"Your Class is Not Your Character": Is this a real problem?

[Azzy]

Since we have offical insect druids, I dont see sewer druids be that far off. And your plumber guild could actually all be druids.

Wait, so now you're telling me that Mario is a druid?

 

[TwoSix]

Wait, so now you're telling me that Mario is a druid?

That would explain the raccoon tails and being able to cast fire seeds by eating flowers.

 

[jayoungr]

This is something that gets said over and over again. The implication here is that it is more imaginative to play a weird character or one with a gimmick or what have you than one of a strong classic archetype.

Make a memorable Wood Elf Ranger. That takes imagination and skill.

I agree that the classics are often too readily dismissed, and I like to make classic-type characters myself. I'm currently playing a halfling rogue who started out as the bog-standard level 1 pregen from the WotC site, and I'm proud of how I've made her into an individual.

But, that said, I've also played alongside some "gimmick" characters that turned out really well. For example, in another campaign I play in, one of the PCs (not mine) is a celestial warlock with the criminal background. Here's the character's background from our Obsidian Portal site:

Born to a supply officer in Northhill, with a father who was clearly a Drow, but was otherwise a mystery, Mayflower managed to ruin her mother’s career before she was even born. Her mother became a merchant; May became ambitious, energetic and amoral. She started her career in theft at a young age, in the late days of the war; while her training was informal, she managed well enough to eventually, after the war ended, need to leave town in a terrible hurry, and found herself trapped in a battlefield full of undead. Desperately trying to hide in a broken old wagon, Mayflower prayed to anything that could help her for salvation… and was answered!

Zaphriel manifested as a glowing unicorn with vast shining wings, speaking in Mayflower’s mind in a voice like rich honey. May was too desperate to turn down the bargain it offered— patronage for service was better than being eaten by the walking dead!— and accepted, receiving the powers she needed to heal her own wounds and blast her way out of the battlefield!

And that’s when she realized that she was stuck. Zaphriel’s influence wasn’t going away. No, through the “gift” of May’s new “ally” Silvermoon, she was frequently informed of all the things she wasn’t supposed to do any more, and how she was obligated to use her powers for good. Since then, Mayflower has lived around the borders of the shadowlands, always traveling, drawn to endlessly right wrongs and help the helpless. She still manages to haggle with Zaphriel to win herself come concessions, but for all that, there she is. Mayflower Shadeborn, Champion of Light, whether she wants be that or not.

 

[abirdcall]

Indeed. But the crux of the matter is that they did not stop having the Noble background after taking Barbarian levels.

Right and the Noble background is a background.

Has anyone in this thread even suggested a character that would not be going on adventures?

I'm not sure where that suggestion came from. - Does someone have me on ignore perhaps?

Yes. The example which has been repeated is a character who is a Noble only and the character's class, Barbarian, has no effect on who the character is. It's just there because they needed a class.

Nobles don't adventure. Guild Artisans don't adventure. Hermits aren't adventurers. They need something after.

A character still has those skills they gained during their background. A noble still has a title and a guild artisan might still have their guild membership. But that isn't what they DO anymore.

PHB pg 125:

Backgrounds:

The most important question to ask about your background is what changed? Why did you stop doing whatever your background describes and start adventuring?

 

[FrozenNorth]

Why? Because a lot of people view classes as, and want to maintain classes that are are more than just a collection of mechanics. As does the game itself. If WotC and TSR before that wanted classes to be the mechanics only, the fluff wouldn't exist to define those mechanics.

As I alluded to in my previous post, fluff is useful to beginning players who might be overwhelmed with choice otherwise. It serves a function and I wouldn’t want it eliminated.

However, if you are claiming that WOTC’s intention in 5e was that the fluff serve as anything other than a guideline, than you are going to have to provide some evidence in support of that claim.

 

[Panda-s1]

He also wouldn't be popular with adventuring groups. Pee yew!

I'm sure personal hygiene is the least of an adventuring party's worries.

Yes. The example which has been repeated is a character who is a Noble only and the character's class, Barbarian, has no effect on who the character is. It's just there because they needed a class.

Nobles don't adventure. Guild Artisans don't adventure. Hermits aren't adventurers. They need something after.

A character still has those skills they gained during their background. A noble still has a title and a guild artisan might still have their guild membership. But that isn't what they DO anymore.

yeah, I don't think you just straight up stop being your background because you became an adventurer. my last D&D character was a noble fighter. she was sent out by her mother to adventure as a means of training, as was the tradition of her lineage. she was still expected to come back and do noble business once she was done adventuring. part of this was being hired to protect a middle aged guild artisan who was also a fledgling wizard. his place in the guild is what actually moved us forward; finding a business contact and later being tasked with locating a lost guild member led us all over the place. he still did guild business vis-a-vis actual goldsmithing throughout the adventure.

PHB pg 125:

Backgrounds:

The most important question to ask about your background is what changed? Why did you stop doing whatever your background describes and start adventuring?

you do realize the answers to these questions can be "nothing" and "I didn't", right?

 

[abirdcall]

I'm sure personal hygiene is the least of an adventuring party's worries.

yeah, I don't think you just straight up stop being your background because you became an adventurer. my last D&D character was a noble fighter. she was sent out by her mother to adventure as a means of training, as was the tradition of her lineage. she was still expected to come back and do noble business once she was done adventuring. part of this was being hired to protect a middle aged guild artisan who was also a fledgling wizard. his place in the guild is what actually moved us forward; finding a business contact and later being tasked with locating a lost guild member led us all over the place. he still did guild business vis-a-vis actual goldsmithing throughout the adventure.

You stop doing your background. You don't spend your days crafting. You don't spend your days alone in a hut. You don't spend your days managing your estate.

You are primarily an adventurer now of a class and that class has meaning and identity.

you do realize the answers to these questions can be "nothing" and "I didn't", right?

Depends on whether you want to follow the rules as written.

 

[Panda-s1]

You stop doing your background. You don't spend your days crafting. You don't spend your days alone in a hut. You don't spend your days managing your estate.

You are primarily an adventurer now of a class and that class has meaning and identity.

does downtime mean nothing to you? I'm 3000% certain 5e put a renewed emphasis on doing stuff when you're not out adventuring.

Depends on whether you want to follow the rules as written.

I don't think I follow, how is giving an answer to these questions not RAW?

 

[abirdcall]

does downtime mean nothing to you? I'm 3000% certain 5e put a renewed emphasis on doing stuff when you're not out adventuring.

I said primarily.

Downtime is meant to be handled away from the table and meant to be a very small part of the game.

The majority of your character's identity is adventuring. That is what the game is designed for.

I don't think I follow, how is giving an answer to these questions not RAW?

Those aren't valid answers.

 

[Panda-s1]

I said primarily.

Downtime is meant to be handled away from the table and meant to be a very small part of the game.

The majority of your character's identity is adventuring. That is what the game is designed for.

uh, I'm pretty sure what you do between adventures still happens in the game world and needs to be arbitrated by the DM, especially if said activity advances the campaign story in any way.

Those aren't valid answers.

okay Mike Mearls, even though the rules don't actually say that, I guess if you say it's not valid I have to take your word