D&D (2024) First playtest thread! One D&D Character Origins.

[Ixal]

ASI tied to background is imo the worst scenario, if it weren't for custom backgrounds (so back to floating).
A background does not necessarily have any relation to a specific attribute.
A farmer can be strong because he works a lot. Or, as it was often the case, he was weak because of constant malnourishment.
And just look what kind of nobles there were out there in history. You have everything from frontline soldier to lazy hedonis to uncharismatic tyrant. What kind of ASI should the noble background give?

 

[Cadence]

Well, that’s… Kinda the thing, isn’t it? “Breeding” and “Bloodlines” are just other names for genetics. In fact, they’re more transparently eugenicist names for it. That’s exactly why WotC are (potentially) removing half-races alongside racial ASIs. Now, there’s a valid case to be made that half-races are important representation for mixed-race people. The problem with that is, having just half-elves and half-orcs privileges some… err… “breeding pairs” (shudder) over others. And it’s going to take up a loooooooot of page space, to say nothing of design space, to account for every possible combination. So, what’s a designer to do? Maybe a catch-all “mixed-race” race?

So, sorcerer needs a big edit too?
And the various plane-touched?

 

[Minigiant]

One of my favorite series (Glen Cook's Garrett stories) is full of lots of beings that are part one thing and part another, or have an ancestor back aways contributing some giant or gnome characteristics. Some rules for balancing choosing things from different races to make ones own (but not allowing for just picking all the really strong characteristics) feels like it would be neat.

One of my favorite fan theories of ASOIAF was that the Starks had not only a high concentrtion the blood of the First Men but some of the Children of the Forest. And that mixture made them naturally charismatic leaders and eventually allowed the Stark children to link and warg into dire wolf cubs.

 

[Cadence]

I’ll be returning feedback that says, “Please bold, highlight, and underline that the default background is custom, and then keep the stat boost in background.”

Why should I have to justify my ASI with a background? Why can't I have a super-strong scholar who got the strength from a rumored giant-ancestor and not from working in the library?

 

[Ixal]

Why should I have to justify my ASI with a background? Why can't I have a super-strong scholar who got the strength from a rumored giant-ancestor and not from working in the library?

Thats why imo a background should only provide you with stuff you learn while doing that background. Skills and proficiencies. Language would be a special case as it would depend on culture and where you lived and not necessarily your background but I do not thing WOtC will add a separate culture entry.

 

[HammerMan]

One of my favorite fan theories of ASOIAF was that the Starks had not only a high concentrtion the blood of the First Men but some of the Children of the Forest. And that mixture made them naturally charismatic leaders and eventually allowed the Stark children to link and warg into dire wolf cubs.

Oh the aSoIaF breeding cross breeding rabbit hole goes deep. (Then again every animal is the three eyed crow so some time foil is there too). This is also why I wish both the half races and custom linage gave more cut and paste help

 

[SakanaSensei]

Why should I have to justify my ASI with a background? Why can't I have a super-strong scholar who got the strength from a rumored giant-ancestor and not from working in the library?

Hmm… yknow what, I’ll concede on this one! Floating is better than just racial or just background for reasons like this.

 

[Charlaquin]

That would still leave us with races, some vastly different like dragonborn to halflings, which for game purposes are nearly identical, especially when they take the same background.

That not only stretches believability, several races have a lot of lore build on their racial ASI. Like elves being exceptional archers. That was backed up with their Dex bonus.

Exceptional skill at archery is not a genetic trait, so it is appropriate that this (along with the bow and longbow proficiencies) be moved to background instead of race.

Or the dwarven resistance to posion (including beer) with their con bonus.

Ah, yes. The race with the genetic resistance to getting drunk, and the genetic knowledge of how to use brewer’s supplies. And the conspicuous Scottish accents. Classy.

That is all gone now.
And for what? So that people can always play a combat optimized character? Should D&D, which draws in a lot of new players into RPGs, really teach them that first and foremost they should optimize their character for combat and the character itself comes second?

It’s not about optimization. It’s about not wanting eugenicist rhetoric to have a place in our hobby any more.

Sadly I think thats one of the reasons for 5Es success. Do not overwhelm new players with nerdy pretending to be an elf. But making a combat character and killing things? Thats what new players did in video games, so it is a lot less strange to them.

trust me, new D&D players these days have no problem with being nerdy and pretending to be an elf, and are less and less invested in combat than D&D players have ever been. They just don’t want to be able to pretend to be an elf who’s rubbish at archery, or a teetotaling dwarf, or a halfling power lifter, or a bookish orc. The old tropes are tired, they want to explore a wider range of possible fantasies.

 

[HammerMan]

Why should I have to justify my ASI with a background? Why can't I have a super-strong scholar who got the strength from a rumored giant-ancestor and not from working in the library?

I pick up books and put them down all day. And they are like weights. Done.

 

[Ixal]

WotC decided to be lazy and do a melting pot (everyone can breed with everyone) but left out stirring the mix.