Background benefits?

[keterys]

A lot of it depends on the campaign - in one campaign I played a paladin with a 10 Con so I could focus on Cha, Wis, and have enough Dex to meet feat prereqs. But it's LFR so I _never_ expect to need more than 10 surges.

In the campaign I'm running, though, I often run them down to just a few surges left _in the party_ and I've had their defender go into the final battle of an adventure while still bloodied with no surges. In that campaign, Con matters.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

A lot of it depends on the campaign - in one campaign I played a paladin with a 10 Con so I could focus on Cha, Wis, and have enough Dex to meet feat prereqs. But it's LFR so I _never_ expect to need more than 10 surges.

In the campaign I'm running, though, I often run them down to just a few surges left _in the party_ and I've had their defender go into the final battle of an adventure while still bloodied with no surges. In that campaign, Con matters.

Its true. You could look at it this way though, DB Fighter #1 is going to want Weapon Expertise to equal the base to-hit of DB Fighter #2, who can take Toughness for his feat choice, or Durable might even be better in his case, and mitigate many of the lingering issues. He may still be limited in some ways with his lower CON of course, but 2 points better STR has a lot of benefits too. Kind of depends on the build you want, etc. Everything is of course debatable to a certain extent. I think its still one of those background benefits that can be a bit more mechanically tempting than I really like, but I've never considered telling someone they couldn't take it (not really come up to tell the truth).

 

[Doctor Proctor]

Yes, they do. The "Max HP" on the character sheet is not your real HP allotment, nor even the maximum with temporary HP sources. You have access to a lot more HP, depending on the number of surges you have, you just need to tap them. A character with 32 "regular" HP and seven surges has access to roughly 103 actual HP in a day. (32 base + 7*8 surge + 15 (1 short of negative bloodied). This can go up based on healing from negative, temporary HP and riders from leader healing.

These are the actual HP a character has to use. Your view is oversimplified and simply inaccurate. The background feat, toughnes and durability can all help mitigate a lower constitution, but it's at a steep cost. It's not bad, overpowered or "broken", it's a build choice.

One last time: Read what I actually wrote. Arguing a point I'm not even making is foolish.

I never contended that dumping CON and taking the background was good. The ONLY (and I don't know how many more time I have to say it) contention I was making was that if you're already dumping CON, then this background can effectively replace Toughness. Therefore, for certain characters, it's effective is equal (if not superior) to a feat. This is too strong when compared to the other backgrounds which, as I already explained, give benefits less than the feats that most closely mirror their benefits (ie- +2 to skill compared to skill focus, add skill to class list compared to skill training, add a single language compared to the language feat that grants 3 languages).

So, if you're going to continue to be dismiss and tell me that my view is "oversimplified and simply inaccurate", then why don't you try actually discussing the point we're talking about. Obviously raising CON will beat out Toughness, Durability, this background, and just about anything else that raises HP every time. However, not every class can afford it. A Wizard multiclassing Warlock, for example, wouldn't be able to pump CON because they're already pumping two attack stats. Neither would a TWF Ranger that's concentrating on STR and DEX for attack and AC separately. I could go on listing all the potential class builds that dump CON, but I trust you understand the point now. FOR THOSE CLASSES this background is strictly superior to Toughness because it grants almost the same bonuses while at the same time saving them a feat slot.

 

[Herschel]

And for Dragonborn intimidating fighters +2 to Intimidate is simply a superior background. If you're campaign features a lot of elemental attacks, fire being the most common, Akanul is a superior background feat. Yada, yada, yada.

There will always be cases where certain backgrounds/feats/weapon/stat allocation/etc. will be markedly better. There are also ones where the base HP boost will be better. For back-line guys I've found other backgrounds far more useful when there are sticky "defenders". Non-Con melee guys are where it usually becomes best and gives you build options that can actually work without falling in to MAD territory (or backline guys with an Assault Swordmage built for damage).

They're not broken, they're not bad, they're just an option for making characters playable.

 

[Dredly]

I'm not sure how this conversation ended up being about healing surges vs max HP but I'm pretty sure that can be a new topic instead of trolling in this one.

 

[Dredly]

And for Dragonborn intimidating fighters +2 to Intimidate is simply a superior background. If you're campaign features a lot of elemental attacks, fire being the most common, Akanul is a superior background feat. Yada, yada, yada.

There will always be cases where certain backgrounds/feats/weapon/stat allocation/etc. will be markedly better. There are also ones where the base HP boost will be better. For back-line guys I've found other backgrounds far more useful when there are sticky "defenders". Non-Con melee guys are where it usually becomes best and gives you build options that can actually work without falling in to MAD territory (or backline guys with an Assault Swordmage built for damage).

They're not broken, they're not bad, they're just an option for making characters playable.

I honestly can't see how a +2 to a skill would ever be better then getting more HP. I can see how getting trained in a skill would be a big advantage, but a +2? not really.

 

[Nichwee]

I think I'll house-rule this, slightly, if I DM.
1) If a PC wants to gain a Background Benefit he/she must complete a small page of text on your background and list at least two backgrounds it uses/plays into (choose two backgrounds).
2) I will then choose what Background Benefit the PC gets out of the options.
3) PCs are allowed to request a change in benefit and I will be open to the idea if good reasons are given ("I want it" isn't a good reason. "I know I'm a fighter but I wanted him to be a street theif growing up so wanted Thievery - look I gave him good Dex+Int rather than just pump Con some more for the HP, to represent how he was more quick-wits and fast hands when he was younger" is a good reason - with proof the idea mattered to you).
4) Benefits may be removed/XP may be docked/random penalties may occur if a Background is produced and then seems not to effect the way the character does anything outside the direct mechanical effect given (Appeal to the DM to get a specific benefit for RP reasons and then don't RP it = face my wrath).

Basically, if the Background Benefit really matters to the way the PC is formed none of them should break things, as they should just make sense in a well rounded character. Tho "Use BestStat for HP, not Con" only thematically fits a character that is directly tapped for greatness by the Gods, so I would want a real good background to explain that, and would probably make a point of throwing it in the players face regularly. Basically, being Harry Potter/Luke Skywalker/Hercules comes with aggro that can quickly get annoying (random monsters want YOU dead - focus fire - or townsfolk are awed by you - you never go unnoticed - or want to manipulate you.)

 

[Herschel]

I honestly can't see how a +2 to a skill would ever be better then getting more HP. I can see how getting trained in a skill would be a big advantage, but a +2? not really.

Play a Dragonborn Intimidating Fighter or Barbarian. It's a HUGE boost.

 

[keterys]

Though, really, you're actually getting the +3 from Wandering Duelist. But yeah, it's necessary to put Intimidate into the range where you can actually defeat enemies as soon as they're bloodied. If the DM allows it, anyways.

 

[Rathyr]

I'm of the opinion that the +hp backgrounds are too powerful, moreso because they are active at *level 1*.

Worst case scenario: A rogue/ranger gaining +10 hp at the first level (starting with 20 Dex is not that uncommon for these classes) is not balanced. Any class that keys off Int or Dex as their primary attack stat not only gains significant AC bonuses, but also hitpoints. Granted, not every class can do this, but getting +hp off your primary stat that is already increasing:
1.) Your chance to hit
2.) Your damage
3.) Your AC
is a joke.

Fact of the matter is the "normal" backgrounds do not scale, and typically don't even match a feat of equivelent power. I would not allow any but the PHB2 backgrounds in my game. Backgrounds are supposed to be minor increases in power, and unless the HPs gained from the background was <=5, I would rule that it was too strong. Whats more, I wouldnt let it wouldn't scale.

HPs have a concrete effect in every combat encounter. They also increase the value of your surges. I dont think gaining 5-10 HPs as a background at level one is balanced game design. As a DM, I would feel the need to increase damage to compensate for this, and thats a bad sign at level 1.

If you let initiative, AC, or surges suddenly key off a different stat and available to every class, the balance of the game becomes fairly shakey, and players are gaining benefits for things they havent paid for. If you don't invest in Con, you should be more squishy, OR HAVE TO SPEND FEATS TO MAKE UP FOR IT.

Also, Windrise Ports is beyond silly. MCing is already opening up a can of worms. Hybrids shouldnt be able to MC, and no class should be able to MC more than once (bards twice). MCing more than once to me screams powergamer. Gaining access to feats from 4 classes is just... urg. Exceptions to the rules need to be limited in nature. You would need a mighty interesting background for be able to justify that.