D&D (2024) Is anyone going to use the new 2024 backgrounds?

[payn]

Are you the DM for those groups?

Sometimes.

 

[ECMO3]

Plus, it's just so much faster to tell people '+2/+1 to stats, pick two skills, pick a starting feat'.

This! Then make a backstory - your cleric was an Acolyte, or a Sailor, or an urchin that was going to be sacrificed by an evil cult until your god intervened.

 

[ECMO3]

But I suspect some people want to focus on the story, not the speed of the build, and others like the idea of kicking the tires on the rules and testing them RAW. I am one of the RAW folk that wants a legit true experience that I can praise and criticize.

My biggest problem with the new backgrounds is they restrict the story.

Backgrounds by their nature restrict story elements before you attach mechanics to them. When you attach mechanics you then create further restrictions and force a choice between mechanics and the restricted story options you have available.

 

[Clint_L]

This! Then make a backstory - your cleric was an Acolyte, or a Sailor, or an urchin that was going to be sacrificed by an evil cult until your god intervened.

As long as reasonable effort goes into the backstory. In my experience, a lot of the value of character background occupations comes in role-play. For example, a character who was a farmer might have a lot of general knowledge to offer when we are investigating the strange happenings at the orchard, and whatnot.

 

[ECMO3]

There's nothing relevant to the story in the backgrounds. Forcing them on a player just reduces their own creativity. New players haven't ever had any problem with that part of character creation, if it's what they're interested in. If they are just in the game for the combat and narration, giving them one of these backgrounds isn't going to make them any more active or interesting of a roleplayer.

But it is going to affect their combat mechanics and considering both the feat and the abilities are rolled together it will probably not be in a way they would think is ideal.

 

[Zaukrie]

I'm nearly certain we'll throw out the old rules and use dndbeyond for character management. I don't play with min max types, just people that want to play DND.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

If only one could actually find any people running them...

Run it yourself.

 

[ECMO3]

As long as reasonable effort goes into the backstory. In my experience, a lot of the value of character background occupations comes in role-play. For example, a character who was a farmer might have a lot of general knowledge to offer when we are investigating the strange happenings at the orchard, and whatnot.

Sure, but you can apply that whether or not there is an official "farmer background".

Background is part of backstory, but you don't need the former to have the latter, and what if I want to be a rancher instead of a farmer (and get that bonus when investigating livestock disappearing)

 

[WanderingMystic]

Until we see the actual wording in the book I feel like it is all a moot point. I expect that they will say something like talk with your GM about customizing your background, or if you don't see a background that fits work with your GM to make one appropriate for your setting. In the DMG I doubt that it will be presented as an optional rule instead it will be in the world building section.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I expect the vast, vast, vast majority of players to use the pre-canned options (as well as other options they provide in the future).

Why?

Well, in 2014 they had backgrounds. But in the PHB, it also allowed you to customize your background. That wasn't as powerful as what is proposed here, but it existed. And yet almost no one used it, to the extent that every now and then, someone would "discover" the feature.

I've seen players tie themselves in knots trying to choose an optimal background instead of just customizing. And, of course, a lot of people choose things for flavor, not pure DPS/optimization.