D&D (2024) Do you plan to adopt D&D5.5One2024Redux?

[James Gasik]

How the hell do I-as-DM know which backgrounds might or might not be useful over the next 10+ years of adventuring, most of which isn't even thought of yet never mind planned out.

That's a bad expectation right there.

Backgrounds IMO really shouldn't be anything other than player-side fluff to help you give your character more character. If your background happens to come up during play, then fine; but you've no reason to expect or insist that it ever will. And yes, some backgrounds are inherently more useful more often in the field than others, which is why I'd prefer they be random-rolled rather than chosen.

So you're telling me that you cannot possibly keep in mind that maybe, ever few sessions or show, you could put in an opportunity for a player's background to matter or shine? That using a player's background choices to inform your campaign plotting in a meaningful way is too much of an ask?

Well have no fear, WotC seems to have heard you loud and clear.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

So you're telling me that you cannot possibly keep in mind that maybe, ever few sessions or show, you could put in an opportunity for a player's background to matter or shine? That using a player's background choices to inform your campaign plotting in a meaningful way is too much of an ask?

Well have no fear, WotC seems to have heard you loud and clear.

Really depends on time for preperation you have at hand or if you play a premade adventure.

I currently play the Zeitgeist campaign and the themes (secondary background with a feat) come into play all the time.
Not because of any special ability, but because the adventure is written with those themes in mind and have a lot of side quests or little extra plot elements or some extra gear for all the different themes.
The actual 5e background benefit was never used explicitely.
So I think background benefits need to be baked in the adventure, not background itself.

 

[Oofta]

So you're telling me that you cannot possibly keep in mind that maybe, ever few sessions or show, you could put in an opportunity for a player's background to matter or shine? That using a player's background choices to inform your campaign plotting in a meaningful way is too much of an ask?

Well have no fear, WotC seems to have heard you loud and clear.

Depends on the campaign. In Curse of Strahd you are literally in a demiplane cut off from the world you originate from. Most features simply won't apply because you know no one in Barovia and no one knows you. There are no ports for your sailor to get free passage on because there are no oceans to sail, you can't contact anyone back home even with magic. You can make something up, perhaps that sailor has special knowledge of knots that is somehow useful or the guy with the criminal background knows what kind of seedy joint to go to for info but it's not going to match the background feature.

 

[James Gasik]

Depends on the campaign. In Curse of Strahd you are literally in a demiplane cut off from the world you originate from. Most features simply won't apply because you know no one in Barovia and no one knows you. There are no ports for your sailor to get free passage on because there are no oceans to sail, you can't contact anyone back home even with magic. You can make something up, perhaps that sailor has special knowledge of knots that is somehow useful or the guy with the criminal background knows what kind of seedy joint to go to for info but it's not going to match the background feature.

Which is another instance where you simply explain the ground rules to the players so there's no surprises. It's not that I can't conceive of a campaign where backgrounds aren't going to have a huge impact- Ravenloft has always been more about someone else's story that the players are interacting with than their story.

But when I hear people say "well, I mean, how can I be expected to ever make backgrounds important to a game" that I feel like the DM should have just said "custom backgrounds only" and be done with it.

I mean, for decades now, I've had DM's ask the players for backstories, I write them, and then they are simply left forgotten. Nobody wants nameless cardboard cutouts who only exist to murderhobo in their role-playing game, right? So is it an incredible ask for a player to want their story to matter on occasion?

2014 Backgrounds support players and DM's putting work into the game to make sure that who a character is matters more than "My character is named Taran and he's a 6th level Bard who has a +2 longsword!".

"Sure, but what are they like?"

"Well, he's a College of Swords Bard and his favorite spell is Silvery Barbs!"

"Sure but, what's his deal? What's important to him?"

"Uh...loot...babes...you know, the usual."

It feels like the only real problem is that Features are presented are in the PHB instead of being in the DMG as "suggestions for what characters of different backgrounds can do".

 

[Oofta]

Which is another instance where you simply explain the ground rules to the players so there's no surprises. It's not that I can't conceive of a campaign where backgrounds aren't going to have a huge impact- Ravenloft has always been more about someone else's story that the players are interacting with than their story.

But when I hear people say "well, I mean, how can I be expected to ever make backgrounds important to a game" that I feel like the DM should have just said "custom backgrounds only" and be done with it.

I mean, for decades now, I've had DM's ask the players for backstories, I write them, and then they are simply left forgotten. Nobody wants nameless cardboard cutouts who only exist to murderhobo in their role-playing game, right? So is it an incredible ask for a player to want their story to matter on occasion?

2014 Backgrounds support players and DM's putting work into the game to make sure that who a character is matters more than "My character is named Taran and he's a 6th level Bard who has a +2 longsword!".

"Sure, but what are they like?"

"Well, he's a College of Swords Bard and his favorite spell is Silvery Barbs!"

"Sure but, what's his deal? What's important to him?"

"Uh...loot...babes...you know, the usual."

It feels like the only real problem is that Features are presented are in the PHB instead of being in the DMG as "suggestions for what characters of different backgrounds can do".

It depends on your campaign. Mine sometimes takes people far from their home base, on dangerous journeys to other parts of the world or even different realms of existence. The old background features seem to assume you never stray far from home.

I tried to use backgrounds, but honestly? It simply has never worked well and for the most part the players don't really care except for that one guy who though he had a criminal contact in every city he ever visited no matter how far from home they were.

 

[tetrasodium]

I see session zero happening before character creation. Ie, the exact moment where you should be discussing how backgrounds will fit (or not) in a campaign. You keep saying a GM cannot resolve this, and of course they can, why wouldn't they be able to?

because of this very reason below

And who, exactly is being unjustly nagged? I think anyone having the problems you describe should find a better group of people to play fun games with. I'm sorry but I'm finding your arguments difficult to justify- D&D isn't intended to be a player vs. DM game- the PHB tells players background features do useful things. The DMG tells the DM to work with the players to make sure background features do useful things.

...

You are still demonstrating it because his is not an issue the GM can resolve during session zero where all the player needs to do is say whatever it takes to stop what they see as unjust nagging without getting trapped. Once the player has moved past the nagging without getting caught in what they are absolutely certain is unreasonable they are free to slowly ease back to what they feel is guaranteed as described in 1053 1057 & no doubt others you quoted while asserting the player's right to enjoy something else just as a player can do if ever challenged in the future.

Do you not see the difference between something that is objectively unjust and an individual with an unreasonable expectation seeing a challenge to that expectation as an unjust challenge?

If background features are not doing useful things, then it's not the fault of the PHB and the DMG. It's the fault of the DM who doesn't want them to do useful things.

This distraction is a different topic.

Now someone might say "aha, but what if the DM doesn't want a background feature to do something the way a player wants?". I guess the question is, why? Surely the DM knew what background the player wanted to take. Why was there no discussion about this? Why would someone just blindly let a player enter the game as a criminal and then balk when the player wants to call upon their criminal contacts in the game?

This too is a different topic.

Just don't let them be criminals! Tell everyone custom backgrounds only! It's not that hard.

This is quite random. You've done a great job demonstrating how the god awful backgrounds+BIFTs section goes to extremes to reinforce & shield unreasonable expectations over how far is too far when a player chooses to engage in worldbuilding under the guise of background & backstory development.

 

[tetrasodium]

Sorry Tetrasodium, but I am so confused. I literally replied they should read the Introduction of the PHB. It does not mean recite. It means read. If you are asking me to recall from memory without opening the book (which no session zero would ever do), then maybe the second page. The part where it explains to the players that the D&D verse is vast, but the DM is the final authority. It is also in the DMG's Introduction. It is alos in Tasha's Introduction. It is also in Xanathar's Introduction.

I don't understand why you just can't admit that it is a reading comprehension problem, or possibly a problem with not reading the rulebook as a whole. If you want the same advice that exists in all those introductions of ALL FOUR PLAYER BOOKS, then I will agree. Put the same thing in the backgrounds. Put it in. Use the same verbiage. If that makes you feel better, then I don't object to it.

But to deliberately say these backgrounds cause an issue because it doesn't tell the player the DM might object or modify is patently false. To say they are a problem in specific campaign settings because session zero doesn't work is patently false.

Now, if you were to come to me and argue that players in their own right just take on things without reading the rules, then I will be in full agreement. But that is a reading problem. The books are very clear. The problem is many players at the table never (and I mean never) read the rulebooks.

You are talking about something else and I've made repeated efforts to point that out just as I've described the issues caused & had it literally demonstrated in replies to those descriptions,

 

[Umbran]

Also I am pretty sure Tetrasodium from reading their various posts hates ...

Mod Note:
I am pretty sure this thread is not about Tetrasodium. Can you change course and stop making it about them, personally, please? Thanks.

 

[Maxperson]

Looking at what the PHB says about Backgrounds, it's easy to see that these features were intended to be used most of the time players wished to employ them. First, the PHB says that features provide concrete (ie, not abstract) benefits:
View attachment 350378
Next, the language for features include things like "you may expect to" or "will support you" or "even across great distances". What's not said is "ask your DM", "at the DM's discretion", or "the DM may".
View attachment 350379
View attachment 350380
View attachment 350381
Certainly, everything in the game is subject to the DM's discretion! But if something was intended to be a negotiation or requiring specific permission or rulings every time it was used, the books usually state as much, for example:
View attachment 350382
Background features are presented in the same way a character's racial and class features are- abilities that you have, can rely on working when you need to as written, and not requiring much in the way DM oversight or discretion to be used.

Now as has been noted, if a Background feature isn't going to be useful, or requires negotiation with the DM to use, then that should be done in a Session Zero. Or, as the DMG says on page 26:
View attachment 350383
View attachment 350384
Before the game even begins, the DM should know what the backgrounds of the characters are, and how to incorporate them into the game. The players should know what they can expect out of their backgrounds and features.

The reasons Backgrounds are changing is simply because this vital step was not being taken in enough campaigns that WotC was obviously not receiving positive feedback about features. What was meant to be a "cool thing" for players (and certainly not vestigial, as the text bears out) was simply not being that, for various reasons. So, the playtest seeks to fix this by replacing features with Feats- the idea being, the benefit of Feats will come up much more often, and hopefully without the DM having to make too many allowances for them in their worldbuilding.

What this does not mean is that backgrounds are becoming less of a tool for DM's- you can still do everything 2014 wants you to do with backgrounds if you want to- but enough people weren't doing this, again, for various reasons, that it's gone from a core aspect of the game to something optional.

And then there's this on page 6.

"Your DM might set the campaign on one of these worlds or on one that he or she created. Because there is so much diversity among the worlds of D&D, you should check with your DM about any house rules that will affect your play of the game. Ultimately, the Dungeon Master is the authority on the campaign and its setting, even if the setting is a published world."

 

[Micah Sweet]

Depends on the campaign. In Curse of Strahd you are literally in a demiplane cut off from the world you originate from. Most features simply won't apply because you know no one in Barovia and no one knows you. There are no ports for your sailor to get free passage on because there are no oceans to sail, you can't contact anyone back home even with magic. You can make something up, perhaps that sailor has special knowledge of knots that is somehow useful or the guy with the criminal background knows what kind of seedy joint to go to for info but it's not going to match the background feature.

I feel that background features should generally not considered an important mechanical factor, but instead a fun surprise in those situations where they happen to be relevant over the course of play.