D&D (2024) First playtest thread! One D&D Character Origins.

[rooneg]

Is that rank feature equivalent to rolling twice once per round and taking the higher damage number? Not even close. It's got highly narrow usage and what you get during that narrow usage isn't going to be anywhere close to as useful as Savage Attacker.

No, it is not equivalent, but it is also not sufficiently stronger to make it impossible to play the old version at the same table. The difference between the two characters is unlikely to be more than the difference between a weak 5e character and a strong one, for example.

Do I expect people to want to play with the new backgrounds, rebuilding their characters to do so if necessary? Absolutely. Do I think it will absolutely be required to have fun playing the game with other players who did rebuild? No, not really. In the end it’ll depend on what the new classes look like though, since that’s so much more of the power budget for a character.

 

[Parmandur]

But only for new backgrounds. The old backgrounds in the 2014 PHB cannot be played as they are without a significant difference. A feat isn't minor.

New Soldier
Ability Scores: +2 Strength, +1 Constitution
Skill Proficiencies: Athletics, Intimidation
Tool Proficiency: Gaming Set* (one of your
choice)
Language: Goblin
Feat: Savage Attacker

Old Soldier
Skill Proficiencies: Athletics, Intimidation
Tool Proficiencies: One type of gaming set, vehicles (land)
Equipment: An insignia of rank, a trophy taken from
a fallen enemy (a dagger, broken blade, or piece of a
banner), a set of bone dice or deck of cards, a set of
common clothes, and a pouch containing 10 gp

FEATURE: MILITARY RANK
You have a military rank from your career a s a soldier.
Soldiers loyal to your former military organization
still recognize your authority and influence, and they
defer to you if they are of a lower rank. You can invoke
your rank to exert influence over other soldiers and
requisition simple equipment or horses for temporary
use. You can also usually gain access to friendly
military encampments and fortresses where your
rank is recognized.

Is that rank feature equivalent to rolling twice once per round and taking the higher damage number? Not even close. It's got highly narrow usage and what you get during that narrow usage isn't going to be anywhere close to as useful as Savage Attacker.

Saying "take a 1st Level Feat" is a minor fix, though. And other than the Feat replacing the roleplay feature, and the movement of the ASI from race, those are exactly equivalent using the Background rules in the 2014 PHB (although now it is strictly one tool and one language, rather than two of either).

 

[JEB]

Well, 5E hasn't had any type reset for the Core books. Difference between printings and editions.

Tasha's marked a slight increase in font size, if that counts...

 

[Parmandur]

Tasha's marked a slight increase in font size, if that counts...

No, because Tasha’s still works with the same Edition typeset in 2014, even if you have a more recent printing.

 

[Maxperson]

No, it is not equivalent, but it is also not sufficiently stronger to make it impossible to play the old version at the same table. The difference between the two characters is unlikely to be more than the difference between a weak 5e character and a strong one, for example.

It wasn't impossible to play 1e, 2e or 3e fighters at the same table as a cleric, druid and wizard, either. I know because I did it.

The difference is significant, and that's the key. Not whether it's impossible or not, because it isn't going to be even if the new backgrounds gave 5 feats.

Do I expect people to want to play with the new backgrounds, rebuilding their characters to do so if necessary? Absolutely. Do I think it will absolutely be required to have fun playing the game with other players who did rebuild? No, not really. In the end it’ll depend on what the new classes look like though, since that’s so much more of the power budget for a character.

To be backwards compatible, the old choices need to be roughly equally appealing. If the new choices are going to be picked the vast majority of the time because they are superior, it's not really compatible with the old stuff.

 

[Maxperson]

Saying "take a 1st Level Feat" is a minor fix, though.

I agree. If I have to fix it, though, it's not backwards compatible.

Edit: It's also not a great fix as it now makes the old backgrounds strictly better than the new ones. They now have the feat + the feature. To really fix it I have to remove the feature too, which makes it the new background. So also not compatible on that front.

And other than the Feat replacing the roleplay feature, and the movement of the ASI from race, those are exactly equivalent using the Background rules in the 2014 PHB (although now it is strictly one tool and one language, rather than two of either).

Sure. Other than feats being significantly superior with the new background, they are the same. I agree with that.

 

[rooneg]

To be backwards compatible, the old choices need to be roughly equally appealing. If the new choices are going to be picked the vast majority of the time because they are superior, it's not really compatible with the old stuff.

First of all, we don’t really know what the total package is going to look like, it’s quite possible that the new characters are pretty much comparable in power to the old ones (the “Power Level” sidebar in the playtest doc implies that is a goal). The backwards compatibility doesn’t have to be at the level of individual components like backgrounds. It could be at the level of the total package. Regardless though, being compatible doesn’t even have to mean being completely equal in power. It’s certainly desirable for things to be pretty close, but we already have huge power skew between strong characters and weak characters.

Fundamentally, there are a variety of ways things could play out regarding precisely how compatible the old stuff and the new stuff are. I suspect a big chunk of what we’re doing in the playtest is giving the community a chance to tell WotC where they think the line is. If for you having backgrounds give out 1st level feats is a bridge too far, I suggest you tell them that. Personally, I don’t think it’s worth getting worked up about, since I’ve already played at plenty of tables with a bigger power skew between characters and it was fine.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Are you talking about the Power Level sidebar?

No, that sidebar is irrelevant to the discussion, as it exclusively concerns the fact that playtest material is not necessarily at the same power level as published material, because it isn’t finished.

I’m referring to the sidebar describing what to do with your ASIs if you use a PHB or Tasha’s race with a UA background.

 

[Azzy]

For my may-likely-never-get-made home ruleset, I've wondered about just having the 20 allow an exploding die roll (get a 20 and will another die to add to it to try to get to the DC if 20 isn't good enough).Could do similar on a 1 to get something lower.

There are other games that do that. In Cyberpunk 2020 and Mekton Zeta, if you roll a nat 10 (they use a d10 for task resolution), you roll another d10 and add to the total. If you roll a Nat 1, you roll another d10 and subtract it from the total.

 

[edosan]

Is that rank feature equivalent to rolling twice once per round and taking the higher damage number? Not even close. It's got highly narrow usage and what you get during that narrow usage isn't going to be anywhere close to as useful as Savage Attacker.

On the other hand, I think the old background is way more interesting in a role playing way than the new one. The new background feels like too much of a slide backwards to a purely mechanical 4e mindset.