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

Lanefan · May 10, 2024

Faolyn said:
And yet it's not written that way, in large part because it would make half the background useless 95% of the time. Why would they even include that feature if it's going to be so completely useless?

Because, I suspect, the intent is that your background is only really relevant near the start of your adventuring career, when you're still adventuring relatively close-ish to home. In other words, it's primarily a low-level feature.

As your adventuring career goes on, you become - both literally and metaphorically, and in both time and space - further and further distanced from your home and pre-adventuring background, and that background fades into obscurity to be replaced with the new "background" you've acquired; that new background being what you've done and who you've met during your adventures.

FitzTheRuke · May 10, 2024

Konrad13 said:
I just can't with 5e anymore, revision or no, so for the first time ever I will not be picking up the "new edition/revision". Once the older editions are in the CC I plan on doing what I can to complete my collections of those but otherwise I am passing on new D&D material.

Out of curiosity, what made you come to this place? (I think it was the OGL debacle, but I don't want to presume).

As a follow-up: If you, like many others, have "lost faith in WotC", I would like to ask:

Why did you have that sort of faith in them before?

Note: I honestly am interested in your perspective - I do not plan to argue with you.

James Gasik · May 10, 2024

It's hard to divine the intent of Backgrounds. If they were meant to be temporary, and useless after Tier 1, it would have been nice if the book said as much, instead of the DMG asking the DM to work with the players to make them important to the game.

Lanefan · May 10, 2024

James Gasik said:
First, having proven they could defeat the bosses, there's no reason to even risk letting the players die to the minions, IMO.

Couldn't disagree more. Risk is risk, regardless of the situation.

James Gasik said:
Second, the miners are the ones they are there to free, it's the guards that they would fight- ogres and drow. Not the kind of people I would really want the PC's to hire, even if they could, lol.

Ah - didn't catch that bit. I was thinking more that everyone there was a potential enemy; e.g. Ogre bosses running mines full of Orc miners.

James Gasik · May 10, 2024

Lanefan said:
Couldn't disagree more. Risk is risk, regardless of the situation.

Ah - didn't catch that bit. I was thinking more that everyone there was a potential enemy; e.g. Ogre bosses running mines full of Orc miners.

Well let me put it to you this way. I'm pretty sure after the big battle, I will lack the physical or mental endurance to run a few minor encounters. Better to have a big climax to the adventure and get to the denouement at that point!

Swarmkeeper · May 10, 2024

Lanefan said:
In the context of pre-adventuring backgrounds, I can't see any other way to read "local" than "local to where you spent your pre-adventuring life".

There certainly is that "pre-adventuring" context, which I've argued is important, too. But there's also the context of the words within each background...

FitzTheRuke · May 10, 2024

James Gasik said:
It's hard to divine the intent of Backgrounds. If they were meant to be temporary, and useless after Tier 1, it would have been nice if the book said as much, instead of the DMG asking the DM to work with the players to make them important to the game.

I think they're meant to be as "useful as you(r table) can find use in them". As vague as that is, I think it was intentional that different tables would use them to different extents. It seems that they have now learned that it was a step of vagueness too far, and that most tables just don't bother using them in order to avoid the sorts of conflicts we see here. So they've been scrapped. It's unfortunate for the small group of tables that liked them, but it is what it is.

James Gasik · May 10, 2024

FitzTheRuke said:
I think they're meant to be as "useful as you(r table) can find use in them". As vague as that is, I think it was intentional that different tables would use them to different extents. It seems that they have now learned that it was a step of vagueness too far, and that most tables just don't bother using them in order to avoid the sorts of conflicts we see here. So they've been scrapped. It's unfortunate for the small group of tables that liked them, but it is what it is.

I mean, the redesign certainly proves that most people found them lacking and even the developers don't want to champion their original form.

It's so odd, the PHB claims backgrounds have "concrete features", which doesn't sound very "ribbon-like" to me, but I suppose we'll never know what they expected. Were they going to pitch 5e as a game where players have more narrative agency, and give them metagame currency to shape the course of the game, then realized a large number of players would balk at that, but didn't remove all references to it?

I wonder what that alternate universe would have looked like.

Micah Sweet · May 10, 2024

mamba said:
then we are back to why include 'local' at all...

it is written that way, you just interpret it differently

They write it that way because the background can initially help you a little, but in the end you making a name for yourself will be more important than whatever the background offers.

If they meant 'everywhere', then why limit e.g. the Smuggler but not the Criminal when both are pretty similar... no, local is your hometown not 'anywhere you find yourself'

sure, and notice how there are more benefits in the hometown, just not none elsewhere? Why reduce them at all if the Criminal supposedly has no reduction, and again, why even mention 'local' in the first place then

If anything, I'd make it explicit for Folk Hero and possibly others too...

One thing we can say for certain is that backgrounds were written inconsistently.

Micah Sweet · May 10, 2024

James Gasik said:
First, having proven they could defeat the bosses, there's no reason to even risk letting the players die to the minions, IMO.

Second, the miners are the ones they are there to free, it's the guards that they would fight- ogres and drow. Not the kind of people I would really want the PC's to hire, even if they could, lol.

Both of those reasons IMO harm verisimilitude and/or player agency, and I would therefore avoid making those choices for the Players.

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

Plan to adopt the new core rules?

Yep

Nope

Lanefan

Victoria Rules

FitzTheRuke

Legend

James Gasik

We don't talk about Pun-Pun

Lanefan

Victoria Rules

James Gasik

We don't talk about Pun-Pun

Swarmkeeper

Hero

FitzTheRuke

Legend

James Gasik

We don't talk about Pun-Pun

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast

Similar Threads