D&D (2024) D&D species article

[Parmandur]

Yeah but there are 16 Backgrounds and 17 combinations of stats. Therefore one combo (hopefully INT WIS CHA or at least something containing INT, the worst stat) has to be excluded. So it's not going to be exactly 50%, is it? Have I gone crazy? Lost my damn mind?

Acolyte is the three mental stats.

The math to figure out how many combos there is beyond my Lit major brain without some serious calculators and probavly brute force counting. However, the full array of combos is less important than there being an even number of Backgroinds: that means 8 can allow a +2 in every given Ability.

What the article says is:

"The way ability score adjustments work for 2024 backgrounds is that each background has three ability scores tied to it. You can choose to add +2 to one of those ability scores and +1 to another, or add +1 to all three. For example, the Farmer background gives you Strength, Constitution, and Wisdom to choose from. The Wayfarer background gives you Dexterity, Wisdom, and Charisma"

 

[Parmandur]

I wager that within a relatively short amount of time, the amount of backgrounds is going to explode. Between old backgrounds being converted (unofficially and then officially), new backgrounds in future products, 3pp products and rules in the DMG for creating them, I suspect there will be no lack for appropriate backgrounds that mix just the right collection on ASI, skills and feats. Maybe you don't like the noble background, but perhaps the courier or Waterdhavian noble will be more to your liking.

The PHB will have official conversion rules for older Backgroinds already.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Unfortunately, I kinda agree.

Setting aside ASI for a minute, they have cut off their nose to spite their face by making proficiencies (be it in skills, tools, weapons, armor, or languages) verboten in species design. It limits giving flavorful abilities that represent natural aptitude and ability (be it a goliaths natural athleticism, an elves keen senses, or a tabaxi's natural stealth). So all they have left are biological abilities (wings, gills, claws or hide) and magical ones (spells and supernatural abilities) to define species with. They still slipped a few skill proficiencies into MotM, but it seems that is going by the wayside in the PHB. Which means I suspect many MotM and later races will be getting redone eventually to remove those vestigial proficiencies as well.

How do you square that thought with Elves getting skills and humans getting a skill with the recommendation of the Skilled feat?

Yeah, okay, Goliath's lost athleticism as part of their Powerful Build to instead be better at breaking out of grapples.... which used to be a function of the athletic skill. So, did they lose it because "no skills allowed" or did they lose it because the intent was it is hard to grapple a goliath and when grappling changed the ability needed to change?

And if we look at the 10 races in the list:

Aasimar, Gnomes, Tieflings, Dragonborn, Halflings have never had skills as part of their species/race design.
Orcs lost theirs in MotM, and seem to have lost powerful build so that Adrenaline rush could be on a short rest

Leaving only dwarves, with their tools and weapons, and elves with their weapons.... and those weapon profs were terrible mechanically. And instead of tools and some bonuses to specific history, Dwarves are getting tremorsense which is AWESOME.

I think you are reading a few losses as much bigger, and as being motivated by things that aren't the real motivations.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Acolyte is the three mental stats.

Christ, I'd forgotten that. The one no-brainer combo to exclude if you're going to exclude one!

probavly brute force counting

Brute force counting gives me 17. I am pretty confident I didn't double-count or miss one but I'm not a maths wizz either.

the Farmer background gives you Strength, Constitution, and Wisdom to choose from

LOL the classism, the stereotyping, but America, what more can I expect! If INT, for example, meant formal education that'd be one thing, but 150% absolutely totally doesn't even slightly mean that, especially given how many monsters have extremely high INTs despite "no formal education" lol.

 

[Chaosmancer]

It was certainly more varied and interesting.

Then go ahead and use those. The PHB Dragonborn are always the more generic option compared to the more specialized options.

 

[Veltharis ap Rylix]

Not only can you still make a half-elf, you can now make a half-anything. And you can make them a "distinct group all of their own" as much as you like. Different human groups don't get their distinctiveness from unique abilities, they get their uniqueness from forging their own culture.

You could have every elf in your campaign setting use human stats and still retain a distinct "elven" culture for them - no one is claiming otherwise - yet elves are still allowed to retain their own species mechanics, because people want elves to feel different than humans.

Same with dwarves, or tieflings, or anything else.

Saying mixed-ancestry characters don't need distinct mechanics because you can just give them a distinct culture is tantamount to saying that nobody needs species mechanics at all, yet they're the only one's being stuck with "hand-me-downs" from their parent ancestries.

Beyond that, with the notable exception of Khoravar from Eberron, how many mixed-ancestry groups in D&D have historically been given their own distinct cultural identity separate from their parent ancestries? Because where you seem to see a vast increase in the possibility for all kinds of new mixed-ancestry characters, I see what mechanical identity the "half-elf" and "half-orc" actually had being stripped away without replacement and little to no incentive being provided for writers, DMs, or players to bother even considering mixed-ancestry characters at all ever again, much less entire culturally distinct societies comprised of them.

At best, I expect we'll see more one-off, "I'm the result of a chance encounter between an X and a Y" type characters - lone first-generation individuals who may well never meet another of their kind, not a people with a shared mixed heritage that possess their own distinct culture.

 

[Parmandur]

If INT, for example, meant formal education that'd be one thing, but 150% absolutely totally doesn't even slightly mean that, especially given how many monsters have extremely high INTs despite "no formal education" lol.

Based on the Skills impacted, seems pretty clearly that Iny does mean education, to a large extent.

 

[Charlaquin]

How do you square that thought with Elves getting skills and humans getting a skill with the recommendation of the Skilled feat?

Yeah, okay, Goliath's lost athleticism as part of their Powerful Build to instead be better at breaking out of grapples.... which used to be a function of the athletic skill. So, did they lose it because "no skills allowed" or did they lose it because the intent was it is hard to grapple a goliath and when grappling changed the ability needed to change?

And if we look at the 10 races in the list:

Aasimar, Gnomes, Tieflings, Dragonborn, Halflings have never had skills as part of their species/race design.
Orcs lost theirs in MotM, and seem to have lost powerful build so that Adrenaline rush could be on a short rest

Leaving only dwarves, with their tools and weapons, and elves with their weapons.... and those weapon profs were terrible mechanically. And instead of tools and some bonuses to specific history, Dwarves are getting tremorsense which is AWESOME.

I think you are reading a few losses as much bigger, and as being motivated by things that aren't the real motivations.

To add to this, the halfling’s “Naturally Stealthy” was just free stealth proficiency in the UA. So skill proficiencies are definitely still on the table for species traits, so long as they’re framed as some kind of biological trait rather than cultural knowledge. This is easy enough to justify for stealth and perception, a bit harder for something like athletics or acrobatics, and probably right out for stuff like religion and deception.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Does the assumption really have to be that design is for short time PCs? I don't recall hearing that anywhere.

You should pay more attention to the meetings then.

 

[Neonchameleon]

To me it looks like you're trying extremely hard, actually, given the bizarre example.

And I'm not sure why you think that it's bizarre. I think one of my players reached sixteen pages of background.

Further, most characters are like 18-20. They don't remotely have the depth of background you're "not particularly trying" about (we're not all the sons of nobles!).

That was an 18 year old. How old do you think someone needed to be to be a squire? Or a monk in the middle ages? (14 in both cases generally). We're not all the sons of nobles - but most of us have a past and do multiple things.

Further you're not really addressing the classism as a center of oppression issue at all. I mean, sure, in America it's not considered to be such, but outside of the US it often is.

This is because to me it looks as if you are reaching and contorting to try desperately to find some sort of moral claim rather than just admitting to disliking the mechanics. But as you keep bringing it up (despite the politics) there would be classism if the stats weren't spread around. Is there anything saying all nobles are smart? No. Is there anything saying that people from the streets can't be smart? Not that I'm aware of. Is there something in the real world saying that sons of the wealthy get better teachers leading to better book learning and better grades? Yes. (Do I need to dig up university entrance stats?)

The closest to classism here is that there is an acknowledgement that your background shapes your opportunities. And that nobles tend to be better fed and those who care about it (not all do, hence not hard coding stats) tend to have better opportunities to learn academic things. And I'd say that the only way to deny this is to claim that everyone actually does have equality of opportunity and it is the fault of poor people that they are poor. And that is classist.

Aren't there 17 possible stat combos? I'm maybe doing the math wrong?

But I don't entirely disagree. I think the combination of Primary stat being essentially hard-required even by most casual players, people looking for secondary stats that aren't a total waste,

The only secondary stats that are a near total waste for any characters are Cha and Int. Wis might be in third place but legitimately has about a quarter of all saving throws, two passive skills, and a good skill range.

and the fact that some Backgrounds will have much better Feats and Skills than others will mean we actually see like, 4-6 "good" backgrounds completely dominating.

I'd say the only skill that truly matters here is Perception. And if they have done what I think then the Str/Dex/Con background will be the one that goes with the Medium Armour + Shield proficiency (at least it won't offer Int or Cha), making it an interesting choice for arcane casters - and the Int/Wis/Cha one with Magic Initiate that can spruce up fighters.

I don't think there will be 4-6 backgrounds; I think it's more likely there will be about four for each class. And four or five backgrounds just dropped in the trash.

Once we see the full list, I bet we can work out which those will likely be extremely fast and probably we'd both have similar results.

For example, if DEX/WIS/CON has a good Feat and/or Skill (god help us if it's Perception), then I think quite a lot of people will want that - like pretty much all Monks, Rangers, Rogues, and most Clerics and Druids can use that. That's 50% of the classes in the game right there. DEX Fighters too.

Here's hoping that Dex/Wis/Con has something like Skilled (I can't see it having Savage Attacker).

And I'm not expecting to see many nobles; I think it's Str/Int/Cha. But I doubt that will be enough to put everyone off because they want to play a noble.