After reading this UA I want to create a Halfling or Gnome Dhampir named Nibbles, then take the short critter feat for the +5 move and +1 attribute and skill, followed by the mobile feat for a base 50 movement little guy maybe make him a monk so his move gets really insane.
Just need to check, Dhampir bite counts as a proper weapon "Your fanged bite is a natural weapon, which counts as a simple melee weapon with which you are proficient". This means that Hexblade should be able to replace the CON scaling with CHA. Combine this with oathbreaker paladin to get your CHA added to your damage as you have an undead creature type to synergize with your own aura. Pump that CHA up to 20 and you get your modifier twice for 1d4+10 along with the already mentioned divine smite synergy. After going the 7 paladin/1 warlock you can go into college of swords bard to get to add your bardic inspiration to your damage too.
The funny thing about how it's worded now you just ADD Con mod to both attack and damage.
This means that you would replace the STR for CHA in your build but still add CON on top of that.
So you could be doing d4 +CHA + CHA (Life drinker) + CON
This should be possible with a 12 Hexblade/7 Oathbreaker, with one level to spare. A level in Warlock gives you a 7th level Mystic Arcanum, while a level in Paladin gives you another ASI.
Assuming both CHA and CON are at 20, adding CON, Hex Warrior, Aura of Hate, Hexblade's Curse and Spirit Shroud (Warlock spell, 5th level), we end up with 2d8+1d4+5+5+5+6 = 2d8+1d4+21. Damage range 24-41, average 32.5 per hit, so 65 damage per attack action.
A weapon must be magical to be made a Blade Pact weapon. Assuming your DM can cook up some magical dentures, you can add Lifedrinker and Improved Pact Weapon for an extra +6. Damage range 30-47, average 38.5 per hit, 77 per action.
Of course, all these bonuses can apply to a greatsword, but healing or buffing rolls by up to 47 points is really neat. It does take two bonus actions to set up. Make your teeth a hex weapon and get a greatsword pact weapon. If you're disarmed or restrained, get to chomping.
Just need to check, Dhampir bite counts as a proper weapon "Your fanged bite is a natural weapon, which counts as a simple melee weapon with which you are proficient". This means that Hexblade should be able to replace the CON scaling with CHA. Combine this with oathbreaker paladin to get your CHA added to your damage as you have an undead creature type to synergize with your own aura. Pump that CHA up to 20 and you get your modifier twice for 1d4+10 along with the already mentioned divine smite synergy. After going the 7 paladin/1 warlock you can go into college of swords bard to get to add your bardic inspiration to your damage too.
The funny thing about how it's worded now you just ADD Con mod to both attack and damage.
This means that you would replace the STR for CHA in your build but still add CON on top of that.
So you could be doing d4 +CHA + CHA (Life drinker) + CON
This should be possible with a 12 Hexblade/7 Oathbreaker, with one level to spare. A level in Warlock gives you a 7th level Mystic Arcanum, while a level in Paladin gives you another ASI.
Assuming both CHA and CON are at 20, adding CON, Hex Warrior, Aura of Hate, Hexblade's Curse and Spirit Shroud (Warlock spell, 5th level), we end up with 2d8+1d4+5+5+5+6 = 2d8+1d4+21. Damage range 24-41, average 32.5 per hit, so 65 damage per attack action.
A weapon must be magical to be made a Blade Pact weapon. Assuming your DM can cook up some magical dentures, you can add Lifedrinker and Improved Pact Weapon for an extra +6. Damage range 30-47, average 38.5 per hit, 77 per action.
Of course, all these bonuses can apply to a greatsword, but healing or buffing rolls by up to 47 points is really neat. It does take two bonus actions to set up. Make your teeth a hex weapon and get a greatsword pact weapon. If you're disarmed or restrained, get to chomping.
Yeah the fact that you can then heal with it as a free action is pretty good. Granted it's limited in use but overall pretty good.
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.
This sounds like the opening to a slashfic. That is just dripping with soap opera sex-scene energy.
For the Dhampirs Vampiric Bite ability it says you add your constitution bonus to its attack and damage rolls. It says you add your CON modifier, not instead of using strength for attack and damage rolls..
Does this mean that the bite attack is made only using your constitution modifier for attack and damage rolls or is the bite attack using your strength modifier and your constitution modifier for attack and damage rolls?
For the Dhampirs Vampiric Bite ability it says you add your constitution bonus to its attack and damage rolls. It says you add your CON modifier, not instead of using strength for attack and damage rolls..
Does this mean that the bite attack is made only using your constitution modifier for attack and damage rolls or is the bite attack using your strength modifier and your constitution modifier for attack and damage rolls?
As its written now....both.
Many doubt its rules as intended though and that its a mistake.
Fair enough. I was gonna say that means that you'll almost always hit with your bite and the damage would be a lot as well. That's possibly why it's only a d4.
Then again, I actually like that it's linked to your constitution modifier. I think that's really cool and fits thematically.
Im currently playing in Icewind Dale: Rime of the Frostmaiden as a Human Variant Hollow One, Eldritch Knight. My characters name is Niklaus Alucard Van Richten making him a son of Rudolph Van Richten the legendary vampire hunter. Niklaus himself is a monster hunter who grew up in Ravenloft and after some random adventurers defeated Strahd, the fog keeping everyone trapped in Barovia was lifted, and so my character found his way to Icewind Dale.
My DM said I could play test one of the new races to replace me being a human Variant. I just can't decide whether I should be a Dhampir or a Reborn.. anyone got some opinions?
I dont think that Reborn really fits thematically, since Niklaus hasnt been reborn from anything. I could see a quasi-vampire Dhampir buisiness though which could have been obtained in Ravenloft by things like, being bitten by strahd but not fully turned, weird powers of the Amber Temple, or some sort of mystic experiment gone wrong when going through his father's notes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews!Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
I dont think that Reborn really fits thematically, since Niklaus hasnt been reborn from anything. I could see a quasi-vampire Dhampir buisiness though which could have been obtained in Ravenloft by things like, being bitten by strahd but not fully turned, weird powers of the Amber Temple, or some sort of mystic experiment gone wrong when going through his father's notes.
The funny thing is I've been playing essentially a Hexblood and a Reborn all along in my Feywild and Curse of Strahd campaigns (respectively.)
For the Feywild, I was playing the Changeling that the hag coven replaced the original child with and for Curse of Strahd, I'm playing a human who was murdered and made a deal with The Raven Queen to come back to life and live out the rest of his days until he dies again of old age...but only if he can stake Strahd himself.
And the funny thing is I just changed out my Hexblood/Changeling character for the original child who had been replaced. And the Reborn human has clear memories of both his past life and his time in the realm of the dead, so the DM ruled that I wasn't allowed to mechanically change things out.
I've been homebrewing a vampire race for my own campaign, to fit a more romanticized version. Nearly done with balancing, and then this comes out XD.
I'll probably stick with my own version, but making it a lineage instead of a feat will be extremely helpful (I was making it as a feat for those who got turned during the campaign, as an alternative to standard Vampire rules).
Would a human Variant, lose their feat and 1 free skill if they became one of these three lineages?
From what I'm reading yes.
That could use some work IMO. Choosing one of these lineages at character creation is sound, but a DM would have to write pretty creatively to explain why a Dhampir Centaur loses their hooves and equine build but gains a bite attack and spiderclimb in the middle of a campaign.
If a lineage is gained after character creation, I think they should be treated similarly to prestige classes in earlier editions where you need to fulfill some kind of story/mechanical requirement to gain them, but their features don't always replace existing racial features. Obviously which features that are added, replaced or lost would have to be on a case-by-case basis.
A Reborn Leonin retains their claws and roar but maybe loses the skill from Hunter's Instincts. A Reborn Vuman might lose their skill and feat if it's related to memory, but gains the extra ability increase on top of what they had. A Hexblood Satyr might remain a Fey instead of a dual-type Fey/Humanoid. A Dhampir Tabaxi would gain the bite and keep their claws and Feline Agility, but wouldn't gain spiderclimb. And so on.
Ultimately such an approach is just dumping more work on the DM. It would be nice for the official release of new lineages to detail rules for gaining them after character creation.
Would a human Variant, lose their feat and 1 free skill if they became one of these three lineages?
From what I'm reading yes.
That's how I'm reading this too. It seems a lot of players more familiar with the old template system (that may also be found in Pathfinder?) would like these lineages to be something you could layer over an existing character. That doesn't seem to be the intention behind these, and possibly the lineage "system". Rather, these gothic lineages are things you choose when building your character in the first place, not something that results from something happening to you in game.
[ABOUT TO GO FAR AFIELD] One could postulate a system "well, what if I start as a variant human and then take on a gothic lineage?" That sort of lifepath style character generation seems to be a bit beyond the RAW (at least for the moment). Plenty of games do a sort of "lifepath" style of character development. For example in some iterations of Traveller and at least the first two editions of Cyberpunk, you'd go through 4 year stints till you wanted to stop (after age 28, you're character I think started receiving aging effects ... also in early editions of Traveller, you could die in character generation, one two many tours with special forces and the death commando life caught up to you). Anyway here and in other threads some folks would like to see some sort of tier of lineage/race, class, background, and culture being the making system for a sheet ... I'd say life paths would be an interesting way to integrate the interest in back story to the mechanics of character generation moreso than that those stool legs.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Except the UA specifically mentions changing from having one race to gaining these lineages. Look under the section on Languages and it says that if you started as another race with multiple languages, you still keep those languages.
It may be more balanced, but it'd still be weird to lose your proficiency in a skill just by becoming a hexblood or dhampir.
Except the UA specifically mentions changing from having one race to gaining these lineages. Look under the section on Languages and it says that if you started as another race with multiple languages, you still keep those languages.
It may be more balanced, but it'd still be weird to lose your proficiency in a skill just by becoming a hexblood or dhampir.
It's clear to me they're talking about character generation, if you do it "mid character" you have some complications and some trade offs. It specifically says:
If you choose a lineage, you might have once been a member of another race, but you aren’t any longer. You now possess only your lineage’s racial traits.
And re: racial traits:
Racial traits henceforth reflect only the physical or magical realities of being a player character who’s a member of a particular lineage. Such traits include things like darkvision, a breath weapon (as in the dragonborn), or innate magical ability (as in the forest gnome). Such traits don’t include cultural characteristics, like language or training with a weapon or a tool,
So it seems it's going against what you're saying about language. Variant human feats may be a frustrating complication to this. Some are clearly training with a tool, others could be considered innate, and others are wobblers but I suppose one either has to develop or receive guidance on what physical and magical realities are apart from cultural traits. Part of me wonders how "set in stone" some of the shadebox text really is since that's a big question to beg.
Narratively, the loss/trade off makes sense to me in the abstract. The prior character was one part of the alchemy that goes into the creation of the Dhampir, hex blood or reborn. The Reborn sort of frames it best, "who you were" is no longer "who you are" but there are echoes of who you were in there.
That said, given what you're exposing here, I'm presuming this UA may be on the drawing table for a while, maybe this is for a Fall 2022 product.
These holes being found are key on giving an honest feedback.
Just be careful of wording it in a way like "I like the concept but there are lots of room for improvement" rather than "this UA sucks, I wanna speak with your boss, I will get you fired." You know what I mean.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
After reading this UA I want to create a Halfling or Gnome Dhampir named Nibbles, then take the short critter feat for the +5 move and +1 attribute and skill, followed by the mobile feat for a base 50 movement little guy maybe make him a monk so his move gets really insane.
This should be possible with a 12 Hexblade/7 Oathbreaker, with one level to spare. A level in Warlock gives you a 7th level Mystic Arcanum, while a level in Paladin gives you another ASI.
Assuming both CHA and CON are at 20, adding CON, Hex Warrior, Aura of Hate, Hexblade's Curse and Spirit Shroud (Warlock spell, 5th level), we end up with 2d8+1d4+5+5+5+6 = 2d8+1d4+21. Damage range 24-41, average 32.5 per hit, so 65 damage per attack action.
A weapon must be magical to be made a Blade Pact weapon. Assuming your DM can cook up some magical dentures, you can add Lifedrinker and Improved Pact Weapon for an extra +6. Damage range 30-47, average 38.5 per hit, 77 per action.
Of course, all these bonuses can apply to a greatsword, but healing or buffing rolls by up to 47 points is really neat. It does take two bonus actions to set up. Make your teeth a hex weapon and get a greatsword pact weapon. If you're disarmed or restrained, get to chomping.
Yeah the fact that you can then heal with it as a free action is pretty good. Granted it's limited in use but overall pretty good.
This sounds like the opening to a slashfic. That is just dripping with soap opera sex-scene energy.
For the Dhampirs Vampiric Bite ability it says you add your constitution bonus to its attack and damage rolls. It says you add your CON modifier, not instead of using strength for attack and damage rolls..
Does this mean that the bite attack is made only using your constitution modifier for attack and damage rolls or is the bite attack using your strength modifier and your constitution modifier for attack and damage rolls?
As its written now....both.
Many doubt its rules as intended though and that its a mistake.
Fair enough. I was gonna say that means that you'll almost always hit with your bite and the damage would be a lot as well. That's possibly why it's only a d4.
Then again, I actually like that it's linked to your constitution modifier. I think that's really cool and fits thematically.
Im currently playing in Icewind Dale: Rime of the Frostmaiden as a Human Variant Hollow One, Eldritch Knight. My characters name is Niklaus Alucard Van Richten making him a son of Rudolph Van Richten the legendary vampire hunter. Niklaus himself is a monster hunter who grew up in Ravenloft and after some random adventurers defeated Strahd, the fog keeping everyone trapped in Barovia was lifted, and so my character found his way to Icewind Dale.
My DM said I could play test one of the new races to replace me being a human Variant. I just can't decide whether I should be a Dhampir or a Reborn.. anyone got some opinions?
I dont think that Reborn really fits thematically, since Niklaus hasnt been reborn from anything. I could see a quasi-vampire Dhampir buisiness though which could have been obtained in Ravenloft by things like, being bitten by strahd but not fully turned, weird powers of the Amber Temple, or some sort of mystic experiment gone wrong when going through his father's notes.
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
That sounds super cool!
The funny thing is I've been playing essentially a Hexblood and a Reborn all along in my Feywild and Curse of Strahd campaigns (respectively.)
For the Feywild, I was playing the Changeling that the hag coven replaced the original child with and for Curse of Strahd, I'm playing a human who was murdered and made a deal with The Raven Queen to come back to life and live out the rest of his days until he dies again of old age...but only if he can stake Strahd himself.
And the funny thing is I just changed out my Hexblood/Changeling character for the original child who had been replaced. And the Reborn human has clear memories of both his past life and his time in the realm of the dead, so the DM ruled that I wasn't allowed to mechanically change things out.
Oh dang. That definitely seems interesting though!
I've been homebrewing a vampire race for my own campaign, to fit a more romanticized version. Nearly done with balancing, and then this comes out XD.
I'll probably stick with my own version, but making it a lineage instead of a feat will be extremely helpful (I was making it as a feat for those who got turned during the campaign, as an alternative to standard Vampire rules).
If I told you, it wouldn't be mysterious.
Would a human Variant, lose their feat and 1 free skill if they became one of these three lineages?
From what I'm reading yes.
#OpenDnD
That could use some work IMO. Choosing one of these lineages at character creation is sound, but a DM would have to write pretty creatively to explain why a Dhampir Centaur loses their hooves and equine build but gains a bite attack and spiderclimb in the middle of a campaign.
If a lineage is gained after character creation, I think they should be treated similarly to prestige classes in earlier editions where you need to fulfill some kind of story/mechanical requirement to gain them, but their features don't always replace existing racial features. Obviously which features that are added, replaced or lost would have to be on a case-by-case basis.
A Reborn Leonin retains their claws and roar but maybe loses the skill from Hunter's Instincts. A Reborn Vuman might lose their skill and feat if it's related to memory, but gains the extra ability increase on top of what they had. A Hexblood Satyr might remain a Fey instead of a dual-type Fey/Humanoid. A Dhampir Tabaxi would gain the bite and keep their claws and Feline Agility, but wouldn't gain spiderclimb. And so on.
Ultimately such an approach is just dumping more work on the DM. It would be nice for the official release of new lineages to detail rules for gaining them after character creation.
That's how I'm reading this too. It seems a lot of players more familiar with the old template system (that may also be found in Pathfinder?) would like these lineages to be something you could layer over an existing character. That doesn't seem to be the intention behind these, and possibly the lineage "system". Rather, these gothic lineages are things you choose when building your character in the first place, not something that results from something happening to you in game.
[ABOUT TO GO FAR AFIELD] One could postulate a system "well, what if I start as a variant human and then take on a gothic lineage?" That sort of lifepath style character generation seems to be a bit beyond the RAW (at least for the moment). Plenty of games do a sort of "lifepath" style of character development. For example in some iterations of Traveller and at least the first two editions of Cyberpunk, you'd go through 4 year stints till you wanted to stop (after age 28, you're character I think started receiving aging effects ... also in early editions of Traveller, you could die in character generation, one two many tours with special forces and the death commando life caught up to you). Anyway here and in other threads some folks would like to see some sort of tier of lineage/race, class, background, and culture being the making system for a sheet ... I'd say life paths would be an interesting way to integrate the interest in back story to the mechanics of character generation moreso than that those stool legs.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Except the UA specifically mentions changing from having one race to gaining these lineages. Look under the section on Languages and it says that if you started as another race with multiple languages, you still keep those languages.
It may be more balanced, but it'd still be weird to lose your proficiency in a skill just by becoming a hexblood or dhampir.
It's clear to me they're talking about character generation, if you do it "mid character" you have some complications and some trade offs. It specifically says:
And re: racial traits:
So it seems it's going against what you're saying about language. Variant human feats may be a frustrating complication to this. Some are clearly training with a tool, others could be considered innate, and others are wobblers but I suppose one either has to develop or receive guidance on what physical and magical realities are apart from cultural traits. Part of me wonders how "set in stone" some of the shadebox text really is since that's a big question to beg.
Narratively, the loss/trade off makes sense to me in the abstract. The prior character was one part of the alchemy that goes into the creation of the Dhampir, hex blood or reborn. The Reborn sort of frames it best, "who you were" is no longer "who you are" but there are echoes of who you were in there.
That said, given what you're exposing here, I'm presuming this UA may be on the drawing table for a while, maybe this is for a Fall 2022 product.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
These holes being found are key on giving an honest feedback.
Just be careful of wording it in a way like "I like the concept but there are lots of room for improvement" rather than "this UA sucks, I wanna speak with your boss, I will get you fired." You know what I mean.