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

[CreamCloud0]

Your genetic makeup is innate. Your upbringing is not. That's the difference.

Both are matters of chance - no one can choose their parents or the circumstances of their birth - but species is only decided once, at the very start. Outside of reincarnation or potent transmutation magic, that isn't something that changes.

By contrast, background is a years-long process that arguably never stops changing, is influenced by innumerable factors, and can be redirected through effort and opportunity, at least in theory.

An orc is always going to grow up to be an orc (again barring reincarnation/transmutation magic).
An urchin might stay an urchin, or they could grow up to be a scholar, or a soldier, or a merchant, or even a noble.

so seeing as background is such a longwinded extensive process including multiple factors and experiences it makes less sense that it would be locked into specific stat increases

 

[Micah Sweet]

It sounds like they hired sensitivity readers. I use them a lot in scientific publishing right now.

Does it make the work more or less comprehensible?

 

[Xamnam]

Well I suppose it is up to you. Lots of things bother lots of people though, and some are contradictory. You can't crusade for them all.

Well, sure, definitionally. If I were to have a reason personally I liked species ASI, then I might push back against it. But I try to listen to issues people are sincerely arguing they are having, and always try to frame their desires in the most positive light. It wasn't hard work to sway me to this position.

And also, this was never a thing I was going to crusade over. Just gently advocating for the validity of the points.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

the math of the game is not changing.

The same bonuses are avaialable.

This is about roleplay at a certain level
And immersion. I dont want to take this background to get the bonuses. Why?

Well I don’t want to pretend to be a former soldier…or something. Odd but it tells me most people are concerned about the numbers and the roleplay both

 

[Micah Sweet]

Well, sure, definitionally. If I were to have a reason personally I liked species ASI, then I might push back against it. But I try to listen to issues people are sincerely arguing they are having, and always try to frame their desires in the most positive light.

And also, this was never a thing I was going to crusade over. Just gently advocating for the validity of the points.

Fair enough. I do have reasons I personally preferred ASIs to be attached to species (if they exist at all), but Level Up made a convincing argument with their origin system (heritage, culture, background, destiny) to put them on their version of background, so I'm cool with it.

 

[Minigiant]

And attaching the same mechanic to backgrounds doesn't cause mechanics and power gaming headaches?

Lesser headaches because of acceptance that is iffy to talk about in the site in detail.

Out of the three: Species, Background, or Class, which would be most acceptable, it's class

But 5e already put too much into class to do that.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Lesser headaches because of acceptance that is iffy to talk about in the site in detail.

Out of the three: Species, Background, or Class, which would be most acceptable, it's class

But 5e already put too much into class to do that.

Said reasons (that we're not allowed to talk about no matter how relevant they are to the topic at hand) have nothing to do with mechanics and power gaming, from which the headaches you are concerned with spring according to your argument.

 

[Nikosandros]

Lesser headaches because of acceptance that is iffy to talk about in the site in detail.

Out of the three: Species, Background, or Class, which would be most acceptable, it's class

But 5e already put too much into class to do that.

I agree about class. For me ASI with backgrounds is worse than with species, but as you say, iffy to talk about it.

 

[Horwath]

the math of the game is not changing.

The same bonuses are avaialable.

This is about roleplay at a certain level
And immersion. I dont want to take this background to get the bonuses. Why?

Well I don’t want to pretend to be a former soldier…or something. Odd but it tells me most people are concerned about the numbers and the roleplay both

correct.

if I want to play an STR based ranger, IE, I cannot play a guide background or whatever as those ASI options are DEX, CON and WIS.
So as an STR based character, I start with 15 instead of 17 in STR, or I play as you say a former soldier that decided to be a guide after boot camp was over.

 

[Cadence]

correct.

if I want to play an STR based ranger, IE, I cannot play a guide background or whatever as those ASI options are DEX, CON and WIS.
So as an STR based character, I start with 15 instead of 17 in STR, or I play as you say a former soldier that decided to be a guide after boot camp was over.

The conflation of to-hit and lifting power in D&D is one reason I appreciate species and ASI being separate. If to-hit and lifting power were separate then I would be all over halflings vs goliaths as a reason for species affecting some ASI.