D&D (2024) 2024 Player's Handbook Reveal: Feats/Backgrounds/Species

[Belen]

i like that the set choices exist as the example of the 'standard' member of a species, but even if your table doesn't use them you can't deny floating has pretty much become a staple rule in most of the play culture.

Maybe. I just have not seen that one used. I allow it in my games but just have not seen players use it.

 

[Sir Brennen]

You laughed at my post about an Int boost, but I know people who play this way. Who want an interesting character that's more than their DPR.

A +1 to an odd numbered Wis can also boost ubiquitous Perception rolls, among other skills, and add a +1 to Saves. That's not a bad thing.

And even a Wis or Int caster might want to bump up their Cha based skills because it fits their character concept and reflects how they want to play the PC in the game.

 

[mellored]

No-one gets hit that rarely and mind-controlled that often.

My abjuration wizard would disagree. I could negate the majority of damage, without AC or HP.

But a hold person would of ended me.

90%+ of character put +2 in their primary stat and then +1 in CON or DEX. I suspect that very much includes you.

70% of my characters do that.

And I expect there is litterally 1 background that has Int/Wis/Cha, out of 16.

So if just 7+% of people take +2 Cha, +1 Wis, or +2 Int +1 Wis, then it's worth the space.

Which, you admit is probably the case.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

So if just 7+% of people take +2 Cha, +1 Wis, then it's worth the space.

No, it isn't. Because background isn't just stats - it's also Skills and a Feat, and we can be very sure that there will be a small number of backgrounds that are optimal for a very large number of classes - and I'd bet money, like real money, that those backgrounds are not the most thematically common backgrounds in D&D at all.

They should have kept stats out of this entirely. Stats should have been a player decision, as they have been for 5+ years for easily most D&D groups. You cannot put the cat back into the bag. And WotC are, inexplicably and rather stupidly, trying to do exactly that.

This will create a situation where people just whinge continuously from now until whenever the next version of D&D comes out. Because you can say "Oh well as a DM I'd allow people to create backgrounds freely!", but like, a lot of people will be in groups where the DM doesn't do that, either because they think the restrictions are smart, or because they're too scared to "overrule" the books or the like. It'll be particularly annoying on any digital platform, because unless they just put an override in, they'll be restricting people's stats.

The end result will be some rules that almost no-one likes, and almost no-ones RAW (or even close to it), but that everyone complains about. It's absolutely outright bad design. The first piece of genuinely bad design I've seen "go live" with 2024. Maybe not the last.

And I expect there is litterally 1 background that has Int/Wis/Cha, our of 16.

Sure but anything that misses CON is almost as bad, and a lot of ones which miss DEX will be pretty bad.

EDIT - To be clear, we're going from a situation, where, for the vast majority of groups, the player could choose:

1) What stats they had bonuses to.

2) What skills they had

3) What tool proficiencies they had

To one where they cannot choose ANY of those things. And also cannot choose a Feat! And WotC thinks this is going to go well why?

 

[Belen]

No, it isn't. Because background isn't just stats - it's also Skills and a Feat, and we can be very sure that there will be a small number of backgrounds that are optimal for a very large number of classes - and I'd bet money, like real money, that those backgrounds are not the most thematically common backgrounds in D&D at all.

They should have kept stats out of this entirely. Stats should have been a player decision, as they have been for 5+ years for easily most D&D groups. You cannot put the cat back into the bag. And WotC are, inexplicably and rather stupidly, trying to do exactly that.

This will create a situation where people just whinge continuously from now until whenever the next version of D&D comes out. Because you can say "Oh well as a DM I'd allow people to create backgrounds freely!", but like, a lot of people will be in groups where the DM doesn't do that, either because they think the restrictions are smart, or because they're too scared to "overrule" the books or the like. It'll be particularly annoying on any digital platform, because unless they just put an override in, they'll be restricting people's stats.

The end result will be some rules that almost no-one likes, and almost no-ones RAW (or even close to it), but that everyone complains about. It's absolutely outright bad design. The first piece of genuinely bad design I've seen "go live" with 2024. Maybe not the last.

This.

It kills player agency. I am sure that overrides will exist because they will continue to allow 2014 rules; however it is bad design.

It also needlessly restricts RP choice or will just break immersion by using background to optimize stats.

 

[mellored]

Sure but anything that misses CON is almost as bad, and a lot of ones which miss DEX will be pretty bad.

I often take Resilience (Con) at level 4, and start with an odd Con score.
And if I am human and pick up medium armor as by bonus feat, that means Dex at 14 is fine.

So toss the extra +1 into Wis. Maybe pick up Alert at 8.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I often take Resilience (Con) at level 4, and start with an odd Con score.
And if I am human and pick up medium armor as by bonus feat, that means Dex at 14 is fine.

So toss the extra +1 into Wis. Maybe pick up Alert at 8.

Again, you're resorting to weird corner-case situations and demanding players do bizarre-as-hell things, and all this does is prove my point.

People are going to be extremely mad about this as soon as they actually start playing it. And the complaints and arguments won't stop until the next edition comes out.

 

[Parmandur]

Forcing people to spend money to legalize ability combos that have been legal for 5+ years is pretty gross behaviour, even by WotC standards. Pretty damn gross.

Customizing is also apparently in the DMG. Not rocket science.

 

[Parmandur]

Given that the DMG has rules for custom backgrounds, a willing DM can work with a player to "customize" with the bare minimum of effort by simply swapping a attribute, skill or feat from one of the prefabs, without having to create a whole new background. In my game, I'd just ask the player to justify it.

Player: "I'd really like to take the Acolyte background for my cleric, with a +2 to Wisdom, but can I put the +1 into Con?"
DM: "Why would your character have received that benefit?"
Player: "They studied meditation during their training, able to keep their body fit even when going without food or water for extended periods."
DM: "Sold!"

I have zero doubt that this is what is envisioned by design.

 

[Nikosandros]

There are 19 combinations of ability score boost, and only 16 backgrounds.

Meaning a few combinations won't exist (i.e. Str/Int/Cha might be missing).

Aren't there 20 combinations? It's the binomial coefficient of 6 and 3.