D&D (2024) Dungeon Master's Guide Bastion System Lets You Build A Stronghold

The Dungeon Master's Guide's brand new Bastion System has been previewed in a new video from Wizards of the Coast.

Characters can acquire a bastion at 5th-level. Each week, the bastion takes a turn, with actions including crafting, recruiting, research, trade, and more.

A bastion also contains a number of special facilties, starting with two at 5th-level up to 6 at 17th-level. These facilities include things like armories, workshops, laboratories, stables, menageries, and more. In total there are nearly thirty such facilities to choose from.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Maybe its meant to be off limits in the way of 'the DM cannot send in a comet to nuke the it from orbit' kind of off limits?

That's what I'm getting. Let's face it, lots of dms see anything not a class feature as an avenue to punish players. Background npcs are just there to be hurt to "motivate" pcs, but never ever ever to be in any way helpful.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That's what I'm getting. Let's face it, lots of dms see anything not a class feature as an avenue to punish players. Background npcs are just there to be hurt to "motivate" pcs, but never ever ever to be in any way helpful.

I'm never going to be ok with mechanics that are rationalized by the idea that the DM might be a jerk, so let's launch a pre-emptive strike against that.

 

[MarkB]

Not sure how the official rules will relate to following.

I want a "bastion" that is multigenerational, an estate that can be inherited by future characters. Even when the founder of a bastion is still alive, I want the other characters to grow up there an be part of it.

You could extend the rules for combining bastions, so that the current PCs build on the same grounds and share defenders, but retired PCs' special facilities aren't available for their use.

I want to merge the bastion with a permanent Mordenkainens Magnificent Mansion.

How obvious/hidden is it? Some events seem to rely upon the bastion being known to be in the area. If you did it like the magic door on Howl's Moving Castle, so that it has a known "shop front" but the door actually leads to an extradimensional space that could work.

I want the bastion to be plane-hopping, perhaps teleporting.

Again, plays into how interactable it is with the wider world. So long as it's not constantly on the move, and its staff have some interaction with the outside world wherever they're currently parked, it should work.

I prefer an "army of wizards" and other mages be the defenders.

I think that would be purely a matter of flavour, since the defenders are not statted out.

 

[jmartkdr2]

I'm never going to be ok with mechanics that are rationalized by the idea that the DM might be a jerk, so let's launch a pre-emptive strike against that.

The mechanic here is "dms shouldn't arbitrarily use this against players." Hardly a major limitation of dm agency.

 

[Yaarel]

You could extend the rules for combining bastions, so that the current PCs build on the same grounds and share defenders, but retired PCs' special facilities aren't available for their use.

Maybe a mechanic similar to attuning a magic item. For example, when a new character shares the bastion of a previous character, who might still be around, the architecture for the special facility such as "Research Library" is present, but the benefit only happens if the new character chooses it at a higher level. It implies that more than one character can share the same facility.

How obvious/hidden is it? Some events seem to rely upon the bastion being known to be in the area. If you did it like the magic door on Howl's Moving Castle, so that it has a known "shop front" but the door actually leads to an extradimensional space that could work.

For example, there might be a permanent shop, but the door to the demiplane bastion flits about from place to place. The door might even be something like a Portable Hole.

Again, plays into how interactable it is with the wider world. So long as it's not constantly on the move, and its staff have some interaction with the outside world wherever they're currently parked, it should work.

A "secret hideout" bastion would have little or no interactivity with the outside world.

On the other hand, for a different bastion, a flying castle would be awesome, or one that shifts back-and-forth from the Feywild.

The Witchlight Carnival would be a kind of plane-hopping bastion.

I think that would be purely a matter of flavour, since the defenders are not statted out.

Since I want the bastion to be a safe space, the possibility of an event that even requires defenders sounds concerning. But the consequences of such event seems to be the special facility will be out of commission for a turn, but afterward will become operational again. This seems tolerable, and a good compromise.

 

[MarkB]

Since I want the bastion to be a safe space, the possibility of an event that even requires defenders sounds concerning. But the consequences of such event seems to be the special facility will be out of commission for a turn, but afterward will become operational again. This seems tolerable, and a good compromise.

As I understand it, this only happens if all your available defenders are killed in the attack. And the sample random event shown in the article also seems to have a high lethality potential. So basically, however you flavour your bastion defenders... don't get too attached to any of them.

 

[Yaarel]

As I understand it, this only happens if all your available defenders are killed in the attack. And the sample random event shown in the article also seems to have a high lethality potential. So basically, however you flavour your bastion defenders... don't get too attached to any of them.

Still, the "loss" of a defender, doesnt necessarily mean death. It could mean an injury, which the defender recovers from.

 

[MarkB]

Still, the "loss" of a defender, doesnt necessarily mean death. It could mean an injury, which the defender recovers from.

True, though the "Request for Aid" event shown in the article does specifically say "killed". But you could reflavour that if needed.

 

[Yaarel]

True, though the "Request for Aid" event shown in the article does specifically say "killed". But you could reflavour that if needed.

Heh, killed momentarily. To serve again for as a future Defender after a Revivify spell, and some rest-and-recuperation.

 

[Chaosmancer]

When I'm using a game to tell a story, I get cognitive dissonance every time I have to reference the rules using terminology which is completely unrelated to what's going on in the narrative. For me, the names of rules elements matter.

Of course, I realize other people process language differently, so plenty of people aren't going to be bothered by this. If anything, based on the discussion that went on during the playtest, I suspect I'm in the minority here.

I doubt I can effectively explain how I'm bothered by disassociated mechanics to anyone who isn't already aware of and bothered by disassociated mechanics. The experience is too subjective. So I'll give you the last word if you want it. I don't know that there's anything else for me to say.

If Ginny's Coffeehouse is a Pub in her stronghold, and you are telling the story of Ginny's Coffeehouse, why would you call it a pub? You can absolutely refer to it as a Coffeehouse. You absolutely SHOULD refer to it as a coffeehouse. In the story and in the player's notes, and in their conception of the situation, it is a coffeehouse.

This is just like having the Queen's Champion, Sir Theron, be a wizard. You can be a champion, and a knight.... and mechanically be a wizard. Because the term "Champion" and "Knight" can have multiple meanings. This should not cause any dissonance to my mind.