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

[Argyle King]

Thought:

Why must ability scores be only from species or only from background?

Perhaps each Species could grant one fixed +1 and one semi-floating* +1.
On top of that, each background could grant a +1 that may be placed into one of three attributes.

*by semi-floating, I mean that each species could have two attributes that they typically (but not always) excel at. For example, dwarves are renowned for their Constitution, so the fixed +1 could go there. As well, dwarves are known for wisdom that comes from long lives and for an uncanny battle strength that defies their otherwise squat stature, so their semi-floating +1 could go to either Strength or Wisdom.
Dwarf: +1 Con; +1 to either Str or WIS

Then perhaps the town guard background might assume some minimum level of physical fitness (Str); experience in observing people and places (Wis); and (I'm making this up as I'm typing it) let's say some reasoning for (Con).

With that in mind, character creation might look like this:
Dwarf +1 Con; +1 to either Str or Wis
Guard Background: +1 one of to Str, Con, or Wis

If you wanted to keep the idea of human versatility, humans could be the only species to have two freely floating +1s.

Half-Elves could be +1 Cha; +1 to any
Half-Orcs could be +1 Str; +1 to any

 

[mellored]

Why must ability scores be only from species or only from background?

IMO
+1/+1 from your class.
+1 from your backgound.

But yea, lots of ways to do it.

 

[Maxperson]

Thought:

Why must ability scores be only from species or only from background?

Perhaps each Species could grant one fixed +1 and one semi-floating* +1.
On top of that, each background could grant a +1 that may be placed into one of three attributes.

*by semi-floating, I mean that each species could have two attributes that they typically (but not always) excel at. For example, dwarves are renowned for their Constitution, so the fixed +1 could go there. As well, dwarves are known for wisdom that comes from long lives and for an uncanny battle strength that defies their otherwise squat stature, so their semi-floating +1 could go to either Strength or Wisdom.
Dwarf: +1 Con; +1 to either Str or WIS

Then perhaps the town guard background might assume some minimum level of physical fitness (Str); experience in observing people and places (Wis); and (I'm making this up as I'm typing it) let's say some reasoning for (Con).

With that in mind, character creation might look like this:
Dwarf +1 Con; +1 to either Str or Wis
Guard Background: +1 one of to Str, Con, or Wis

If you wanted to keep the idea of human versatility, humans could be the only species to have two freely floating +1s.

Half-Elves could be +1 Cha; +1 to any
Half-Orcs could be +1 Str; +1 to any

That's kind of how I thought they were going to do it. I think race, class and background should each just give +1. None of this +2 nonsense!!

 

[Remathilis]

Thought:

Why must ability scores be only from species or only from background?

Perhaps each Species could grant one fixed +1 and one semi-floating* +1.
On top of that, each background could grant a +1 that may be placed into one of three attributes.

*by semi-floating, I mean that each species could have two attributes that they typically (but not always) excel at. For example, dwarves are renowned for their Constitution, so the fixed +1 could go there. As well, dwarves are known for wisdom that comes from long lives and for an uncanny battle strength that defies their otherwise squat stature, so their semi-floating +1 could go to either Strength or Wisdom.
Dwarf: +1 Con; +1 to either Str or WIS

Then perhaps the town guard background might assume some minimum level of physical fitness (Str); experience in observing people and places (Wis); and (I'm making this up as I'm typing it) let's say some reasoning for (Con).

With that in mind, character creation might look like this:
Dwarf +1 Con; +1 to either Str or Wis
Guard Background: +1 one of to Str, Con, or Wis

If you wanted to keep the idea of human versatility, humans could be the only species to have two freely floating +1s.

Half-Elves could be +1 Cha; +1 to any
Half-Orcs could be +1 Str; +1 to any

Congrats, you just invented Pathfinder 2e.

 

[Argyle King]

Congrats, you just invented Pathfinder 2e.

I just looked at what late 4E was doing with ability scores and mixed that with some of what D&D 2024 is planning to do.

I feel as though it's a good compromise that makes most camps happy (though I would still prefer 2014 style background features also be included in some way).

I also feel that the smaller +1s better accomplish the lip service of bounded accuracy.

(If I were writing my own game, I would also try to add a little more breadth of play so as to make the ability scores more desirable even even not relevant to a character's main class. I'd also divorce ASIs from feats.)

 

[Parmandur]

Less of a problem is still a problem, and we already had a system where things had been changed up to allow dwarves and half-orcs to easily be anything they wanted and now all they seem to have done is taken the old system and changed where the restrictions are. In my opinion it's still bad compared to floating ASIs. As I said much earlier in the thread, it's 2 steps forward, and 1 step back.

It is a potential pitfall of being "tuned in" that it is surprising what people who don't buy into an expansion like Tasha's think. WotC tested totally floating ASI's, and it appears to have bounced slightly: gamewise, there is no problem with totally floating ASI's, and I am sure the DMG will say as much: but it seems people wanted some directed decision points, amd that makes sense to me. And having a range for "people from this Background often have an adjustment in this rnage" just is better than "all Wood Elves are this". It simply isn't problematic in the same way, showing how people's experiences shape them. Sure, a Novle Barbarian with an Intelligence of 4 going up to 6 isn't as smart as the Urchin Wizard with an 18 Intelligence. People don't make these choices.on min-maxijg, by and large, so I don't see this being a problem at the table.

 

[TwoSix]

That's kind of how I thought they were going to do it. I think race, class and background should each just give +1. None of this +2 nonsense!!

I like this. +1 to one of three different stats for class. +1 to one of three different stats for race/species. +1 to one of three different stats for background. None of the three +1s can be to the same stat.

 

[Maxperson]

I like this. +1 to one of three different stats for class. +1 to one of three different stats for race/species. +1 to one of three different stats for background. None of the three +1s can be to the same stat.

Sure. Or you can allow doubling up of +1s if you like the +2.

Let's say elf gives +1 dex or +1 int, Urchin gives +1 dex or +1 cha, and rogue gives +1 dex. You then have the option of +2 dex and +1 int, or +2 dex and +1 cha, or +1 dex and +1 int and +1 cha.

Any way you want to do it. It seems good to me to spread the bonuses around the various background options.

 

[TwoSix]

Sure. Or you can allow doubling up of +1s if you like the +2.

Let's say elf gives +1 dex or +1 int, Urchin gives +1 dex or +1 cha, and rogue gives +1 dex. You then have the option of +2 dex and +1 int, or +2 dex and +1 cha, or +1 dex and +1 int and +1 cha.

Any way you want to do it. It seems good to me to spread the bonuses around the various background options.

Maybe rather than set a stacking rule, just make a blanket rule that says "You cannot use these bonuses to raise any stat above a 17." (Or 16, if you want to limit it further.) Plays nicely with point buy, array, or rolling that way. No starting 20s even if you roll.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

It might make more race/class combos, but if ASI is tied to background and they aren't just suggestions, then all they've done is changed it from making people pick a race to complement their class to picking a background to complement their class. Any wizard players who want a soldier background might end up picking something else if they can't get an Int boost. This isnt really an issue for many players who will just ignore those background requirements, but new players might not.

ASIs should have been kept floating in my opinion.

I am a bit in the middle ground.

Maybe +1 should be free.
And two +1's should be put into the background suggested stats.

I'd also like to have the choice of two feats. A soldier should be able to chose between lightly armored and savange attacker. Always one feat that favours a class that matches the stats and one feat that is great for more unlilely combinations.