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.

 

[James Gasik]

I've often seen claims that a post by Jeremy Crawford on Twitter trumps the written text.

And just as many claims that he's "not a rules guy" and his opinion shouldn't be trusted. Some people won't accept anything that isn't in actual text or in an official FAQ or errata.

Other people won't even accept that.

 

[Not a Decepticon]

For DMs who have limited time and-or who have players willing to take on that work, I get it; and I certainly don't see it as a "prick move" in any case. I mean hell, the players can always decline to do said work, which puts it right back in the DM's lap if it's to get done at all.

it is certainly a prick move to do it without prior discussion and/or at a table that already has established DM-party dynamics and lines where one's responsibility begins or ends.

 

[Hussar]

/snip

Sorry, responded before I should have. My bad. NOthing to see here.

 

[AnotherGuy]

And, this is why we don't have follower rules in the game anymore.

I much prefer player facing rules to be actually player facing. Then again, if I'm worried about my players suddenly becoming mass murderers for no reason, maybe it would be more of a concern. Since I don't play with dicks, it's not a concern.

I think the concerns are not so much mass murderers but rather mature roleplaying

We have a player at our table who's strong suit is not role playing, in my estimation.

In an instance where the players were controlling multiple characters, he found himself in charge of 3 clerics of different faiths. They were his characters so he was familiar with them, they were not thrust on him.
There was a rather significant decision to be made and there was much dialogue and a social exchange occuring between the PCs and NPCs. Another player at the table called him out for playing the clerics all the same way despite their obvious differences (sex, race, culture, background, creed...etc)

This is not the first time this player has created wtf moments at the table both with DM (myself) and the players. I've spoken about this before, but this player is the reason I will not use Plot Points (DMG 2014) at my table, after a rather disastrous use.
We cannot trust him to use that device to build a better or interesting story.

Now I have only one such player at my table. Imagine someone has 2 or more players like that.
I'm lucky in that if I had to use the Bastion Rules I could allow the players to control the hirelings leave it to the players with maturity to run things and outvote his power-gamist tendencies, but if I were running a table with more such players, I would never leave NPCs in their hands.

 

[Imaro]

I think the concerns are not so much mass murderers but rather mature roleplaying

We have a player at our table who's strong suit is not role playing, in my estimation.

In an instance where the players were controlling multiple characters, he found himself in charge of 3 clerics of different faiths. They were his characters so he was familiar with them, they were not thrust on him.
There was a rather significant decision to be made and there was much dialogue and a social exchange occuring between the PCs and NPCs. Another player at the table called him out for playing the clerics all the same way despite their obvious differences (sex, race, culture, background, creed...etc)

This is not the first time this player has created wtf moments at the table both with DM (myself) and the players. I've spoken about this before, but this player is the reason I will not use Plot Points (DMG 2014) at my table, after a rather disastrous use.
We cannot trust him to use that device to build a better or interesting story.

Now I have only one such player at my table. Imagine someone has 2 or more players like that.
I'm lucky in that if I had to use the Bastion Rules I could allow the players to control the hirelings leave it to the players with maturity to run things and outvote his power-gamist tendencies, but if I were running a table with more such players, I would never leave NPCs in their hands.

So it is a question of trusting the players... well at least you were actually willing to admit it vs obfuscate the concern behind claims of bad rules design or tradition or whatever other non-reason.

I do wonder as a DM have you (do you) always nail your NPC's perfectly so far as roleplaying them? If not how did you learn?

Edit: To further expound... the bastion NPC's have very limited roles and the extent to which they can affect the larger world is minimal to null (at least without DM ok'ing it)... so wouldn't this be a good set up for players to explore roleplaying different characters?

 

[pemerton]

It is MY job to weave the storytelling into a beleivable world PCs will CARE FOR!

Do you really think I'm as bad as some jackass who kills player character's dog "for the story" because I think if a player leads order of righteous knights and then slaughters Village of Women and Children, Edmonton, pees on the king and kidnapps his daughter, then at least some of these knights should be appaled and disgusted by their leader?

If the stuff mentioned in the second quote is a serious part of your RPGing, then I think you are failing in the aspiration stated in the first quote.

Play their characters and shape the world by their decisions and actions. I run reactive world that changes and responds to the PCs

It sounds to me that you as GM are shaping (=authoring) the world, treating the decisions and actions that the players declare for their PCs as factors to take into account.

You know what I think the problem is? That several people in this conversation do not consider the Game Master to be a player who also gets to have fun.

You are strawmaning by reducing all GM who like to use the NPCs like that to the worst case scenario. One of first lessons I've learned as a DM is to not murder PC's family. I do not see how kidnapping is bad aside the idea the player resents anythign bad happenning to "their" part of the world. But all this mentality leads to is that the player's NPCs do not really live in the world and aren't allowed to interact with anything.

So, suppose that a player chose to have their PC be an orphan. Then you as GM wouldn't get to make kidnapping their family members a part of the fiction.

Or, suppose a player chooses not to have their PC build a bastion. Then you as GM wouldn't have any bastion NPCs to make up stories about.

Presumably in such circumstances you would nevertheless be able to find enjoyable stuff to do as GM.

So why can't you do whatever that would be, even if the PC is not an orphan, or even if the PC has a bastion?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

From my reading of this, the DM basically has to give the player a bastion as a reward (even if it’s nothing but a plot of land). So it’s quite within the rules for the DM to not give a player a bastion.

 

[AnotherGuy]

So it is a question of trusting the players... well at least you were actually willing to admit it vs obfuscate the concern behind claims of bad rules design or tradition or whatever other non-reason.

To be fair, I read the last few posts and went several pages to try get the gist of the conversation.
I have not looked into the mechanics of the Bastions Rules. I didn't know if they were out.
I'm not here to play favourites with any side, just perhaps offer some insight as to why certain DMs may be reluctant to loosen the reigns altogether.

I do wonder as a DM have you (do you) always nail your NPC's perfectly so far as roleplaying them? If not how did you learn?

I am by no means great, nevermind perfect.
I'm only saying this particular player has historically proven that the table has had issues with his content creation be it from his characters or using a plot point device.

Edit: To further expound... the bastion NPC's have very limited roles and the extent to which they can affect the larger world is minimal to null (at least without DM ok'ing it)... so wouldn't this be a good set up for players to explore roleplaying different characters?

Yes. In fact, I have allowed many times PCs to create established content.
They have each created their own NPCs in a city, written up content on our Obsidian Portal pages for what has occurred between adventures, expounded on background ...etc
I'm happy to let PCs have a sandpit, in fact I want them to as it gives me more ideas - I'm just saying not all players are the same and some concerns by DMs for their tables may be valid.

On the other side of the coin though, these players won't learn unless they are provided the opportunity and learn from their peers. So, it is a table-by-table basis on how much or how little you as DM feel comfortable letting your players create.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Just as a follow up, in our 2e and 3e days the players had a Bastion and pretty much managed the hirelings. There were not formalised rules, we made sense of things as we went along.

My players' characters over the years have

• Managed a tavern, with a velvet rope back area for their trophy room, study and meeting hall;
• Built a martial training school with a permanent teleportation chamber; and
• Formed a mercenary guild of ex-militia and an ex-member of the Darokinian Diplomacy Corps (the latter for the work connections).

All with no interference from me.

 

[pemerton]

Unless there's some form of mind control involved, there's no logical reason in-setting why a henchmen would be "100% loyal and will never betray the PC"

Huh? Are you saying that it's unrealistic to for some people to be unflaggingly loyal to others? To never betray them? That only betrayal is realistic?