalker rangers or rogues with the Skulker feat. Both of those examples require total darkness to be able to make use of their best features.
Darkvision doesn't make you overpowered, it's a basic nessacity that keeps you from being essentially disabled in darkness. And it negates the requirement for a light source.
Many races don't have darkvision. It isn't a necessity at all for an adventurer.
Nope. Plenty of 5e races have darkvision. Some players pointed out that it's like darkvision is normal and not having darkvision means you have a disability.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Brains over brawn? Mind over matter? These canny warriors rightly answer, "Why not both?" - Tasha
Keeping movement speeds already makes them some of the most powerful race options. For the sake of game balance, they should not get every trait of another race in addition to new ones.
I guess keeping movement speed from your previous races opens up a lot of min-maxing opportunities (Aarakocra), but what do you think about darkvision. It usually doesn't matter, because the Dhampir gets darkvision. This is for if you are playing a Reborn Elf for example. Darkvision doesn't make you overpowered, it's a basic nessacity that keeps you from being essentially disabled in darkness. And it negates the requirement for a light source.
I mean, literally every starting equipment come with a light source. And a light source is more of a necessity than darkvision since even darkvision can't see color in darkness. But besides that, there are several sub/classes and magic items that give darkvision. And several magic items and spells that emit light.
It is very, very far from a disability. That is like saying only knowing common is a disability.
But in an Underdark-themed campaign like Out of The Abyss or Waterdeep: Dungeon of The MadMage,having to carry a light source around just to be able to function fully will give away your position. Lighting up the environment will also hinder certain players, most notably Gloom Stalker rangers or rogues with the Skulker feat. Both of those examples require total darkness to be able to make use of their best features.
There are way, way fewer builds that need darkness than there are races that need light. And in those rare cases, you can uses a bullseye or hooded lantern to control the amount of light.
Darkvision doesn't make you overpowered, it's a basic nessacity that keeps you from being essentially disabled in darkness. And it negates the requirement for a light source.
Many races don't have darkvision. It isn't a necessity at all for an adventurer.
Nope. Plenty of 5e races have darkvision. Some players pointed out that it's like darkvision is normal and not having darkvision means you have a disability.
So I counted. Slightly less than half the races have darvision (not counting variants of same race). It is like 21 out of 45.
Darkvision doesn't make you overpowered, it's a basic nessacity that keeps you from being essentially disabled in darkness. And it negates the requirement for a light source.
Many races don't have darkvision. It isn't a necessity at all for an adventurer.
Nope. Plenty of 5e races have darkvision. Some players pointed out that it's like darkvision is normal and not having darkvision means you have a disability.
Darkvision is like you have a disability - only being able to see things in greyscale rather than the full colour spectrum available when lights are used.
Darkvision doesn't make you overpowered, it's a basic nessacity that keeps you from being essentially disabled in darkness. And it negates the requirement for a light source.
Many races don't have darkvision. It isn't a necessity at all for an adventurer.
Nope. Plenty of 5e races have darkvision. Some players pointed out that it's like darkvision is normal and not having darkvision means you have a disability.
Counting distinct sources as distinct races (as it's sheer nightmare fuel trying to automagically determine if 2 sources agree or not on a race's definition) and counting all subraces as distinct choices (and counting Custom Lineage as 1 race that has Darkvision), there are some 150 playable races. Of those, 56 don't have Darkvision, 7 have 120-foot Darkvision, and the remaining 87 have Darkvision which is more than 0 but less than 120 (I think 100% of them are 60-foot, but there could be a race with 30 or 90 foot Darkvision and my search tool wouldn't be able to tell me). That over-counts races that were printed in multiple sources with identical descriptions, but you get the idea. Most playable races can see in the dark, but a substantial minority can't.
Darkvision doesn't make you overpowered, it's a basic nessacity that keeps you from being essentially disabled in darkness. And it negates the requirement for a light source.
Many races don't have darkvision. It isn't a necessity at all for an adventurer.
Nope. Plenty of 5e races have darkvision. Some players pointed out that it's like darkvision is normal and not having darkvision means you have a disability.
Counting distinct sources as distinct races (as it's sheer nightmare fuel trying to automagically determine if 2 sources agree or not on a race's definition) and counting all subraces as distinct choices (and counting Custom Lineage as 1 race that has Darkvision), there are some 150 playable races. Of those, 56 don't have Darkvision, 7 have 120-foot Darkvision, and the remaining 87 have Darkvision which is more than 0 but less than 120 (I think 100% of them are 60-foot, but there could be a race with 30 or 90 foot Darkvision and my search tool wouldn't be able to tell me). That over-counts races that were printed in multiple sources with identical descriptions, but you get the idea. Most playable races can see in the dark, but a substantial minority can't.
But not counting subraces and variants as separate races (and counting the lineages as separate because they aren't subraces DDB), there are 47 race options, 21 have darkvision, 2 have an option to have darkvision (MPMotM genasi might all have darkvision now, not sure), and 24 just don't have darkvision.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hi. I'm wondering if Natural Armor is something you would keep if your Dhampir character's base race is a tortle or lizardfolk. It seems like something you would retain, because a lizardfolk would essentially still have it's scales. What are your thoughts? I know movement speeds and skills are kept, but I feel like darkvision and natural armor should also be kept from your base race. If you can apply previous race Natural Armor to a Dhampir, you could play a Tortle that has darkvision and Spider Climbing.
Brains over brawn? Mind over matter? These canny warriors rightly answer, "Why not both?" - Tasha
My Homebrews: Monsters, Magic Items, Spells, Races
Rhulg- Hobgoblin Gunsmith
It makes logical sense, but by RAW, no, you don’t keep natural armor. It’s pretty specific what you can keep:
If you replace a race with this lineage, you can keep the following elements of that race: any skill proficiencies you gained from it and any climbing, flying, or swimming speed you gained from it.
So in the case of tortles, you get survival proficiency, and that’s about it.
Though you may be able to convince your DM to let you keep the natural armor, too.
Keeping movement speeds already makes them some of the most powerful race options. For the sake of game balance, they should not get every trait of another race in addition to new ones.
I guess keeping movement speed from your previous races opens up a lot of min-maxing opportunities (Aarakocra), but what do you think about darkvision. It usually doesn't matter, because the Dhampir gets darkvision. This is for if you are playing a Reborn Elf for example. Darkvision doesn't make you overpowered, it's a basic nessacity that keeps you from being essentially disabled in darkness. And it negates the requirement for a light source.
Brains over brawn? Mind over matter? These canny warriors rightly answer, "Why not both?" - Tasha
My Homebrews: Monsters, Magic Items, Spells, Races
Rhulg- Hobgoblin Gunsmith
Many races don't have darkvision. It isn't a necessity at all for an adventurer.
I mean, literally every starting equipment come with a light source. And a light source is more of a necessity than darkvision since even darkvision can't see color in darkness. But besides that, there are several sub/classes and magic items that give darkvision. And several magic items and spells that emit light.
It is very, very far from a disability. That is like saying only knowing common is a disability.
But in an Underdark-themed campaign like Out of The Abyss or Waterdeep: Dungeon of The Mad Mage, having to carry a light source around just to be able to function fully will give away your position. Lighting up the environment will also hinder certain players, most notably Gloom Stalker rangers or rogues with the Skulker feat. Both of those examples require total darkness to be able to make use of their best features.
Brains over brawn? Mind over matter? These canny warriors rightly answer, "Why not both?" - Tasha
My Homebrews: Monsters, Magic Items, Spells, Races
Rhulg- Hobgoblin Gunsmith
Nope. Plenty of 5e races have darkvision. Some players pointed out that it's like darkvision is normal and not having darkvision means you have a disability.
Brains over brawn? Mind over matter? These canny warriors rightly answer, "Why not both?" - Tasha
My Homebrews: Monsters, Magic Items, Spells, Races
Rhulg- Hobgoblin Gunsmith
There are way, way fewer builds that need darkness than there are races that need light. And in those rare cases, you can uses a bullseye or hooded lantern to control the amount of light.
So I counted. Slightly less than half the races have darvision (not counting variants of same race). It is like 21 out of 45.
Darkvision is like you have a disability - only being able to see things in greyscale rather than the full colour spectrum available when lights are used.
Counting distinct sources as distinct races (as it's sheer nightmare fuel trying to automagically determine if 2 sources agree or not on a race's definition) and counting all subraces as distinct choices (and counting Custom Lineage as 1 race that has Darkvision), there are some 150 playable races. Of those, 56 don't have Darkvision, 7 have 120-foot Darkvision, and the remaining 87 have Darkvision which is more than 0 but less than 120 (I think 100% of them are 60-foot, but there could be a race with 30 or 90 foot Darkvision and my search tool wouldn't be able to tell me). That over-counts races that were printed in multiple sources with identical descriptions, but you get the idea. Most playable races can see in the dark, but a substantial minority can't.
But not counting subraces and variants as separate races (and counting the lineages as separate because they aren't subraces DDB), there are 47 race options, 21 have darkvision, 2 have an option to have darkvision (MPMotM genasi might all have darkvision now, not sure), and 24 just don't have darkvision.