D&D (2024) Learning to Love the Background System

I have no issues with the new backgrounds on paper, because technically I can let players customize them.

The issue for me is how they will be implemented in DDB. Will everything be hard-coded in, or will you be able to customize them, swapping one origin feat for another (for instance)?
Even if they are hard coded in it is super easy to create a homebrew background. Honestly, I kind of like that. The DM goes in and creates backgrounds like "9th Street runners" a kind of thieves guild, or "Served in the Great War" you can get guards based on the city they are from, solders based on the country, so on and so on
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Even if they are hard coded in it is super easy to create a homebrew background. Honestly, I kind of like that. The DM goes in and creates backgrounds like "9th Street runners" a kind of thieves guild, or "Served in the Great War" you can get guards based on the city they are from, solders based on the country, so on and so on
That’s assuming that will still be an option. If you’ve got Legacy content on, then I imagine it will let you use the 2014 custom background feature, and then you could manually add the feat and ability score adjustments, but if you’re only using the 2024 rules, you may not get that option right away.
 

I like having backgrounds becoming a more mechanical and meaningful component of the overall character.

It would however, be easier for everyone if the ability score bonuses and feats were dissociated from the backgrounds or species or classes if that is a point of contention.

What I suspect will happen isn't that players will gravitate towards custom backgrounds. Optimizers will for the mechanical benefits while most players (IMO and myself included) will just pick a background they want because it's quick and easy.

Custom backgrounds should be in the PHB.
Entertainer. Similarly, he thinks the Entertainer is good for a Bard or Paladin. Let’s start with the bard. Musician is Chris’s favorite origin feat, and Cha and Dex work for a bard. Acrobatics and Performance are skills a bard would get anyway, and who needs three more instruments? It’s the same prioritization as before: the background is great for ability scores and feat, adequate for skills, and bad for tool.
I think this is a bit off. No, I don't see the need for more instruments on the bard usually outside of what might be available at the time but when it comes to skills a bard picks any 3 skills so whatever skill the background gives are irrelevant. If it's something you think a bard would normally pick then the bard just picks something else that you think might be better off from a background. It doesn't matter if the bard takes it from the background or from their own "any skill" list.

I also almost never take perform because my bards already have high CHA and add JoaT to it . For the small added bonus and how often I use it there doesn't seem to be much point. ;-)

I do like the musician feat on the bard, though. Added inspiration like abilities in early levels when bardic inspiration is more limited is a plus, IMO.
There is nothing good about only having 16 possible backgrounds and not allowing customization. The only way to be Tough is to be a Farmer that specializes in Animal Handling and Nature? There's literally no other way to be Tough? And Farmers cannot boost Dex, Int, or Cha because obviously all farmers are big dumb oafs that no one likes? Hard pass
Well, no, because a person can also be a human or use a warlock invocation or take the feat at a higher level. Toughness isn't locked out or necessarily better than another feat.

Not having a bonus isn't the same thing as being unintelligent or unlikeable. Those can be a 12 and a 13 on that farmer still. Not having a bonus isn't the same thing as somehow having a penalty. ;-)
Like, maybe I think an Acolyte Rogue sounds like a really interesting combination for roleplaying reasons, but am I really going to go for the more interesting roleplaying combination at the cost of not being able to start with 16 Dexterity on my rogue…? I don’t know about that.
I'm different. I don't mind a slightly lower starting ability score when I know the score will end up the same regardless. I'd rather go for what's more interesting than worry about a 15 vs 16 when it's going to end up being 20 anyway. :)
So people didn't like species being pre-packaged combos of ASIs and features, as many players felt that they had to choose one that provided proper ASIs to their class, and now the exact same issue has been shifted to background...

I don't really get it. Like I was fine with species ASIs, but if that was deemed undesirable design it seems crazy to just repeat the same structure elsewhere. 🤷
I don't think it was undesirable design based on the mechanics so much as race overtones. Species and backgrounds aren't comparable in that way because of those issues regardless of how similar the mechanics are.

Of course, that doesn't mean the mechanics are desirable either. That's still up for discussion. :)
I’ll probably be going custom backgrounds from day 1. But I’m still annoyed that they moved that option to the DMG, because I’m sure there will be plenty of DMs who don’t allow any background customization simply because it isn’t in the PHB.
NGL, I would say let them. Their table, their prerogative. I might not agree with them but I still wouldn't argue that it's their choice at their table. It doesn't really affect my choices at my table.
 

WOTC is Is catering D&D So that it allows new players and flavor first players to run with optimizes players

The new backgrounds are not flavor first, that is my biggest problem with them. Having optimal choices available to all means the game can be balanced, it doesn't mean it will be balanced though.

Affording everyone comparable choices though enables balance to a better degree then fencing those choices out. Custom backgrounds do that in a way that the fixed backgrounds don't.
 
Last edited:

NGL, I would say let them. Their table, their prerogative. I might not agree with them but I still wouldn't argue that it's their choice at their table. It doesn't really affect my choices at my table.
That’s well and good, unless I’m playing in their game, at which point it actually affects me.
 

They're banal and feel like mostly human backgrounds. I dislike them so much. They do not encourage creativity and players are going to pick the mechanic bits and pay no attention to the actual background. And as mentioned on another thread, we're going to see a lot of sailor monks. Guess they work well with drop down menus. 🙄
 

So, I can take the Criminal background but say my character was raised in a temple and grew up totally sheltered from any kind of criminal activity? I mean, ok I guess, but that feels pretty weird…
There are a lot of religions (though as I say that, it's mainly Christianity) which are literally illegal in certain places in the world, and open worship can get your head cut off.

I have very little interest in seeing the "optimization game" for backgrounds, so my current inclination is to go all-in with custom backgrounds.
This is a complete oxymoron, and the main problem I see when people talk about this. They say "I don't want to optimize, I want STOOOOOORRRRRYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!!!1!!!!!!

Then they say they can't do Story because the Backgrounds don't give them the ASI or Feat they want. That's called Optimizing.

Farmers are tough. They work with their hands. They plow fields. They are street smart (Wisdom), not book smart (Int), and they are strong and usually have a good constitution. Nobles are healthy (strength) cause they've been well fed, smart cause they have the funds for education, and charismatic so they can deal with other nobles. These things make sense. If you want Story, these Backgrounds are great with Story.

So you're an Orc who lived in the Temple to Gruumsh instead of going out raiding every day (Acolyte)? You're not going to be as strong, at first, as the one who was a Soldier on the front lines from the moment he could crawl. That's OK.

You're a Rogue who spent time in the academy and became a Sage? Well, you're not going to be as dextrous as the one who spent his time running the streets breaking in to buildings, surviving on his speed and charisma.

This is what Story is. This is what Role Playing is. And in the end, you're talking about 2 ASI points. A 5% greater chance at success than someone else. It really, REALLY isn't a big deal.

Use the ASI to shore up something that class usually has a Weakness in. Or an ability they aren't usually associated with, and role play that. I played a Warlock with a 4 Con and a 6 Charisma. He turned out awesome.

Creativity thrives under restraint. Your characters will be better for this. If you're complaining about not being able to put ALL of your points into the stats that would do the most damage, then you're more worried about optimizing than you are about story or role playing. Because yes, all Acolytes will be weaker than all Soldiers. Deal. Or don't be an Acolyte. Be a Devout Soldier who kneels and prays before every battle.

I am the type who optimizes around a concept. I find a concept, and build to that concept, tweaking until it is as optimized as possible, but I will TOTALLY take a suboptimal option if that option is a better fit for the concept. So if I'm making a Noble Aasimar who becomes a Warlock, I'm going to take Noble even though I don't really need Strength or Intelligence. If I want to make a Trickery Cleric who has the Charlatan background, I'll deal with my Wisdom being a little lower to start, and put the points in Charisma instead so I can deceive better. His Wisdom will get better! And it won't take long! Every single Feat has at least one Ability point. That's HUGE!

Optimizers: You will be ok. It will be fine. Custom Backgrounds sound like you'll have so many options, but you won't. Every single Monk will put their scores in Wis and Dex. Every single wizard will go Int and Con. Period. Every time. Because why wouldn't you? You will never play the Wizard who is more street smart than book smart. Or the Paladin who loves History. Or the Monk who is good with the ladies. Like, there is more to these characters than just their primary ability scores.
 

So, I can take the Criminal background but say my character was raised in a temple and grew up totally sheltered from any kind of criminal activity? I mean, ok I guess, but that feels pretty weird…
I think the idea is thst you can change the name per the PHB, as well as the description. And the DMG will no doubt say "yeah, man, floating ASI, pick a Feat and a Tool."
 

One thing that is mentioned in the video is that you're specifically told that you can alter the story of your background however you wish, so ultimately it's just a label that has nothing to do with your character's actual story.
If this is the case, just de-couple the mechanical aspects of ASIs and Feats from the narrative of backstory altogether.

Assuming that anyone building a character wants to do so optimally, the honestly baffling choice to tie ASIs, Backgrounds and Feats together essentially forces certain classes/builds to select a particular Background, which might cut off certain Origin feat from entire classes.

Having the mechanical benefits tied to background just results in choosing a background for its stats or its feat (or both) - the story and narrative essentially irrelevant.
 

That’s assuming that will still be an option. If you’ve got Legacy content on, then I imagine it will let you use the 2014 custom background feature, and then you could manually add the feat and ability score adjustments, but if you’re only using the 2024 rules, you may not get that option right away.
I was assuming after the DMG comes out, all the people I know around me wont be making a change until the DMG or maybe even the MM comes out.
 

Remove ads

Top