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.

 

[BookTenTiger]

They can, but can you really not see that this is easily seen as a different type of game? A lot of people don't want that in their D&D, and some of those people might still want strongholds.

That's probably why they put it in the DMG. It's not expected to be in every game. It seems like WotC understands that Bastions should be optional and doesn't fit every campaign or playstyle.

 

[Lanefan]

The bastion characters are player characters.

A similar situation can happen when a player plays two characters at the same time.

I get this, and at the same time don't get it.

I often play two characters at the same time when I can; I'm more than used to it.

But playing all the bastion characters somehow seems different. I didn't get to roll them up, didn't get to determine their quirks and personalities and backgrounds, didn't get to choose their class or species...they just appear, fully formed and with little if any guidance as to what makes them tick.

I mean, don't get me wrong - as a player I'm happy to do the bookkeeping as to their numbers, their pay, their comings and goings, and so forth. But in doing so I feel more like I'm acting as an assistant DM helping track the NPCs rather than as a player.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That's probably why they put it in the DMG. It's not expected to be in every game. It seems like WotC understands that Bastions should be optional and doesn't fit every campaign or playstyle.

My point is that bastions are conceptually very cool, but some people won't want to use them any way because of how the mechanics work, and how they work is a big shift from not only previous mechanics on this topic, but (if the video is accurate) previous design philosophy about the player/DM relationship.

 

[Not a Decepticon]

I mean, seriously, are we actually that afraid that the players might have a TINY sandbox to play in in our settings? Is that really something to be so afraid of?

Good grief, this has been done in D&D for decades. Wayyyy back when you used to get followers for your class at a certain level, you didn't have to "recruit" them. They were never going to betray you. You, the player, were 100% supposed to detail the followers. The DM had zero control over them.

Same as having a pet, a familiar, a patron, heck, even a deity. All of these are mostly under the control of the player. Do DM's actually step in and have a cleric's Deity betray them? Be unreliable? IME, no. They don't. The player picks whatever deity they happen to worship, and it's up to the player to bring that into play.

This is no different.

It is different because even if the player created something like familiar or god or a patron, I was stil lthe one controlling them and integrating them into the world to ensure they fit and were coherent with the world I was presenting. I am not allowed to interact with the Bastion NPCs, they're literally video game stat bonuses, not living people in the world, which breaks immersion and reminds the player this is a video game. I am not allowed to ensure they fit into the setting. I run in Mystara, where there are no Tieflings because there are no real fiends or connection to lower planes...except if I run using these rules, and the player wants entire crew of his bastion to be made out of Tiefling refugeees hiding from demons and I say them no, by the rules laid out in the bastion I'm the bad guy because I have no right to interact with the bastion. But even if it wasn't the case, second problem arises - the PCs decide everything about the crew of the bastion. So if a player decides that his crew loves and adores him and then does something horrible like slaughter of women and children, I'm not allowed to say his crew are disgusted and horriffied by this, because I'm not allowed to interact with the Bastion. Hell, if a PC kidnapps a princess and then flees to a bastion, I'm not allowed to have the king send an army to lay siege to the bastion because I'm not supposed to interact with the bastion. FFS the player may then declare that, as being inside his bastion he decides what the princess is like and claim she totally fell in love with him, Stockholm Syndrome style, and I cannot say anything because i'm not supposed to interact with the bastion.

there are games that handle collaborative storytelling like that better. But they build it into whole framework of the game, not just into one tacked-on part that, quite frankly, encourages murderhobo behavior because it's a place free of consequence. Which sucks especially when previously buing a place was a way to get the PCs more invested into the world and thus discourage murderhobo behavior.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That's probably why they put it in the DMG. It's not expected to be in every game. It seems like WotC understands that Bastions should be optional and doesn't fit every campaign or playstyle.

Are there any rules in the 5.5 PH called out as optional anymore? Called out, not just "everything is optional".

 

[Not a Decepticon]

That's probably why they put it in the DMG. It's not expected to be in every game. It seems like WotC understands that Bastions should be optional and doesn't fit every campaign or playstyle.

that worked so well for Ouathbreakers and Death Domain...oh wait, everyone were using them as PCs.

 

[Arilyn]

It was not financially successful, sure.

It was well-acted, the set design was great, the music was great, the special effects were amazing, and compared to literally every single DnD movie to come before it, it felt like a serious film created by a serious study with the intent of making a good film.

It was a good movie. A really good movie in my personal opinion, with clever twists, a heartfelt story, and solid writing.

And to be fair, it came out when most movies were failing to gain traction at the theatres. It's done really well on streaming. I enjoyed the movie too. Great fun!

 

[Lanefan]

Sure, that's how things are traditionally done. Why can't we try something different? What is wrong with the player's deciding that their kitchen maid is named Eliza and she is being courted by the Stablehand named Boe? Why can't they decide that the old butler they hired has a lame leg from a wound he got defending a noble's manor from a monster assault?

They can; unless the DM (whose NPCs they are) has already decided something else about them e.g. that Eliza the kitchen maid is a spy for the local Thieves' guild who are hoping to, maybe not rob the PCs blind, but use the PCs' info to let them know where other tasty jobs might await.

And it's highly unlikely (as in, it won't happen) that the players will ever design anything into these QPCs* that works against thei own interests.

* - QPC = Quasi-Player Character.

Sure, could be difficult to actually RP those characters, out loud, at the table. That is a challenge... but is that the purpose of the Bastion system? And are you as a DM incapable of taking RPing direction from someone else? I mean, you are an old-hand at DMing Lanefan, have you EVER had to RP a character whose player missed a session? It wouldn't be much different than that.

That's not the issue. The issue is that all these NPCs aren't clones; they're each different and will - or should - each have different goals and reasons for becoming hirelings or recruits for the PCs...not all of which might agree with the PCs' own agenda.

Same as hiring for a small business - you'll get some employees who are above-and-beyond loyal and honest and others who will steal from you at any opportunity; with most falling somewhere between those two points.

 

[Lanefan]

It was not financially successful, sure.

It was well-acted, the set design was great, the music was great, the special effects were amazing, and compared to literally every single DnD movie to come before it, it felt like a serious film created by a serious study with the intent of making a good film.

It was a good movie. A really good movie in my personal opinion, with clever twists, a heartfelt story, and solid writing.

I wouldn't go quite as far in my praise as your last sentence, but it was indeed better than it had any right to be.

 

[Lanefan]

I mean, seriously, are we actually that afraid that the players might have a TINY sandbox to play in in our settings? Is that really something to be so afraid of?

Good grief, this has been done in D&D for decades. Wayyyy back when you used to get followers for your class at a certain level, you didn't have to "recruit" them. They were never going to betray you. You, the player, were 100% supposed to detail the followers. The DM had zero control over them.

Same as having a pet, a familiar, a patron, heck, even a deity. All of these are mostly under the control of the player. Do DM's actually step in and have a cleric's Deity betray them? Be unreliable? IME, no. They don't. The player picks whatever deity they happen to worship, and it's up to the player to bring that into play.

Maybe it's just how we play, but with the exception of familiars the bolded has rarely if ever been completely true round here. If it has a brain and can think for itself, it can act independently; and it's on the PC (if wise) to make sure due diligence is done before putting too much trust in any of these people.

Followers can betray you, intentionally or otherwise. Pets can run off. Patrons and deities are fully DM-side independent entities who each have their own agendae; though it's up to the player to play out the manner of worship etc. if so desired, it's on the DM to determine what makes the deity tick and how it might react (if at all) to those particular ways of worship.

Familiars are different, as they - along with summoned monsters, unseen servants, and the like - are fully controlled by their boss and generally can't or don't think for themselves..