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.
If you don’t keep any of those elements or you choose this lineage at character creation, you gain proficiency in two skills of your choice.
Technically they’re right, you wouldn’t get to retain the feat at all. 🤷♂️ I would let you keep it in the spirit of what I believe would be RAI, but RAW you wouldn’t get to keep the feat at all.
Reborn don't get to keep the feat racial trait, so... I'd think not.
This. You don't even keep the proficiencies you get from the Skill Expert feat; they're from the feat, not the race.
Well... you gained the feat from your race and thus you are getting the prof from your race, no?
No, for the same reason that the extra attack you make with the haste spell doesn't deal damage from a magical source. The rules don't chain causation like that. The proficiencies come from the feat, not the race. You don't get to keep the feat, so you don't get to keep the benefits of the feat.
Technically they’re right, you wouldn’t get to retain the feat at all. 🤷♂️ I would let you keep it in the spirit of what I believe would be RAI, but RAW you wouldn’t get to keep the feat at all.
I do not believe it is RAI that characters should get all the benefits of an entire feat completely for free. Why wouldn't every Reborn player say they used to be a variant human or custom lineage beforehand to get a bunch of extra skills at no cost?
Yea I have to agree with Saga and DJC, if you no longer are a V. Human then you don't get to keep the feat and if you no longer have the feat then you don't get to keep the proficiency or expertise the feat gave you.
Technically they’re right, you wouldn’t get to retain the feat at all. 🤷♂️ I would let you keep it in the spirit of what I believe would be RAI, but RAW you wouldn’t get to keep the feat at all.
I do not believe it is RAI that characters should get all the benefits of an entire feat completely for free. Why wouldn't every Reborn player say they used to be a variant human or custom lineage beforehand to get a bunch of extra skills at no cost?
I don't think IamSposta's arguing it should be a blanket ruling in every case without DM intervention, in fact they specifically said "as a DM".
You seem to be looking at it from the angle of a player newly creating a Reborn character, in which case sure, don't allow it because for a new character there was no previous race (except as backstory), just use the default path or negotiate what you might combine in.
But that's not the only way to become Reborn; it can happen to an existing character during a campaign. Maybe they died and the party got a budget resurrection, or maybe full resurrection isn't allowed in the setting etc. If you go by RAW you'd have a character come back not knowing how to do potentially some of their most core skills, so it makes more sense RAI to allow them to retain these. It's unlikely to upset balance in an ongoing campaign.
The OP hasn't specified which case we're covering here, so it's best to be broad.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
You seem to be looking at it from the angle of a player newly creating a Reborn character, in which case sure, don't allow it because for a new character there was no previous race (except as backstory), just use the default path or negotiate what you might combine in.
But that's not the only way to become Reborn; it can happen to an existing character during a campaign. Maybe they died and the party got a budget resurrection, or maybe full resurrection isn't allowed in the setting etc. If you go by RAW you'd have a character come back not knowing how to do potentially some of their most core skills, so it makes more sense RAI to allow them to retain these. It's unlikely to upset balance in an ongoing campaign.
Not at all; I'm absolutely looking at it from the angle of a player who starts off as a variant human and then becomes a Reborn through play. Why would it be intended that such a character get to keep the benefits of one feat but not another? If that feat were, say, Great Weapon Master, that's probably just as much one of the character's "core skills," but they don't get to keep it, because it does disrupt balance to give one character twice as many racial features as another.
Not at all; I'm absolutely looking at it from the angle of a player who starts off as a variant human and then becomes a Reborn through play. Why would it be intended that such a character get to keep the benefits of one feat but not another? If that feat were, say, Great Weapon Master, that's probably just as much one of the character's "core skills," but they don't get to keep it, because it does disrupt balance to give one character twice as many racial features as another.
Only if you've got multiple players going Reborn mid-campaign, in which case we're getting ever further down the "if this… if that…" rabbit hole; the OP basically said "does X happen" and we've got responses of "usually no, but why not?".
It's also not exactly a hard ruling in RAW either; a variant human's feat is a racial feature, and if that feat grants skill proficiencies it's effectively the race that is granting them, because "pick a feat" is essentially the most free form racial option that it is possible to have.
Also worth noting that Reborn, as with all the lineages, are pretty much 100% an "ask your DM" race, because it's not something that you as the player can simply choose to become whenever you feel like. Likewise variant human is also an optional rule, as are feats. So RAW is pretty dang fluid already at this point, as literally every component involved in the question is DM optional. 😝
Ultimately you have to talk to your DM if you want to swap to a lineage, or they should be talking to you if they're planning to make it happen, either way they're involved in the decision. If multiple characters are going reborn, then by all means balance out the ones who get more out of compared to those who don't, as there are plenty of races that don't get any bonus proficiencies.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Not at all; I'm absolutely looking at it from the angle of a player who starts off as a variant human and then becomes a Reborn through play. Why would it be intended that such a character get to keep the benefits of one feat but not another? If that feat were, say, Great Weapon Master, that's probably just as much one of the character's "core skills," but they don't get to keep it, because it does disrupt balance to give one character twice as many racial features as another.
Only if you've got multiple players going Reborn mid-campaign, in which case we're getting ever further down the "if this… if that…" rabbit hole; the OP basically said "does X happen" and we've got responses of "usually no, but why not?".
It's also not exactly a hard ruling in RAW either; a variant human's feat is a racial feature, and if that feat grants skill proficiencies it's effectively the race that is granting them, because "pick a feat" is essentially the most free form racial option that it is possible to have.
Also worth noting that Reborn, as with all the lineages, are pretty much 100% an "ask your DM" race, because it's not something that you as the player can simply choose to become whenever you feel like. Likewise variant human is also an optional rule, as are feats. So RAW is pretty dang fluid already at this point, as literally every component involved in the question is DM optional. 😝
Ultimately you have to talk to your DM if you want to swap to a lineage, or they should be talking to you if they're planning to make it happen, either way they're involved in the decision. If multiple characters are going reborn, then by all means balance out the ones who get more out of compared to those who don't, as there are plenty of races that don't get any bonus proficiencies.
This is the Rules & Game Mechanics forum. The discussion I'm trying to have is not about homebrewing. The discussion I'm trying to have is about why it would be the intent of the rule to give certain characters an entirely free feat. This is obviously not a necessary discussion by any stretch of the imagination; I'm just curious, because to me it would seem to be very obviously not the intent.
I have a related question... If a character begins play as a v. human, and in the course of play is affected by reincarnate, what happens to their starting feat when their race becomes elf (gnome, halfling, etc.)?
I have a related question... If a character begins play as a v. human, and in the course of play is affected by reincarnate, what happens to their starting feat when their race becomes elf (gnome, halfling, etc.)?
Well, their racial traits change to the new race, so they lose the trait that gave them the feat, so they lose the feat.
This is the Rules & Game Mechanics forum. The discussion I'm trying to have is not about homebrewing. The discussion I'm trying to have is about why it would be the intent of the rule to give certain characters an entirely free feat. This is obviously not a necessary discussion by any stretch of the imagination; I'm just curious, because to me it would seem to be very obviously not the intent.
And as I've pointed out it's not homebrew, we're not talking about core rules here; feats, lineage and variant human are all DM optional features of the game. Also, again as already said, the skill proficiencies are being granted by the race so even a strict interpretation of RAW still works for this case, it just happens to raise the question of "why not other feats?" but the answer to that is "because the rule only says skill proficiencies"
No matter what, DM decisions are required for a player becoming reborn from a variant human, so sometimes the correct answer is "maybe, maybe not, ask your DM". This is not a game that always has a clear answer.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Well, their racial traits change to the new race, so they lose the trait that gave them the feat, so they lose the feat.
Skill proficiencies are also granted by a racial trait though; if the exception applies to one then it can equally apply to the other.
Since that was my answer for what happens if the character is reincarnated, and reincarnate doesn't make an exception for skills. So yes, the lack of exception for both apply equally. Reading is fundamental.
In regards to changing lineage though, no an exception for 1 does not apply equally to another. Feats are not proficiencies. Its like if you lose a class level, but argue you can still use the features of the level you lost.
In regards to changing lineage though, no an exception for 1 does not apply equally to another. Feats are not proficiencies. Its like if you lose a class level, but argue you can still use the features of the level you lost.
Proficiencies are granted by racial traits, but you lose racial traits when becoming Reborn, so the exception definitely applies indirectly; the only difference with a free feat is that it's one extra level of abstraction, but that's no different from a racial option that offers a choice of bonuses such as half-elf sub-races that let you pick proficiencies or a cantrip, the only difference is that "pick a feat" gives substantially more options.
The Reborn lineage makes precisely zero reference to the amount of abstraction beyond which something doesn't apply; if you rule that feats are somehow magically different then you're inventing a step to suit the conclusion, so that's not RAW. The feat is granted by the race, therefore any effects it applies are as well, and if those are skill proficiencies then they are absolutely covered by the exception for skill proficiencies, because it makes no reference to levels of abstraction or any such additional considerations.
Put another way, a RAW ruling should always be as simple as possible, referring only to what is written (no invented steps in between). So if the rule says "you keep skill proficiencies from your race" then the only question is "did I get a skill proficiency from my race?" and the answer to that for a variant human with Prodigal/Skilled/Skill Expert etc. is "yes", it doesn't matter what the exact mechanism was, because the rule doesn't care how the race granted those proficiencies, only that it did.
But again, the correct answer is ultimately "ask your DM" because literally every component involved is optional.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
In regards to changing lineage though, no an exception for 1 does not apply equally to another. Feats are not proficiencies. Its like if you lose a class level, but argue you can still use the features of the level you lost.
Proficiencies are granted by racial traits, but you lose racial traits when becoming Reborn, so the exception definitely applies indirectly; the only difference with a free feat is that it's one extra level of abstraction, but that's no different from a racial option that offers a choice of bonuses such as half-elf sub-races that let you pick proficiencies or a cantrip, the only difference is that "pick a feat" gives substantially more options.
The Reborn lineage makes precisely zero reference to the amount of abstraction beyond which something doesn't apply; if you rule that feats are somehow magically different then you're inventing a step to suit the conclusion, so that's not RAW. The feat is granted by the race, therefore any effects it applies are as well, and if those are skill proficiencies then they are absolutely covered by the exception for skill proficiencies, because it makes no reference to levels of abstraction or any such additional considerations.
Put another way, a RAW ruling should always be as simple as possible, referring only to what is written (no invented steps in between). So if the rule says "you keep skill proficiencies from your race" then the only question is "did I get a skill proficiency from my race?" and the answer to that for a variant human with Prodigal/Skilled/Skill Expert etc. is "yes", it doesn't matter what the exact mechanism was, because the rule doesn't care how the race granted those proficiencies, only that it did.
But again, the correct answer is ultimately "ask your DM" because literally every component involved is optional.
The rules never mention levels of abstraction, because they aren't abstract. If a rule says you can only use your action to make a single weapon attack, that doesn't mean you can cast booming blade. A trait that grants your choice of proficiencies directly granted proficiencies, a trait that granted a feat did not.
I'm glad you brought up the prodigy feat. Lineages' ancestral legacy doesn't let you keep tool proficiencies granted by race. Does that mean you lose only part of the feat, lose the whole feat, or keep the whole feat? What about taking magic initiate to get a spell that grants proficiencies, does that count? It's only one more "level of abstraction".
The correct answer in game is always to ask DM, but in the forums we discuss RAW.
The rules never mention levels of abstraction, because they aren't abstract. If a rule says you can only use your action to make a single weapon attack, that doesn't mean you can cast booming blade.
An attack doesn't let you use booming blade because booming blade is not an attack, it's casting a spell, which is an action in it's own right. There is plenty of legitimate confusion over the three different meanings of the word attack in D&D, but that's another topic in its own right and nothing to do with this one.
A trait that grants your choice of proficiencies directly granted proficiencies, a trait that granted a feat did not.
Citation please, because the rule says literally nothing to this effect; it only refers to skill proficiencies; the rule does not make any reference whatsoever to the mechanism by which the race grants the proficiencies, only whether you got some proficiencies from your race, which you did.
At the moment the burden of the proof is on your position that there's a non-existent extra condition in which a feat granted by a race somehow magically has nothing to do with the race that granted it. Because as far as the rule goes all it specifies is skill proficiencies, and skill proficiencies they be.
I'm glad you brought up the prodigy feat. Lineages' ancestral legacy doesn't let you keep tool proficiencies granted by race. Does that mean you lose only part of the feat, lose the whole feat, or keep the whole feat?
You would keep the skill proficiency because the rule says you do.
Again, getting a free feat as a variant human is no different from another race that has options; the only difference is that the variant human has more options because they can pick literally any feat that your DM allows.
What about taking magic initiate to get a spell that grants proficiencies, does that count? It's only one more "level of abstraction".
Spells do not grant skill proficiencies simply by choosing them; if you had cast borrowed knowledge before turning into a Reborn, and assuming the transformation took less time than the duration of the spell, then you would absolutely retain that proficiency, but it would vanish as soon as the spell ends because it's granted by an explicitly temporary effect.
The correct answer in game is always to ask DM, but in the forums we discuss RAW.
The RAW answer in this case is "ask your DM" because as I've said multiple times now literally every component of this rules question involves an optional rule (variant human, feats and lineages) so it is up to your DM to arbitrate on all of it. The transition from an ordinary race to a Reborn is not something that a player can simply choose to do, their DM is required to be involved in that process.
Every other answer is incorrect in the OP's case because we have no idea what their DM's position is on a) allowing the use of the Reborn race in the first place b) how to handle the transition and c) what to allow from their former race.
Sometimes the RAW answer is ask your DM; the two are not mutually exclusive.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Title.
I know you'd keep the proficiency but would you still double your prof bonus though?
I yes I've asked my DM, but I want to see if y'all have any insight or "rules as tweeted" stuff on the matter.
Er ek geng, þat er í þeim skóm er ek valda.
UwU
As a DM, I would rule yes.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Reborn don't get to keep the feat racial trait, so... I'd think not.
This. You don't even keep the proficiencies you get from the Skill Expert feat; they're from the feat, not the race.
Well... you gained the feat from your race and thus you are getting the prof from your race, no?
Er ek geng, þat er í þeim skóm er ek valda.
UwU
Technically they’re right, you wouldn’t get to retain the feat at all. 🤷♂️ I would let you keep it in the spirit of what I believe would be RAI, but RAW you wouldn’t get to keep the feat at all.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
No, for the same reason that the extra attack you make with the haste spell doesn't deal damage from a magical source. The rules don't chain causation like that. The proficiencies come from the feat, not the race. You don't get to keep the feat, so you don't get to keep the benefits of the feat.
I do not believe it is RAI that characters should get all the benefits of an entire feat completely for free. Why wouldn't every Reborn player say they used to be a variant human or custom lineage beforehand to get a bunch of extra skills at no cost?
Yea I have to agree with Saga and DJC, if you no longer are a V. Human then you don't get to keep the feat and if you no longer have the feat then you don't get to keep the proficiency or expertise the feat gave you.
I don't think IamSposta's arguing it should be a blanket ruling in every case without DM intervention, in fact they specifically said "as a DM".
You seem to be looking at it from the angle of a player newly creating a Reborn character, in which case sure, don't allow it because for a new character there was no previous race (except as backstory), just use the default path or negotiate what you might combine in.
But that's not the only way to become Reborn; it can happen to an existing character during a campaign. Maybe they died and the party got a budget resurrection, or maybe full resurrection isn't allowed in the setting etc. If you go by RAW you'd have a character come back not knowing how to do potentially some of their most core skills, so it makes more sense RAI to allow them to retain these. It's unlikely to upset balance in an ongoing campaign.
The OP hasn't specified which case we're covering here, so it's best to be broad.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Not at all; I'm absolutely looking at it from the angle of a player who starts off as a variant human and then becomes a Reborn through play. Why would it be intended that such a character get to keep the benefits of one feat but not another? If that feat were, say, Great Weapon Master, that's probably just as much one of the character's "core skills," but they don't get to keep it, because it does disrupt balance to give one character twice as many racial features as another.
Only if you've got multiple players going Reborn mid-campaign, in which case we're getting ever further down the "if this… if that…" rabbit hole; the OP basically said "does X happen" and we've got responses of "usually no, but why not?".
It's also not exactly a hard ruling in RAW either; a variant human's feat is a racial feature, and if that feat grants skill proficiencies it's effectively the race that is granting them, because "pick a feat" is essentially the most free form racial option that it is possible to have.
Also worth noting that Reborn, as with all the lineages, are pretty much 100% an "ask your DM" race, because it's not something that you as the player can simply choose to become whenever you feel like. Likewise variant human is also an optional rule, as are feats. So RAW is pretty dang fluid already at this point, as literally every component involved in the question is DM optional. 😝
Ultimately you have to talk to your DM if you want to swap to a lineage, or they should be talking to you if they're planning to make it happen, either way they're involved in the decision. If multiple characters are going reborn, then by all means balance out the ones who get more out of compared to those who don't, as there are plenty of races that don't get any bonus proficiencies.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
This is the Rules & Game Mechanics forum. The discussion I'm trying to have is not about homebrewing. The discussion I'm trying to have is about why it would be the intent of the rule to give certain characters an entirely free feat. This is obviously not a necessary discussion by any stretch of the imagination; I'm just curious, because to me it would seem to be very obviously not the intent.
I have a related question... If a character begins play as a v. human, and in the course of play is affected by reincarnate, what happens to their starting feat when their race becomes elf (gnome, halfling, etc.)?
Well, their racial traits change to the new race, so they lose the trait that gave them the feat, so they lose the feat.
And as I've pointed out it's not homebrew, we're not talking about core rules here; feats, lineage and variant human are all DM optional features of the game. Also, again as already said, the skill proficiencies are being granted by the race so even a strict interpretation of RAW still works for this case, it just happens to raise the question of "why not other feats?" but the answer to that is "because the rule only says skill proficiencies"
No matter what, DM decisions are required for a player becoming reborn from a variant human, so sometimes the correct answer is "maybe, maybe not, ask your DM". This is not a game that always has a clear answer.
Skill proficiencies are also granted by a racial trait though; if the exception applies to one then it can equally apply to the other.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Since that was my answer for what happens if the character is reincarnated, and reincarnate doesn't make an exception for skills. So yes, the lack of exception for both apply equally. Reading is fundamental.
In regards to changing lineage though, no an exception for 1 does not apply equally to another. Feats are not proficiencies. Its like if you lose a class level, but argue you can still use the features of the level you lost.
Proficiencies are granted by racial traits, but you lose racial traits when becoming Reborn, so the exception definitely applies indirectly; the only difference with a free feat is that it's one extra level of abstraction, but that's no different from a racial option that offers a choice of bonuses such as half-elf sub-races that let you pick proficiencies or a cantrip, the only difference is that "pick a feat" gives substantially more options.
The Reborn lineage makes precisely zero reference to the amount of abstraction beyond which something doesn't apply; if you rule that feats are somehow magically different then you're inventing a step to suit the conclusion, so that's not RAW. The feat is granted by the race, therefore any effects it applies are as well, and if those are skill proficiencies then they are absolutely covered by the exception for skill proficiencies, because it makes no reference to levels of abstraction or any such additional considerations.
Put another way, a RAW ruling should always be as simple as possible, referring only to what is written (no invented steps in between). So if the rule says "you keep skill proficiencies from your race" then the only question is "did I get a skill proficiency from my race?" and the answer to that for a variant human with Prodigal/Skilled/Skill Expert etc. is "yes", it doesn't matter what the exact mechanism was, because the rule doesn't care how the race granted those proficiencies, only that it did.
But again, the correct answer is ultimately "ask your DM" because literally every component involved is optional.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
The rules never mention levels of abstraction, because they aren't abstract. If a rule says you can only use your action to make a single weapon attack, that doesn't mean you can cast booming blade. A trait that grants your choice of proficiencies directly granted proficiencies, a trait that granted a feat did not.
I'm glad you brought up the prodigy feat. Lineages' ancestral legacy doesn't let you keep tool proficiencies granted by race. Does that mean you lose only part of the feat, lose the whole feat, or keep the whole feat? What about taking magic initiate to get a spell that grants proficiencies, does that count? It's only one more "level of abstraction".
The correct answer in game is always to ask DM, but in the forums we discuss RAW.
An attack doesn't let you use booming blade because booming blade is not an attack, it's casting a spell, which is an action in it's own right. There is plenty of legitimate confusion over the three different meanings of the word attack in D&D, but that's another topic in its own right and nothing to do with this one.
Citation please, because the rule says literally nothing to this effect; it only refers to skill proficiencies; the rule does not make any reference whatsoever to the mechanism by which the race grants the proficiencies, only whether you got some proficiencies from your race, which you did.
At the moment the burden of the proof is on your position that there's a non-existent extra condition in which a feat granted by a race somehow magically has nothing to do with the race that granted it. Because as far as the rule goes all it specifies is skill proficiencies, and skill proficiencies they be.
You would keep the skill proficiency because the rule says you do.
Again, getting a free feat as a variant human is no different from another race that has options; the only difference is that the variant human has more options because they can pick literally any feat that your DM allows.
Spells do not grant skill proficiencies simply by choosing them; if you had cast borrowed knowledge before turning into a Reborn, and assuming the transformation took less time than the duration of the spell, then you would absolutely retain that proficiency, but it would vanish as soon as the spell ends because it's granted by an explicitly temporary effect.
The RAW answer in this case is "ask your DM" because as I've said multiple times now literally every component of this rules question involves an optional rule (variant human, feats and lineages) so it is up to your DM to arbitrate on all of it. The transition from an ordinary race to a Reborn is not something that a player can simply choose to do, their DM is required to be involved in that process.
Every other answer is incorrect in the OP's case because we have no idea what their DM's position is on a) allowing the use of the Reborn race in the first place b) how to handle the transition and c) what to allow from their former race.
Sometimes the RAW answer is ask your DM; the two are not mutually exclusive.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
The ability to have a feat is a racial trait - which isn't included in the list of things you keep from the race, so you lose that feat.
It doesn't matter what the feat does, you lose whatever that feat was granting.