D&D (2024) Bonus languages in One D&D backgrounds goes contrary to their other goals

[Cadence]

Do D&D language choices match the way a lot of students in the US experience them? Pick whichever off the list of what's offered, kind of at random, because you have to pick one. Maybe use it once on a trip somewhere or briefly with a pen-pal.

 

[Remathilis]

This is great, I will suggest the same. No generic options, because people are, frankly, too dim to understand that generic options aren't the only options, and this has been proven repeatedly.

This is the kind of feedback a playtest can offer: the realization your target audience is going to misinterpret your ideas and that it isn't worth it.

For anyone who is arguing that 5e was "too dumbed down", I will point to this thread as proof it isn't dumb enough yet.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I totally agree, and there has been some discussion on twitter about this. The sample backgrounds, as constructed, lean into existing dnd tropes and conventions. I can see why they did this, as some people really like those conventions, but it undermines their attempts to open up if not do away with those same conventions. So whereas previous editions might describe Orcs as "brutish warriors," here we get a gladiator archtype that knows Orcish (and for bonus ickiness, they get "savage" attack and galdiators are historically associated with slavery).

There is huge potential in backgrounds doing collaborative worldbuilding work, but not if they just rely on the same tropes. They should emphasize that backgrounds are specific and meant to correspond not just to general archtypes, but your character's origin in a particular setting. So the basic rule would be to craft your own, and then a sidebar they walk you through the process with setting-specific examples. You're not just an "urchin," you are urchin from waterdeep. What is waterdeep like, specifically? Why are there urchins in this city and how do urchins fit into that very specific setting? Or, you are an entertainer in Theros. What is the role of entertainment in that setting? What musical instruments are specifically popular there?

The way out of sterotypes is through specificity and worldbuilding. Admittedly, this is hard to present in an economical fashion and to standardize into a set of easy to pick up examples. But it's necessary if they want these aspects of the game to become less problematic. Background creation should be part of a session 0 procedure through which players contribute to defining aspects of the setting in these small ways. In the OSR, this is referred to as "anti-canon" worldbuilding. Or, take a page from dungeon world, and allow players to fill in some of the "blanks" on the conceptual map of the world.

Maybe they just want the game to be less problematic enough.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I understand that’s how they’re saying it works. I just think that’s a poor decision. “This cultural trait is innate because the gods made it so” doesn’t work when it’s Gruumsh creating all orcs to be aggressive, why would it be any different when it’s Bahamut creating all dragonborn to know draconic?

Its because they refuse to add culture as a separate metric, like Level Up did. Wouldn't be a problem otherwise.

 

[Remathilis]

I understand that’s how they’re saying it works. I just think that’s a poor decision. “This cultural trait is innate because the gods made it so” doesn’t work when it’s Gruumsh creating all orcs to be aggressive, why would it be any different when it’s Bahamut creating all dragonborn to know draconic?

You can do that with any racial trait though: why are halflings lucky? Why are elves resistant to charm? Why do gnomes have innate magic? Why are humans automatically inspired? Biology can only explain so much, unless you want all racial traits to be size, movement, sensory and natural attacks.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I'd pick ones that go against type, and provide a parenthetical about why that was the language picked up. (Scholar - Orcish - learned from fellow students; Soldier - Gnomish - learned from assigned tentmate in training; etc...)

That seems really forced. Just let them pick one language, if you have to have examples.

 

[Cadence]

That seems really forced. Just let them pick one language, if you have to have examples.

Sure. But if we're going to give an example -and- don't want to play to stereotypes...

 

[Micah Sweet]

Sure. But if we're going to give an example -and- don't want to play to stereotypes...

I definitely think any examples are going to become the default. People can handle making a few decisions.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

But that’s just the thing. The fact that most players are just going to grab an example and go is exactly why these example backgrounds are needed.

You are arguing against a point I don't think anyone is making.

I think these examples are a good idea, executed imperfectly.

EDIT: I stand corrected. A bunch of people are making that argument now.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

As an aside I've seen a lot of criticism of 1D&D for the half-race rules, which I think is fairly justified, but equally, a ton of it comes from keen PF2 boosters, and PF2 has a nearly identical issue (to be half-race in that, you have to select a "main" race then lose your subrace to get the benefits of the other race, IIRC).

The half-race issue deserves its own thread (and I bet one is around here some place), but yeah, it's a collision of sacred cows born in a very different time versus making that argument in public for the first time today is one of the few ways one can still destroy their career in 2022. (And it's bipartisan, which is a shocking thing to see in the United States at this moment in time.)