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

[Faolyn]

Which is completely and utterly pointless.

People complain about ASIs in races, so they make them "floating". Now, they move them to backgrounds, which by default are completely customizable anyway so the ASI are, in fact, still floating; making the "change" utterly pointless.

It's like, when with the devs finally get it. Just make ASI part of generating ability scores or bake them into the numbers by default...

Anyway, bowing out.

I think a lot of people aren't going to bother customizing their backgrounds.

And I don't think the change is pointless here. With races, it outright says that you're born better than other creatures in some way. With backgrounds, it says that you managed to improve yourself with time and effort. A noble has gotten a good education and learned manners and diplomacy, so raising Cha and Int make sense. A gladiator has learned how to fight and how to please the crowd, so raising Strength and Cha make sense.

 

[Charlaquin]

Anyone point out yet that Surprise just gives the surprised disadvantage on Init?

Yeah. Checks out with the post-MMotM version of False Appearance.

 

[Charlaquin]

I should clarify, my initial very negative reaction was more about how people described the new stuff than about the media itself. Rewatching the video while not freaking out, it does seem to be that they want to be able to make PCs with stuff from any point in 5e’s publication life, without any conversion.

That makes sense. I was a little surprised at your negative reaction, as these seem like changes I would have guessed you would mostly be in favor of. Personally I don’t love everything in this UA, but I do love the general direction, and I’d say most of the changes look positive to me. My biggest gripes are the changes to nat 1s and 20s (which are easy to ignore) and the Aardling race, which I low-key hate. But, I can accept that I’m just not the target audience for them.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

As a catgirl type, I disagree, but

Seeing as you have to land (or fall) at the end of movement, just fluff it as a prodigious leap!

 

[Ixal]

I think a lot of people aren't going to bother customizing their backgrounds.

And I don't think the change is pointless here. With races, it outright says that you're born better than other creatures in some way. With backgrounds, it says that you managed to improve yourself with time and effort. A noble has gotten a good education and learned manners and diplomacy, so raising Cha and Int make sense. A gladiator has learned how to fight and how to please the crowd, so raising Strength and Cha make sense.

And why wouldn't some races be biologically better than others in an area?
A crow is smarter than a pigeon. And a (small) gorilla can easily knock out an adult human. Or if you want to account for the "everyone can interbreed with everyone", a boxer is stronger than a poodle because they were bred for strength.

It makes no sense that vastly different species/races are biologically completely equal in all regards and it destroys most flavor those races had. Elves are good archers? Halflings are good with slings and throwing stones? Why? They are not an ounce better than everyone else. Dwarves being able to handle beer (and other posion) better because of their constitution? Not anymore.

"But your training....". Training is not represented by ASI but by the stats array and how you distribute stats. An elf who toiled day in day out as slave Conan style? Highest score into strength, obviously. Doesn't change that he would still be more dexterous than other slaves because of his biology.

 

[Charlaquin]

Halflings really seem to have lost out in terms of design space here - very boring compared to the rest. And I really wish they'd taken more of a pass on Brave - conditional advantage on saves always slows things down at the table.

Yeah, Stealth proficiency in place of poison resistance or the preternatural ability to hide behind Medium and larger creatures feels like a huge nerf. Though I can see wanting to change Naturally Stealthy since so many DMs outright refuse to let it work the way it clearly says it does (and same for Mask of the Wild), replacing it with Stealth proficiency is just incredibly disappointing.

 

[Charlaquin]

Seeing as you have to land (or fall) at the end of movement, just fluff it as a prodigious leap!

I mean, ok, that works for cats. Not so much for like… I dunno, cows or something.

This is just a divide between different types of furry. I like my anthros to cleave very close to the animals they’re based on, because animals are freaking cool, and their behaviors and traits make for a really cool lens through which to reframe human behaviors and traits. But @Ruin Explorer is absolutely right, there’s a different subset of furries to whom “anthro but also an angel with magic spectral wings sometimes” is going to be everything they’ve ever wanted in an OC.

 

[Mallus]

First reactions:

The animal-headed celestial race looks great. Because I’ve wanted to play a character based on those cynocephalic St. Christopher paintings for years. Also because I put an entire city of similar creatures in my latest homebrew. Great minds and all…

Moving ASIs to Backgrounds is… fine.

The bonus languages in the Backgrounds are… kinda random? It feels like structure for structure’s sake.

Starting with a Feat is good. Feats are fun.

Giving the magic-y races a standardized cantrip/spell/spell is nice and elegant.

Spells can’t crit anymore???

 

[Faolyn]

And why wouldn't some races be biologically better than others in an area?
A crow is smarter than a pigeon. And a (small) gorilla can easily knock out an adult human. Or if you want to account for the "everyone can interbreed with everyone", a boxer is stronger than a poodle because they were bred for strength.

It makes no sense that vastly different species/races are biologically completely equal in all regards and it destroys most flavor those races had. Elves are good archers? Halflings are good with slings? Why? They are not an ounce better than everyone else.

"But your training....". Training is not represented by ASI but by the stats array and how you distribute stats. An elf who toiled day in day out as slave Conan style? Highest score into strength, obviously. Doesn't change that he would still be more dexterous than other slaves because of his biology.

Because, when applied to sentient beings in a fantasy setting, it can be unpleasantly and pointlessly limiting.

It can also be bigoted at times, when done badly. Especially when it comes to the mental stats.

But take your good elven archers and your good halfling slingers. Those are both cultural things that should have nothing to do with their biology. Elves aren't born knowing how to use a bow. And in D&D, both would be represented by a higher Dex, which means that there's no mechanical flavor differences between the two.

Why should I have to play a dexterous elf ex-slave? Why couldn't I have built muscles during my hard labor but never developed that elven grace? because I was being being a slave and couldn't attend mandatory elf dancing lessons.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I really have no idea why anyone cares if it is a new edition or not. If it is balanced to work with old 5e stuff, or at least enough that it doesn't matter a lot, and the basic concepts don't change, who cares? But I'm sure we'll get hundreds of posts debating it.

It matters because everything coming out from now on, including likely the bulk of 3PP material, will be replaced by the new presentation and format. The 2014 5e will be erased effectively, because the new stuff will still be 5e officially.