D&D (2024) Is anyone going to use the new 2024 backgrounds?

[Micah Sweet]

Run it yourself.

@EzekielRaiden wants to play in a game they enjoy, not run one.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Sure, but you can apply that whether or not there is an official "farmer background".

Background is part of backstory, but you don't need the former to have the latter, and what if I want to be a rancher instead of a farmer (and get that bonus when investigating livestock disappearing)

Talk to your Narrator? This stuff shouldn't be hard to work out.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

My biggest problem with the new backgrounds is they restrict the story.

Backgrounds by their nature restrict story elements before you attach mechanics to them. When you attach mechanics you then create further restrictions and force a choice between mechanics and the restricted story options you have available.

Eh. No more restrictive than class or species. These character creation "packages" are part of D&D, and I'm fine with it. Of course, of the 3, I'm fine with backgrounds being the most "editable" because they consist only of modular objects, including ability score bonuses, proficiencies, and gear, as opposed to "powers".

 

[Micah Sweet]

Well, kinda.

But you could use any ribbon feature that already existed for a background that was already made. So sure, you could create a new feature (subject to DM approval), but this lets you mix-n-match the feature with the skills with the tool proficiencies (or languages) of your choice.


And you start by choosing the background with the equipment you want, and then everything else you customize.

It's not game-breaking, but given how flexible it is, I think it shows you how people just don't go off the beaten path that often.

And yet whenever I assert that most people just go along with what's in front of them, it's "insulting to suggest that people can't think for themselves".

 

[Zaukrie]

Are there only two types of players in your estimation: people who "just want to play D&D", and "min max types"?

Yes, that's totally what I meant

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yes, that's totally what I meant

What did you mean then? You presented a dichotomy.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

@EzekielRaiden wants to play in a game they enjoy, not run one.

If you don't start it (maybe as a DM first) you won't find a game. That is often a reality. Going to the 5e forum and bemoaning your tragedy won't help at all.

 

[tetrasodium]

Until we see the actual wording in the book I feel like it is all a moot point. I expect that they will say something like talk with your GM about customizing your background, or if you don't see a background that fits work with your GM to make one appropriate for your setting. In the DMG I doubt that it will be presented as an optional rule instead it will be in the world building section.

We kinda did for some of them. A while back wotc had the phb pages up on a projection at garycon gencon someothercon. They were blurry but appear to have solved some of the flawed by design aspects in 2014 ones. sthat seems to be confirmed in the page panning through

Spoiler: this video

 

[Arilyn]

My players would likely use the pregen backgrounds. They are more interested in story and flavor than mechanical benefit from their backgrounds.

We find creating our own to be more flavourful and story oriented. The WotC ones are all bland. Nothing wrong with ordinary backgrounds but we like to mix it up with "raised by goblins" or "transformed wizard familiar." We'd also prefer to pick an origin feat that matches the character, so maybe a lucky farmer or a tough crafter. I heavily encourage players to create their backgrounds and traits in 2014. If we play 2024, I'll do the same.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

@EzekielRaiden wants to play in a game they enjoy, not run one.

In fairness, Hussar has very kindly provided me a seat at his table and I am enjoying that game. It isn't 4e or 13A, of course, but it's still a good game.

Also, I like the new profile pic!