I loaded a Dhampir and Monk together. When I level them to 20 the Vampiric Bite converts to a d10 which indicates it is benefiting from the Monk's unarmed die. Was this intentional?
I think it might be beneficial to either make a very clear statement about which effects, positive and negative, would work on creatures that are more than one type or force a choice of type construct or undead for reborn, fey for hexblood, and undead for dhampir.
As it comes to the reborn, I think it would be interesting if they could choose two of the three types: humanoid, construct, undead, rather that forced to be humanoid and construct or undead. I think it would allow for an interesting character dynamic as it would not benefit from healing spells but would also have other benefits to being undead and a construct.
My only Feedback for these Lineage Races is that they should reflect more of the original race. It should be more clearly defined as to what traits remain from your original race and which are replaced.
For example: If I am playing an Aarakocra. Do I lose my Talons and Wings because of my Lineage? RAW says I'd take on the new traits. But we really need these things defined so there is no conflict/confusion between player and DM.
A more realistic scenario is a Winged Tiefling or an Elven Trance. Both sides can argue for either or, but it shouldn't come to that. Should be a clear and simple ruling of what is and is not kept. 😊
My only Feedback for these Lineage Races is that they should reflect more of the original race. It should be more clearly defined as to what traits remain from your original race and which are replaced.
For example: If I am playing an Aarakocra. Do I lose my Talons and Wings because of my Lineage? RAW says I'd take on the new traits. But we really need these things defined so there is no conflict/confusion between player and DM.
A more realistic scenario is a Winged Tiefling or an Elven Trance. Both sides can argue for either or, but it shouldn't come to that. Should be a clear and simple ruling of what is and is not kept. 😊
By RAW you loose everything from your previous race. Per your example, the Aarakocra, will loose their Flight, Talons and Languages.
Right, Which I'm pointing out is a problem. Should have traits remain from certain aspects. Aarakocra should be able to keep its flight, etc.
Which is partly why I think Lineages should be treated as an entirely different system rather than just another Race. But something that gets added on top of an existing race, likely with flaws on top of it.
Kinda missed my window to talk about this in the survey, but I thought I should mention this. Dual-typing is a purely negative effect. The dhampir can be detected by detect evil, dispelled by dispel evil, damaged by forbiddance, and warded out by hallow, magic circle, and protection from evil. Basically all the downsides of being humanoid and half the downsides of being undead with none of the upsides.
so if your reborn or dhampir undead, and most undead resist or are immune to necrotic/Negative energy, Example Negative Energy Flood as you are undead you gain 5d12 temp hitpoints. So with your dm Your going to have to agree to rule if your resistant or immune to necrotic.
From the UA: "These types don’t have rules themselves, but some rules in the game affect creatures of certain types in different ways. For example, the text of the cure wounds spell specifies that the spell doesn’t work on a creature that has the Construct or Undead type." Having immunity or resistance to necrotic or poison damage isn't an innate part of being undead. The Dhampir traits don't mention necrotic resistance, and based on the quoted statement, there's nothing inherent about being part undead to suggest that they would, even if it is an odd omission
its the same with reborn constructs to many constructs MENDING HEALS but bonus it doesnt affect most humanoid races.
For the constructs that are healed by Mending, it's due to a trait that the individual construct has. The Steel Defender trait from the Improved Steel Defender Stats Block: ". . . If the mending spell is cast on it, it regains 2d6 hit points. . ." The Homunculus has the same trait. There's no guarantee that the Mending spell would restore hit points to a half-construct character (up to the DM), and even if it did, I can say with some degree of certainty that a race that can be healed infinitely probably isn't what Wizards intended.
There's a Reddit post detailing what spells have special rules for creature types (https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/5rgw5f/spells_by_affected_creature_types/). Admittedly, I'm sure there are some spells that have been released since this post was made. Still, I'll try to detail below what spells affect a dual-typed character, and whether they are positive (+) or negative (-), to the best of my interpretation of the statement "If an effect works on at least one of a creature’s types, that effect can work on that creature."
If you were to go through all of these, you'd notice that all of the positive spells are ones that already affected humanoids, and that all of the spells that didn't affect you before are negative, except for Negative Energy flood and arguably Mending. So, I stand by my previous statement; dual-typing, RAW, is a purely negative effect. The goal was to create undead or otherwise themed races that could still be healed, but I'd rather they be JUST humanoid.
I loaded a Dhampir and Monk together. When I level them to 20 the Vampiric Bite converts to a d10 which indicates it is benefiting from the Monk's unarmed die. Was this intentional?
The bite qualifies as a monk weapon, so why wouldn't it be intentional? The only part of the UA bite entry I am 100% confident is unintentional is that they screwed up the wording on the bite's modifier such that a Dhampir adds Constitution and Strength (or Constitution and Dexterity, if a Monk) to the attack and damage.
Minor issue I’ve noticed on the description for Dhampir bite. If you play monk, your to-hit and damage modifiers will most likely be DEX+CON (because simple melee weapons count as monk weapons and most monks build DEX, ime). However, in the text entry, it only shows the calculations as STR based. So, my monk with +0 STR, +3 DEX, +2 CON shows a to-hit of +4 (PB+CON+STR) instead of +7 (PB+CON+DEX) and a damage mod of +2 (CON) instead of +5 (CON+DEX). The actual action displays correctly (using the customized to-hit and damage bonus workarounds from OP).
I know with Van Richten’s being around the corner and official rules for it likely dropping then, it might be best to wait and see what the official wording of the action is before fixing this, but thought I’d report it.
So, my monk with +0 STR, +3 DEX, +2 CON shows a to-hit of +4 (PB+CON+STR) instead of +7 (PB+CON+DEX) and a damage mod of +2 (CON) instead of +5 (CON+DEX). The actual action displays correctly (using the customized to-hit and damage bonus workarounds from OP).
It should be just CON. The attack uses only a single ability score modifier.
So, my monk with +0 STR, +3 DEX, +2 CON shows a to-hit of +4 (PB+CON+STR) instead of +7 (PB+CON+DEX) and a damage mod of +2 (CON) instead of +5 (CON+DEX). The actual action displays correctly (using the customized to-hit and damage bonus workarounds from OP).
It should be just CON. The attack uses only a single ability score modifier.
It may be interacting oddly with being a monk?
Dhampirs add their Con - it's the same basic text Bladesingers use. That means the correct stats for a Dhampir Bite are Con+Str. However, as the bite is not an unarmed strike, I don't think Monks have a way to make the bite a Monk weapon outside of the new L2 Dedicated Weapon ability from Tasha's.
I was thinking how these fall flat, the characters don’t have any feel of previous race. All you can say is they look like a gnome, halfling, dwarf, etc, but it doesn’t feel like they ever were. Maybe a skill or something to give flavor?
I was thinking how these fall flat, the characters don’t have any feel of previous race. All you can say is they look like a gnome, halfling, dwarf, etc, but it doesn’t feel like they ever were. Maybe a skill or something to give flavor?
Yeah, it's a problem. Like, if I made a lizardfolk character that died, and some shenaniganery happens to bring me back as a Reborn, somehow my scales grow soft and my teeth grow dull?
tends to happens when your body should be decomposing lol
Does it also tend to happen when a hag curses you to join her coven? If anything I think that would make them harder.
I recently remembered the Revenant subrace that Wizards tried back in Gothic Heroes, that replaced your subrace or was a variant for races without subraces, sorta like Dragonmarks. Granted, the execution on that wasn't great, and it would be a ton of work to make rules for every race that Wizards probably won't do, but I think it would be the best way to handle pseudo-templates like these lineages.
My only Feedback for these Lineage Races is that they should reflect more of the original race. It should be more clearly defined as to what traits remain from your original race and which are replaced.
For example: If I am playing an Aarakocra. Do I lose my Talons and Wings because of my Lineage? RAW says I'd take on the new traits. But we really need these things defined so there is no conflict/confusion between player and DM.
A more realistic scenario is a Winged Tiefling or an Elven Trance. Both sides can argue for either or, but it shouldn't come to that. Should be a clear and simple ruling of what is and is not kept. 😊
By RAW you loose everything from your previous race. Per your example, the Aarakocra, will loose their Flight, Talons and Languages.
So does an Aarakocra retain its feathers, bird feet (minus the talons), and beak?
Does a Tiefling retain their horns, tail, sharp pointy canine teeth, solid colored eyes, optional goat-like legs with cloven hoofs, etc.?
Does a Loxodon retain their tusks and big ears but end up with more of a piggish nose since they lose their trunk?
I honestly don't think that's clear in the RAW. I seems that you can retain physical appearance aspects that don't give you a game mechanic in the form of a trait. If that's true, then I don't see why a Luxodon couldn't keep the trunk as part of its physical appearance or an Aarakocra keeping wings as long they aren't capable of flight.
Actually there are rules for lycanthrope PCs in the MM, so I'll bite.
Reborn: death always "cures" Lycanthropy, right? There's your answer, you're a Reborn, not your prior race and no longer a lycanthrope either.
Hexblood: the Fey Magic that transforms your origin into a Hexblood also "cures" your Lycanthrope blood. Or maybe not, but if you retained your lycanthropy, if you had a pack, you're not going to pass their sniff test anymore.
Dhampir: duh, among Vampires and Lycanthropes and those mortals that keep tabs on hunt them you're either an Abomination or the Chosen One. The PC is relentlessly pursued by vampires, lycanthropes, blood hunters, gloom stalkers, monster hunters, etc. Create a table that will usually produce at least one daily encounter to contend with and determine the nature and number of that encounter's pursuers. When the PC encounters a pursuer, DM rolls 3d6. On most results the pursuer believes the PC is an abomination and tries to destroy it. If a 1-1-1 is rolled, that pursuer believes the PC is the chosen one and will either aggressively persuade or just outright abduct the PC so it may fulfill what the pursuer believes is The Chosen One's destiny (usually some mess the PC wants nothing to do with).
Are we having fun yet?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I loaded a Dhampir and Monk together. When I level them to 20 the Vampiric Bite converts to a d10 which indicates it is benefiting from the Monk's unarmed die. Was this intentional?
I think it might be beneficial to either make a very clear statement about which effects, positive and negative, would work on creatures that are more than one type or force a choice of type construct or undead for reborn, fey for hexblood, and undead for dhampir.
As it comes to the reborn, I think it would be interesting if they could choose two of the three types: humanoid, construct, undead, rather that forced to be humanoid and construct or undead. I think it would allow for an interesting character dynamic as it would not benefit from healing spells but would also have other benefits to being undead and a construct.
~Levi
My only Feedback for these Lineage Races is that they should reflect more of the original race. It should be more clearly defined as to what traits remain from your original race and which are replaced.
For example: If I am playing an Aarakocra. Do I lose my Talons and Wings because of my Lineage? RAW says I'd take on the new traits. But we really need these things defined so there is no conflict/confusion between player and DM.
A more realistic scenario is a Winged Tiefling or an Elven Trance. Both sides can argue for either or, but it shouldn't come to that. Should be a clear and simple ruling of what is and is not kept. 😊
By RAW you loose everything from your previous race. Per your example, the Aarakocra, will loose their Flight, Talons and Languages.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Right, Which I'm pointing out is a problem. Should have traits remain from certain aspects. Aarakocra should be able to keep its flight, etc.
Which is partly why I think Lineages should be treated as an entirely different system rather than just another Race. But something that gets added on top of an existing race, likely with flaws on top of it.
Kinda missed my window to talk about this in the survey, but I thought I should mention this. Dual-typing is a purely negative effect. The dhampir can be detected by detect evil, dispelled by dispel evil, damaged by forbiddance, and warded out by hallow, magic circle, and protection from evil. Basically all the downsides of being humanoid and half the downsides of being undead with none of the upsides.
God forbid you have to 1v1 a devotion Paladin lol. But I think spider climb and the bite is a considerable buff
From the UA: "These types don’t have rules themselves, but some rules in the game affect creatures of certain types in different ways. For example, the text of the cure wounds spell specifies that the spell doesn’t work on a creature that has the Construct or Undead type." Having immunity or resistance to necrotic or poison damage isn't an innate part of being undead. The Dhampir traits don't mention necrotic resistance, and based on the quoted statement, there's nothing inherent about being part undead to suggest that they would, even if it is an odd omission
For the constructs that are healed by Mending, it's due to a trait that the individual construct has. The Steel Defender trait from the Improved Steel Defender Stats Block: ". . . If the mending spell is cast on it, it regains 2d6 hit points. . ." The Homunculus has the same trait. There's no guarantee that the Mending spell would restore hit points to a half-construct character (up to the DM), and even if it did, I can say with some degree of certainty that a race that can be healed infinitely probably isn't what Wizards intended.
There's a Reddit post detailing what spells have special rules for creature types (https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/5rgw5f/spells_by_affected_creature_types/). Admittedly, I'm sure there are some spells that have been released since this post was made. Still, I'll try to detail below what spells affect a dual-typed character, and whether they are positive (+) or negative (-), to the best of my interpretation of the statement "If an effect works on at least one of a creature’s types, that effect can work on that creature."
Humanoid/Construct: Abi-Dalzim's Horrid Wilting (-), Animate Dead (Arguable), Antilife Shell (-), Blight (-), Calm Emotions (-), Cause Fear (-), Charm Person (-), Create Undead (Arguable), Crown of Madness (-), Cure Wounds (+), Dominate Person (-), Fast Friends (-), Heal (+), Healing Spirit (+), Healing Word (+), Hold Person (-), Magic Jar (-), Mass Cure Wounds (+), Mass Heal (+), Mass Healing Word (+), Mending (Arguable), Phantasmal Force (-), Power Word Heal (+), Prayer of Healing (+), Reincarnate (+), Simulacrum (+), Soul Cage (-), Spare the Dying (+)
Humanoid/Fey: Animate Dead (Arguable), Calm Emotions (-), Charm Person (-), Create Undead (Arguable), Crown of Madness (-), Detect Evil and Good (-), Dispel Evil and Good (-), Divine Word (-), Dominate Person (-), Fast Friends (-), Forbiddance (-), Hallow (-), Hold Person (-), Magic Circle (-), Magic Jar (-), Planar Binding (-), Protection from Evil and Good (-), Reincarnate (+), Simulacrum (+), Soul Cage (-)
Humanoid/Undead: Abi-Dalzim's Horrid Wilting (-), Animate Dead (Arguable), Antilife Shell (-), Blight (-), Calm Emotions (-), Cause Fear (-), Charm Person (-), Chill Touch (-), Command (-), Create Undead (Arguable), Crown of Madness (-), Cure Wounds (+), Detect Evil and Good (-), Dispel Evil and Good (-), Dominate Person (-), Fast Friends (-), Forbiddance (-), Hallow (-), Heal (+), Healing Spirit (+), Healing Word (+), Hold Monster (-), Hold Person (-), Holy Aura (-), Magic Circle (-), Magic Jar (-), Mass Cure Wounds (+), Mass Heal (+), Mass Healing Word (+), Negative Energy Flood (I would rule it damages you but with Evasion, +), Phantasmal Force (-), Power Word Heal (+), Prayer of Healing (+), Protection from Evil and Good (-), Raise Dead (+), Reincarnate (+), Resurrection (+), Simulacrum (+), Sleep (-), Soul Cage (-), Spare the Dying (+), Speak with Dead (Arguable), Sunbeam (-), Sunburst (-)
If you were to go through all of these, you'd notice that all of the positive spells are ones that already affected humanoids, and that all of the spells that didn't affect you before are negative, except for Negative Energy flood and arguably Mending. So, I stand by my previous statement; dual-typing, RAW, is a purely negative effect. The goal was to create undead or otherwise themed races that could still be healed, but I'd rather they be JUST humanoid.
The bite qualifies as a monk weapon, so why wouldn't it be intentional? The only part of the UA bite entry I am 100% confident is unintentional is that they screwed up the wording on the bite's modifier such that a Dhampir adds Constitution and Strength (or Constitution and Dexterity, if a Monk) to the attack and damage.
Minor issue I’ve noticed on the description for Dhampir bite. If you play monk, your to-hit and damage modifiers will most likely be DEX+CON (because simple melee weapons count as monk weapons and most monks build DEX, ime). However, in the text entry, it only shows the calculations as STR based. So, my monk with +0 STR, +3 DEX, +2 CON shows a to-hit of +4 (PB+CON+STR) instead of +7 (PB+CON+DEX) and a damage mod of +2 (CON) instead of +5 (CON+DEX). The actual action displays correctly (using the customized to-hit and damage bonus workarounds from OP).
I know with Van Richten’s being around the corner and official rules for it likely dropping then, it might be best to wait and see what the official wording of the action is before fixing this, but thought I’d report it.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
D&D Beyond FoundersIt should be just CON. The attack uses only a single ability score modifier.
It may be interacting oddly with being a monk?
Pun-loving nerd | Faith Elisabeth Lilley | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
It could also potentially be interacting with a piece of homebrew that had a glitch that wasn’t apparent before this interaction.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Dhampirs add their Con - it's the same basic text Bladesingers use. That means the correct stats for a Dhampir Bite are Con+Str. However, as the bite is not an unarmed strike, I don't think Monks have a way to make the bite a Monk weapon outside of the new L2 Dedicated Weapon ability from Tasha's.
I was thinking how these fall flat, the characters don’t have any feel of previous race. All you can say is they look like a gnome, halfling, dwarf, etc, but it doesn’t feel like they ever were. Maybe a skill or something to give flavor?
Yeah, it's a problem. Like, if I made a lizardfolk character that died, and some shenaniganery happens to bring me back as a Reborn, somehow my scales grow soft and my teeth grow dull?
tends to happens when your body should be decomposing lol
Does it also tend to happen when a hag curses you to join her coven? If anything I think that would make them harder.
I recently remembered the Revenant subrace that Wizards tried back in Gothic Heroes, that replaced your subrace or was a variant for races without subraces, sorta like Dragonmarks. Granted, the execution on that wasn't great, and it would be a ton of work to make rules for every race that Wizards probably won't do, but I think it would be the best way to handle pseudo-templates like these lineages.
So does an Aarakocra retain its feathers, bird feet (minus the talons), and beak?
Does a Tiefling retain their horns, tail, sharp pointy canine teeth, solid colored eyes, optional goat-like legs with cloven hoofs, etc.?
Does a Loxodon retain their tusks and big ears but end up with more of a piggish nose since they lose their trunk?
I honestly don't think that's clear in the RAW. I seems that you can retain physical appearance aspects that don't give you a game mechanic in the form of a trait. If that's true, then I don't see why a Luxodon couldn't keep the trunk as part of its physical appearance or an Aarakocra keeping wings as long they aren't capable of flight.
Considering there aren't any official rules for lycanthrope PCs that'd be up to the DM.
Actually there are rules for lycanthrope PCs in the MM, so I'll bite.
Reborn: death always "cures" Lycanthropy, right? There's your answer, you're a Reborn, not your prior race and no longer a lycanthrope either.
Hexblood: the Fey Magic that transforms your origin into a Hexblood also "cures" your Lycanthrope blood. Or maybe not, but if you retained your lycanthropy, if you had a pack, you're not going to pass their sniff test anymore.
Dhampir: duh, among Vampires and Lycanthropes and those mortals that
keep tabs onhunt them you're either an Abomination or the Chosen One. The PC is relentlessly pursued by vampires, lycanthropes, blood hunters, gloom stalkers, monster hunters, etc. Create a table that will usually produce at least one daily encounter to contend with and determine the nature and number of that encounter's pursuers. When the PC encounters a pursuer, DM rolls 3d6. On most results the pursuer believes the PC is an abomination and tries to destroy it. If a 1-1-1 is rolled, that pursuer believes the PC is the chosen one and will either aggressively persuade or just outright abduct the PC so it may fulfill what the pursuer believes is The Chosen One's destiny (usually some mess the PC wants nothing to do with).Are we having fun yet?
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.