D&D 5E Are you excited for the Backgrounds?

[Ruin Explorer]

I'd buy me the Big Book o' Backgrounds if it were something along the lines of a 96 page softcover packed with bizarre ideas that really expanded the typical horizons of the game. I find the game concept of the backgrounds to be helpful in moving character creation along and spurring character concept ideas. It seems like a component that can be easily ignored without negative effect if so desired.

I'd buy that book too, and indeed they can be ignored. What I'm worried about is that every player or setting book is going to have pages and pages and pages of backgrounds, where they could otherwise have stuff more likely to see use more than once ever.

 

[jgsugden]

My big problem with tying story to mechanics (as we do by saying you get certain skills for having a certain background) is that people will look to the mechanics before the story. If Acolyte gives great skills to complement a Barbarian, then you'll see a plethora of former acolytes turned barbarian, even though that should be a rarity. In 4E, themes created similar problems.

Of course, if you have enough backgrounds, then there are multiple options to get a great combinatation of mechanics for your PC, and this problem is somewhat diminished... but in the early days, I worry that it'll be a bit annoying.

I think my preference would have been to split backgrounds into two parts: 1.) Themes that grant mechanics (skills, training with tools, etc...), and 2.) Role playing backgrounds that give the backstory, role playing benefits (like the hobo's secret, the soldier's rank, etc...), and a few more story hooks. That would result in more sensical story points without people forcing in the backgroup thatgives them the best mechanical advantage.

 

[Xodis]

I'd buy that book too, and indeed they can be ignored. What I'm worried about is that every player or setting book is going to have pages and pages and pages of backgrounds, where they could otherwise have stuff more likely to see use more than once ever.

See I'm the opposite, I think pages of backgrounds that are setting specific will be a neat and useful thing. Example:
Forgotten Realms:
Harper Orphan - Raised by Harpers, your life .....
Thayan - Living in the Lands of Thay....

Helps tie players into the setting and while a player may like the Soldier or Noble background, maybe "Purple Dragon Knight" background is more fitting. Even if it is only a slight variation of the 2 that we could always house-rule.

I do agree though that they could have left out the Alignment recommendation and allowed players to justify their Ideal themselves without bias.

Might - In life as in war, the stronger force wins. (Evil) I think we can all justify this as a drive for a good person, hell its why Heroes try so hard and never give up.

 

[DEFCON 1]

The one thing I know I'm going to do with Backgrounds is make them an additional point for Inspiration generation.

The Background names plus the BIFT system (Bonds, Ideals, Flaws, Traits) when combined together are almost a recreation of the Aspect system in Fate. Your Background is your High Concept, your Flaw is your Trouble, and the Bonds, Ideals, and Traits are other Aspects of your character. And every time they apply, you acquire an Inspiration (Fate) point, which you can use to re-roll a check. The two systems are very similar.

So that's how I'm going to handle it when getting my players to create their PCs. Their Background will grant them the two skills, tool or language proficiencies, and their feature as normal... but I'm also going to let them use it / rename it as an aspect of their character a la a 'High Concept' to be a part of their personality characteristics. So if someone took the Soldier background for example, they might make:

Background: Quartermaster of the Flying Tiger Mercenary Company
Flaw: Stingy With The Supplies
Trait: Fast With A Smile, Quick With A Joke
Ideal: The Chain of Command Is Paramount
Bond: Always Have Your Ally's Back

Then as these come up during play they'll acquire Inspiration points that they can use to roll with Advantage on a check. As a big fan of the Fate Core system... I'm looking forward to incorporating it into D&D.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

See I'm the opposite, I think pages of backgrounds that are setting specific will be a neat and useful thing. Example:
Forgotten Realms:
Harper Orphan - Raised by Harpers, your life .....
Thayan - Living in the Lands of Thay....

Helps tie players into the setting and while a player may like the Soldier or Noble background, maybe "Purple Dragon Knight" background is more fitting. Even if it is only a slight variation of the 2 that we could always house-rule.

I do agree though that they could have left out the Alignment recommendation and allowed players to justify their Ideal themselves without bias.

Might - In life as in war, the stronger force wins. (Evil) I think we can all justify this as a drive for a good person, hell its why Heroes try so hard and never give up.

I think Harper Orphan illustrates precisely the kind of hyper-specific and faintly laughable/eye-roll-inducing background that will be used as filler in place of y'know, actual setting or rules info, and will actually see play once, at most, at any given table. Instead of more/better detail on the FR and it's regions, we'll get three dozen hyper-specific FR backgrounds (so specific as to not really enhance your knowledge of the setting in most cases), six of which will be wildly overpowered (including any with the name "Harper" or "Silverymoon" or "Shadowdale", most likely!), and twelve of which will be basically unusable for various reasons.

Am I cynical on this? ABSOLUTELY!

 

[Xodis]

I think Harper Orphan illustrates precisely the kind of hyper-specific and faintly laughable/eye-roll-inducing background that will be used as filler in place of y'know, actual setting or rules info, and will actually see play once, at most, at any given table. Instead of more/better detail on the FR and it's regions, we'll get three dozen hyper-specific FR backgrounds (so specific as to not really enhance your knowledge of the setting in most cases), six of which will be wildly overpowered (including any with the name "Harper" or "Silverymoon" or "Shadowdale", most likely!), and twelve of which will be basically unusable for various reasons.

Am I cynical on this? ABSOLUTELY!

Well at least you admit it lol. Between the last 2 versions of the FR book (not including the smaller splats) they are averaging 300 pages, we can afford 10 pages for some setting specific backgrounds, probably end up with some setting specific archetypes thrown into the mix, and of course new feats, spells, and gear. With the new rewrite though they have too much "new" history to cover to really not jam pack all the information in there. I am honestly expecting more of a Tome than a book and it being something special.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Backgrounds are a good idea. They were a good idea in 4e, and in other games that preceded 5e, as well.

I'm not sure 5e has really advanced them enough, though, and also not so sure how far they're going to go in mitigating some of the balance issues we're already seeing in classes. Any class can take any background, so they mostly seem like a class-independent way of delivering some mostly-non-combat options. Which'd be cool if they were the primary way. If, for instance, utility spells & rituals were found in a 'Ritual Caster' background instead of just sitting in spell lists so a caster couldn't just avail himself of both all that non-combat versatility & effectiveness /and/ everything his choice of background gives him.

 

[Garrand]

I have to say I was a bit down on the concept of backgrounds when I first heard of them. I really dislike being railroaded into something; I much prefer to build my character as I see fit. However, we finally got around to trying 5e last night, and rolled up some characters instead of having a regular gaming session, as well as run a single encounter to see how things work. And I have to say my character concept really evolved once we started adding the (few) backgrounds there were in the free PDF. I started out with the generic, haughty High Elf wizard (one of my favorite archetypes to play, and one of my go-to character types, along with dwarf fighters or clerics). Adding the criminal background put a unique spin on the concept, and the random tables resulted in a brash "never tell me the odds" freedom fighter that runs away. I certainly could come up with this on my own (I've been RPing since 1983 or thereabouts), but in situations where I don't have a clear character concept, rolling on some random tables and then rationalizing is almost a game in and of itself. In other instances I could simply pick out the appropriate stuff, or ignore it completely and do it on my own...

Damon.

 

[TwoSix]

The one thing I know I'm going to do with Backgrounds is make them an additional point for Inspiration generation.

The Background names plus the BIFT system (Bonds, Ideals, Flaws, Traits) when combined together are almost a recreation of the Aspect system in Fate. Your Background is your High Concept, your Flaw is your Trouble, and the Bonds, Ideals, and Traits are other Aspects of your character. And every time they apply, you acquire an Inspiration (Fate) point, which you can use to re-roll a check. The two systems are very similar.

So that's how I'm going to handle it when getting my players to create their PCs. Their Background will grant them the two skills, tool or language proficiencies, and their feature as normal... but I'm also going to let them use it / rename it as an aspect of their character a la a 'High Concept' to be a part of their personality characteristics. So if someone took the Soldier background for example, they might make:

Background: Quartermaster of the Flying Tiger Mercenary Company
Flaw: Stingy With The Supplies
Trait: Fast With A Smile, Quick With A Joke
Ideal: The Chain of Command Is Paramount
Bond: Always Have Your Ally's Back

Then as these come up during play they'll acquire Inspiration points that they can use to roll with Advantage on a check. As a big fan of the Fate Core system... I'm looking forward to incorporating it into D&D.

I have to say, I really like this.

 

[Mistwell]

Am I cynical on this? ABSOLUTELY!

Why did you put, "on this" in there? RE, you're an outlier on most polls, and one of the minority negative positions on most threads It's OK, we love you anyway, but you're a cynic in general when it comes to 5e, not just on this topic (at least relative to the EW population of posters).