D&D (2024) D&D Background and Origin Feat Article

[Charlaquin]

To each their own of course. To me that whole thing sounds unacceptably gamist.

That's the real issue here, I think. This is a gamist mechanic. Some people see a problem with that, and some people don't. Nothing wrong with either point of view, but they're definitely at odds.

I disagree. I’m an unapologetic gamist. Good gameplay is always my number one priority. The problem with this feat is that it doesn’t have any connection to the PC’s actions. There’s no decisions to be made, no gameplay actions to be made. The rules just constrain the DM’s ability to narrate the environment. You can have the shopkeepers behave however you want… as long as it results in this PC having to pay less for anything they ever buy than anyone else does.

 

[Charlaquin]

Which is ok. Just ban that feat.

I mean, I’m going to house rule it. I’m just grumpy that I have to. The revisions were supposed to fix this kind of problem.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Getting the shovel is not what’s at issue. Getting to pay less for the shovel than anyone else would have to is the issue.

Most games will do following:

Player: "I want to buy a shovel"
Dm: "There is a shop where you can get it. Just look in the equipmemt list and buy it for standard price."
Player: "Can I deduce my discount?"
DM: "Sure, why not."
A dedicated DM might add: "You buy a lower quality one and reenforce it with your crafting tool."

 

[Micah Sweet]

I disagree. I’m an unapologetic gamist. Good gameplay is always my number one priority. The problem with this feat is that it doesn’t have any connection to the PC’s actions. There’s no decisions to be made, no gameplay actions to be made. The rules just constrain the DM’s ability to narrate the environment. You can have the shopkeepers behave however you want… as long as it results in this PC having to pay less for anything they ever buy than anyone else does.

I'm a simulationist. Good representation of the setting is always my number one priority. In this case my preference aligns with yours.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I mean, I’m going to house rule it. I’m just grumpy that I have to. The revisions were supposed to fix this kind of problem.

I'm not sure the new backgrounds were supposed to fix this the way you're thinking. I think instead turning features into feats is supposed to make it harder for the DM to exert control over their use.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Most games will do following:

Player: "I want to buy a shovel"
Dm: "There is a shop where you can get it. Just look in the equipmemt list and buy it for standard price."
Player: "Can I deduce my discount?"
DM: "Sure, why not."
A dedicated DM might add: "You buy a lower quality one and reenforce it with your crafting tool."

I'm sure most games go the way you say. But it still fails the logic test, and forces the world to change for meta reasons.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I'm sure most games go the way you say. But it still fails the logic test, and forces the world to change for meta reasons.

It fails your logic test.
You really look at this from the wrong perspective.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It fails your logic test.
You really look at this from the wrong perspective.

A different perspective than you. Still not convinced it's the wrong one.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

A different perspective than you. Still not convinced it's the wrong one.

No. It is your personal perspective. Which I respect.

 

[Charlaquin]

Most games will do following:

Player: "I want to buy a shovel"
Dm: "There is a shop where you can get it. Just look in the equipmemt list and buy it for standard price."
Player: "Can I deduce my discount?"
DM: "Sure, why not."

And what if the DM says “no, you’ve never shopped here before, the shopkeepers don’t know you and have no reason to give you a discount”? Or even, “make a Charisma check to try to negotiate for the discounted price?” I think the player would be entirely justified in protesting. They have a feature that says they get a discount. Not that they get a discount if the DM feels like it, not that they get a discount in settlements where they’ve established themselves, not that they can make a Charisma check to get a discount. It just says they get it, full stop. And therein lies the problem. There’s no accounting for the circumstances of the purchase. The feature says you get a discount, players should be able to count on their features to do what they say they do, and DMs should be able to account for various in-world circumstances. With this rule, all three of those things can’t be preserved, one of them must be compromised.

A dedicated DM might add: "You buy a lower quality one and reenforce it with your crafting tool."

My problem is that a player-facing ability shouldn’t be putting the DM in a position to have to do that. The player’s role is to describe what their character does and the DM’s role is to describe how the world responds to that. This feature encroaches on the DM’s ability to perform their role by saying whatever they describe must result in a 20% discount for the character of player who takes this feature.