Yeah the main issue I can actually see people upset about is the fact the "optional" way of handling race/linage is no longer going to be optional for new material.
There's a difference between 'optional for players' and 'optional for writers'. This will be the new paradigm for how they write things up.
Unfortunately, that only gives off the impression that these optional rules aren't really optional if every piece of UA and published material going forward references Tasha's as the foundation for them. I'm not against Tasha's being the standard but they went out of their way to say these rules and features were optional and won't affect normal content because they are optional. So seeing this new UA for lineages with the text box in the Design Note: Changes to Racial Traits saying that they will be using Tasha's model for future racial/lineage/cultural content in all future UA is hard to ignore.
Yeah I personally like it and am glad they are doing this....
But I do get it....its not optional anymore its the norm. People did complain this would happen and they were shot down with cries of "its optional!" when in reality I think we all knew it was going this way.
What friggin stats are you running where you have 2 stats at 20 at level 1? for 99.9999% of players they will have between 16-18 in their main stat and 14-16 in their secondary. so thats a max of 1d4+con (2 or 3), IDK why your even adding Int here. No where is a casting stat involved in the bite. So to hit would be 2(prof)+2/3(con) to hit. So max +5, even a swole wizard with max con AT LEVEL 1 would be 2+5 (7) to hit and 2.5+5 to damage. So max plus to skill would be the damage 1d4 (2.5)+5. 7.5 to one ability check per day. Thats not that bad. and ONLY HAPPENS AT LEVEL 1 IF YOU HAVE 20 IN A STAT.
I would rule the smite damage is not the same as the bite damage. The empowered bite says you "regain hit points equal to the damage dealt by the bite," not bite and smite.
Yeesh. I just want a wizard who bites people for the extra surge when they cast Counterspell. Is that too much to ask?
EDIT - no, make that sorcerer. Blood magic origin. Just need to figure out what I'm going to use for blood magic subclass now. And if I should use one of the Shards to go with it. Hmmm....
Unfortunately, that only gives off the impression that these optional rules aren't really optional if every piece of UA and published material going forward references Tasha's as the foundation for them. I'm not against Tasha's being the standard but they went out of their way to say these rules and features were optional and won't affect normal content because they are optional. So seeing this new UA for lineages with the text box in the Design Note: Changes to Racial Traits saying that they will be using Tasha's model for future racial/lineage/cultural content in all future UA is hard to ignore.
What 'optional' means is "You can still use existing published races". It was pretty obvious from Tashas that this would be the new standard going forward, because the problem they were trying to address is only addressed if they stop publishing old-style races.
Huh. Someone over Discord just told me that Planeshift:Zandikar and Planeshift: Ixalan had vampire races too.
Looks like the bite stuff is actually derived from those stat blocks. Slightly different - 1d6+1 for damage instead of 1d4+CON damage. You can heal yourself equal to damage. That's Zandikar. Ixalan had the damage/healing, plus they had this whenever you healed - "Your speed increases by 10 feet, and you gain advantage on Strength and Dexterity checks and saving throws for 1 minute." Both also had resistance to necrotic damage.
Seems that dhampir is roughly inspired by those two. I do miss the necrotic resistance, but I do like we moved away from the physical boost to some mental improvements as well.
If there's a problem I do have with this UA, is this: Should this go pass the playtest and become official, this technically makes Hags and Vampires officially playable in a way. Technically.
That's not my problem. My problem is that gnolls are apparently too 'demonic' to ever be playable, and yet those are okay? What?
(Please don't pay any attention to this, this is just me and that extremely petty, eternal question I always have. 🤣)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active Campaigns:
Raiketsu's Princes of the Apocalypse (DM: Raiketsu) - Shautha: Half-Orc, Level 3 Druid (Circle of Land: Mountain) ⟆ Monster Misfits Adventures (DM: ShadIn) - Vrakskan Onyxadyn: Dragonborn, Level 3 Barbarian (Path of the Ancestral Guardian) ⟆ Rime of the Frostmaiden (DM: Sarvaeth) - Rildayne Uln'hyrr: Drow Elf, Level 1 Warlock of the Archfey
If there's a problem I do have with this UA, is this: Should this go pass the playtest and become official, this technically makes Hags and Vampires officially playable in a way. Technically.
That's not my problem. My problem is that gnolls are apparently too 'demonic' to ever be playable, and yet those are okay? What?
(Please don't pay any attention to this, this is just me and that extremely petty, eternal question I always have. 🤣)
I mean, I want a playable Gnoll as well.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
I personally don't want a playable gnoll (I'm more of a cat girl, so the Tabaxi and certain Shifters get my love) but I agree that they should have been playable alongside all the other Volo content.
It's very nice of them saying stuff like "It's optional." It's not nice when they say "But from now on we will do it only in this way." after that. That's MTX PR BS level.
And did we EVER get a Tabaxi-like humanoid Wolf race? I can't recall if we did - only Shifters and Lycanthropes.
What friggin stats are you running where you have 2 stats at 20 at level 1? for 99.9999% of players they will have between 16-18 in their main stat and 14-16 in their secondary. so thats a max of 1d4+con (2 or 3), IDK why your even adding Int here. No where is a casting stat involved in the bite. So to hit would be 2(prof)+2/3(con) to hit. So max +5, even a swole wizard with max con AT LEVEL 1 would be 2+5 (7) to hit and 2.5+5 to damage. So max plus to skill would be the damage 1d4 (2.5)+5. 7.5 to one ability check per day. Thats not that bad. and ONLY HAPPENS AT LEVEL 1 IF YOU HAVE 20 IN A STAT.
1st) We roll for stats since 2001. 99.9999% they won't get lucky and roll two 18s, but it has happened more than once.
2nd) I and my Co-DM give a Feat at first level. Take a half-Feat and you get two 20s.
3rd) I hope you include your ability modifier and proficiency into your skill checks. That +7.5 might be a +14.5 - maybe its a +11.5 if you roll on something you don't have high stats in.
4th) you can do it TWICE per day at lvl 1.
5th) nothing that I see says that you can't nibble your friends before a skill check.
6th) It stacks with Bardic Inspiration. DCs of 15? 20? At character level 1? *yawn*
It's very nice of them saying stuff like "It's optional." It's not nice when they say "But from now on we will do it only in this way." after that. That's MTX PR BS level.
''Optional' for a core rules supplement has always meant 'individual campaigns can ignore this, but all future official content will use it'. That sucks if the rule is one you dislike, but it shouldn't be surprising.
What friggin stats are you running where you have 2 stats at 20 at level 1? for 99.9999% of players they will have between 16-18 in their main stat and 14-16 in their secondary. so thats a max of 1d4+con (2 or 3), IDK why your even adding Int here. No where is a casting stat involved in the bite. So to hit would be 2(prof)+2/3(con) to hit. So max +5, even a swole wizard with max con AT LEVEL 1 would be 2+5 (7) to hit and 2.5+5 to damage. So max plus to skill would be the damage 1d4 (2.5)+5. 7.5 to one ability check per day. Thats not that bad. and ONLY HAPPENS AT LEVEL 1 IF YOU HAVE 20 IN A STAT.
1st) We roll for stats since 2001. 99.9999% they won't get lucky and roll two 18s, but it has happened more than once.
2nd) I and my Co-DM give a Feat at first level. Take a half-Feat and you get two 20s.
3rd) I hope you include your ability modifier and proficiency into your skill checks. That +7.5 might be a +14.5 - maybe its a +11.5 if you roll on something you don't have high stats in.
4th) you can do it TWICE per day at lvl 1.
5th) nothing that I see says that you can't nibble your friends before a skill check.
6th) It stacks with Bardic Inspiration. DCs of 15? 20? At character level 1? *yawn*
But with a 20 constitution your friend might be dead. Any player willing to take that damage is metagaming, and your bonus’ include a house rule, incredible luck, and a bard. If you’re proficient in a skill and you can rely on those rolls, why do you need to be a Dhampir to make a DC of 20 at 1st?
I've always wanted to play a hag. But I wanted it as a class, not a race. Or lineage, whatever. I'm actually worried about the wording, I'm wondering how much confusion it's going to cause. I had to read the PDF like 3 times before it clicked that lineage doesn't overlay with your existing race (like the EGtW Hollow One) but replaces it entirely. I don't think they're going to errata all the published books to reword everything, but I'm anticipating a lot of DMs needing to do a lot of double checking, and possibly an uptick in Sage Advice, etc. And I'm also reserving a lot of judgement on how well this will work until I see how they update backgrounds or other ways to add cultural elements back in.
What friggin stats are you running where you have 2 stats at 20 at level 1? for 99.9999% of players they will have between 16-18 in their main stat and 14-16 in their secondary. so thats a max of 1d4+con (2 or 3), IDK why your even adding Int here. No where is a casting stat involved in the bite. So to hit would be 2(prof)+2/3(con) to hit. So max +5, even a swole wizard with max con AT LEVEL 1 would be 2+5 (7) to hit and 2.5+5 to damage. So max plus to skill would be the damage 1d4 (2.5)+5. 7.5 to one ability check per day. Thats not that bad. and ONLY HAPPENS AT LEVEL 1 IF YOU HAVE 20 IN A STAT.
1st) We roll for stats since 2001. 99.9999% they won't get lucky and roll two 18s, but it has happened more than once.
2nd) I and my Co-DM give a Feat at first level. Take a half-Feat and you get two 20s.
3rd) I hope you include your ability modifier and proficiency into your skill checks. That +7.5 might be a +14.5 - maybe its a +11.5 if you roll on something you don't have high stats in.
4th) you can do it TWICE per day at lvl 1.
5th) nothing that I see says that you can't nibble your friends before a skill check.
6th) It stacks with Bardic Inspiration. DCs of 15? 20? At character level 1? *yawn*
But with a 20 constitution your friend might be dead. Any player willing to take that damage is metagaming, and your bonus’ include a house rule, incredible luck, and a bard. If you’re proficient in a skill and you can rely on those rolls, why do you need to be a Dhampir to make a DC of 20 at 1st?
Why should he be dead? Bite damage is 1D4+CON. Lets say a lvl 1 Dhampir Rogue with 18 DEX, 16 CON, and Prof: Lockpicking Tools wants to open a locked door. He'd roll 1D20 and add +6 to the skill check. With a DC of 15 that would be reasonably hard, while a DC of 20 would be quite challenging at this point.
If he chooses to nibble on his Paladin friend - who gets 10 + CON mod in Hitpoints at lvl 1, he would do 1D4+3 damage. Lets say he rolls max and does 7 damage. Pally Buddy is still fine, and now he gets +7 to his 1D20+6 for Lockpicking skill check. Suddenly that DC of 15 is laughably easy, and even the 20 is not hard. Even should you roll low, with average stats like these you almost DOUBLE your number.
And I already showed a high Attribute example WITHOUT Bardic Inspiration or Expertise. All included that would be +5 Attribute +12 Expertise +1D4+5 Bite + 1D12 Bardic Inspiration + 1D20 + Advantage. Thats +22 without rolling a single die, 26 if only 1s are rolled and the D20 is a 2, and 58 if all die roll max. Thats some 3.5 edition BS numbers right there.
I just find this to be a VERY poorly designed ability.
The Hexblood looks interesting, and reasonably balanced. The other two? Ugh, the edgiest of edgelords, just what I DON'T want more of in my D&D games...
Counterpoint: what a thing that would be to see in-game.
Dhampir: "Lawrence of the Law, we need to make this count. Give me just a taste of your blood and I can all but guarantee that door will not block us." Lawrence of Law: "It goes against everything my god believes in to sully myself on your fangs, monster."
That constant tension, the undercurrent of corruption and slow withering, and the temptation of this dhampir to simply...finish the job when a party member proves too obstinate or opposed to the dhampir's methods. In the hands of responsible players who can keep their shit together, the idea of the dhampir feeding from party members to bolster its own abilities in service to the party could be deliciously gothic.
Dhampir: "Lawrence of the Law, we need to make this count. Give me just a taste of your blood and I can all but guarantee that door will not block us." Lawrence of Law: "It goes against everything my god believes in to sully myself on your fangs, monster."
That constant tension, the undercurrent of corruption and slow withering, and the temptation of this dhampir to simply...finish the job when a party member proves too obstinate or opposed to the dhampir's methods.
Dhampir: "But think of the poor people behind that door that are just now being enslaved for some nefarious means!"
Lawrence of the Law: " ...... Curse you, monster! Know that I do this for a greater cause!"
*later that evening*
Robbi the Ranger: "Ya coulda have busted that door open no problem, ay laddy?"
Dhampir: "Indeed! But his virtue and steadfastness ... his blood called to me!"
Dhampir bite has definite scaling problems. At first level, trading 5 hit points for +5 to a roll isn't a balance issue, it's probably underpowered. At level 20...
Looking at the simple case of traps and hazards, the hp value of +1 to a check is 5% of the damage you'd take by missing the check. Thus, +1 to a check for 1 hp is balanced against a 20 damage threat. At level 1-4, 20 damage is basically a Deadly (4d10) hazard; at 5-10 it's a Dangerous hazard, at 11-16 it's a Setback, at level 17+ it's below the bottom of the chart.
I suspect a more balanced version would be something like
Bite: 1d4+Con and gain temp HP equal to damage done. Increase to 2d4 at level 5, 3d4 at level 11, 4d4 at level 17. If you have not lost any of the temp hp granted by a use of this trait, you may expend all the temp hp granted by this trait to gain advantage on one ability check.
That's roughly cantrip-level (1d4 per tier is low, but temp hp and adding con make up for it) and won't encourage biting allies.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Yeah I personally like it and am glad they are doing this....
But I do get it....its not optional anymore its the norm. People did complain this would happen and they were shot down with cries of "its optional!" when in reality I think we all knew it was going this way.
What friggin stats are you running where you have 2 stats at 20 at level 1? for 99.9999% of players they will have between 16-18 in their main stat and 14-16 in their secondary. so thats a max of 1d4+con (2 or 3), IDK why your even adding Int here. No where is a casting stat involved in the bite. So to hit would be 2(prof)+2/3(con) to hit. So max +5, even a swole wizard with max con AT LEVEL 1 would be 2+5 (7) to hit and 2.5+5 to damage. So max plus to skill would be the damage 1d4 (2.5)+5. 7.5 to one ability check per day. Thats not that bad. and ONLY HAPPENS AT LEVEL 1 IF YOU HAVE 20 IN A STAT.
I would rule the smite damage is not the same as the bite damage. The empowered bite says you "regain hit points equal to the damage dealt by the bite," not bite and smite.
Yeesh. I just want a wizard who bites people for the extra surge when they cast Counterspell. Is that too much to ask?
EDIT - no, make that sorcerer. Blood magic origin. Just need to figure out what I'm going to use for blood magic subclass now. And if I should use one of the Shards to go with it. Hmmm....
What 'optional' means is "You can still use existing published races". It was pretty obvious from Tashas that this would be the new standard going forward, because the problem they were trying to address is only addressed if they stop publishing old-style races.
Huh. Someone over Discord just told me that Planeshift:Zandikar and Planeshift: Ixalan had vampire races too.
Looks like the bite stuff is actually derived from those stat blocks. Slightly different - 1d6+1 for damage instead of 1d4+CON damage. You can heal yourself equal to damage. That's Zandikar. Ixalan had the damage/healing, plus they had this whenever you healed - "Your speed increases by 10 feet, and you gain advantage on Strength and Dexterity checks and saving throws for 1 minute." Both also had resistance to necrotic damage.
Seems that dhampir is roughly inspired by those two. I do miss the necrotic resistance, but I do like we moved away from the physical boost to some mental improvements as well.
If there's a problem I do have with this UA, is this: Should this go pass the playtest and become official, this technically makes Hags and Vampires officially playable in a way. Technically.
That's not my problem. My problem is that gnolls are apparently too 'demonic' to ever be playable, and yet those are okay? What?
(Please don't pay any attention to this, this is just me and that extremely petty, eternal question I always have. 🤣)
Active Campaigns:
Raiketsu's Princes of the Apocalypse (DM: Raiketsu) - Shautha: Half-Orc, Level 3 Druid (Circle of Land: Mountain) ⟆ Monster Misfits Adventures (DM: ShadIn) - Vrakskan Onyxadyn: Dragonborn, Level 3 Barbarian (Path of the Ancestral Guardian) ⟆ Rime of the Frostmaiden (DM: Sarvaeth) - Rildayne Uln'hyrr: Drow Elf, Level 1 Warlock of the Archfey
RachelEvening's Tyranny of the Dragon Queen - DM
RachelEvening's Tomb of Annihilation - DM
I mean, I want a playable Gnoll as well.
"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 personally don't want a playable gnoll (I'm more of a cat girl, so the Tabaxi and certain Shifters get my love) but I agree that they should have been playable alongside all the other Volo content.
When do you think the lineages will be added to D&D Beyond? Do you think they'll work differently than normal races?
It's very nice of them saying stuff like "It's optional." It's not nice when they say "But from now on we will do it only in this way." after that. That's MTX PR BS level.
And did we EVER get a Tabaxi-like humanoid Wolf race? I can't recall if we did - only Shifters and Lycanthropes.
#OpenDnD
1st) We roll for stats since 2001. 99.9999% they won't get lucky and roll two 18s, but it has happened more than once.
2nd) I and my Co-DM give a Feat at first level. Take a half-Feat and you get two 20s.
3rd) I hope you include your ability modifier and proficiency into your skill checks. That +7.5 might be a +14.5 - maybe its a +11.5 if you roll on something you don't have high stats in.
4th) you can do it TWICE per day at lvl 1.
5th) nothing that I see says that you can't nibble your friends before a skill check.
6th) It stacks with Bardic Inspiration. DCs of 15? 20? At character level 1? *yawn*
#OpenDnD
''Optional' for a core rules supplement has always meant 'individual campaigns can ignore this, but all future official content will use it'. That sucks if the rule is one you dislike, but it shouldn't be surprising.
But with a 20 constitution your friend might be dead. Any player willing to take that damage is metagaming, and your bonus’ include a house rule, incredible luck, and a bard. If you’re proficient in a skill and you can rely on those rolls, why do you need to be a Dhampir to make a DC of 20 at 1st?
I have a weird sense of humor.
I also make maps.(That's a link)
I've always wanted to play a hag. But I wanted it as a class, not a race. Or lineage, whatever. I'm actually worried about the wording, I'm wondering how much confusion it's going to cause. I had to read the PDF like 3 times before it clicked that lineage doesn't overlay with your existing race (like the EGtW Hollow One) but replaces it entirely. I don't think they're going to errata all the published books to reword everything, but I'm anticipating a lot of DMs needing to do a lot of double checking, and possibly an uptick in Sage Advice, etc. And I'm also reserving a lot of judgement on how well this will work until I see how they update backgrounds or other ways to add cultural elements back in.
Birgit | Shifter | Sorcerer | Dragonlords
Shayone | Hobgoblin | Sorcerer | Netherdeep
Why should he be dead? Bite damage is 1D4+CON. Lets say a lvl 1 Dhampir Rogue with 18 DEX, 16 CON, and Prof: Lockpicking Tools wants to open a locked door. He'd roll 1D20 and add +6 to the skill check. With a DC of 15 that would be reasonably hard, while a DC of 20 would be quite challenging at this point.
If he chooses to nibble on his Paladin friend - who gets 10 + CON mod in Hitpoints at lvl 1, he would do 1D4+3 damage. Lets say he rolls max and does 7 damage. Pally Buddy is still fine, and now he gets +7 to his 1D20+6 for Lockpicking skill check. Suddenly that DC of 15 is laughably easy, and even the 20 is not hard. Even should you roll low, with average stats like these you almost DOUBLE your number.
And I already showed a high Attribute example WITHOUT Bardic Inspiration or Expertise. All included that would be +5 Attribute +12 Expertise +1D4+5 Bite + 1D12 Bardic Inspiration + 1D20 + Advantage. Thats +22 without rolling a single die, 26 if only 1s are rolled and the D20 is a 2, and 58 if all die roll max. Thats some 3.5 edition BS numbers right there.
I just find this to be a VERY poorly designed ability.
#OpenDnD
The Hexblood looks interesting, and reasonably balanced. The other two? Ugh, the edgiest of edgelords, just what I DON'T want more of in my D&D games...
Counterpoint: what a thing that would be to see in-game.
Dhampir: "Lawrence of the Law, we need to make this count. Give me just a taste of your blood and I can all but guarantee that door will not block us."
Lawrence of Law: "It goes against everything my god believes in to sully myself on your fangs, monster."
That constant tension, the undercurrent of corruption and slow withering, and the temptation of this dhampir to simply...finish the job when a party member proves too obstinate or opposed to the dhampir's methods. In the hands of responsible players who can keep their shit together, the idea of the dhampir feeding from party members to bolster its own abilities in service to the party could be deliciously gothic.
Please do not contact or message me.
Dhampir: "But think of the poor people behind that door that are just now being enslaved for some nefarious means!"
Lawrence of the Law: " ...... Curse you, monster! Know that I do this for a greater cause!"
*later that evening*
Robbi the Ranger: "Ya coulda have busted that door open no problem, ay laddy?"
Dhampir: "Indeed! But his virtue and steadfastness ... his blood called to me!"
#OpenDnD
Dhampir bite has definite scaling problems. At first level, trading 5 hit points for +5 to a roll isn't a balance issue, it's probably underpowered. At level 20...
Looking at the simple case of traps and hazards, the hp value of +1 to a check is 5% of the damage you'd take by missing the check. Thus, +1 to a check for 1 hp is balanced against a 20 damage threat. At level 1-4, 20 damage is basically a Deadly (4d10) hazard; at 5-10 it's a Dangerous hazard, at 11-16 it's a Setback, at level 17+ it's below the bottom of the chart.
I suspect a more balanced version would be something like
That's roughly cantrip-level (1d4 per tier is low, but temp hp and adding con make up for it) and won't encourage biting allies.