D&D (2024) Just drop the backgrounds.

[Horwath]

Where are you putting ASI? Back into race?

forgot about that.
but, it is also irrelevant as it is floating +2/+1 or +1/+1/+1.
It can be in race or in 1st level class options.

 

[aco175]

I would leave the sample backgrounds in the book and let people that can make their own a way to do that. I can see the abuse of letting everyone free range make a background and each Turnip Farmer being skilled in Perception and Investigation/Thieves' Tools and martial weapons.

 

[Horwath]

I would leave the sample backgrounds in the book and let people that can make their own a way to do that. I can see the abuse of letting everyone free range make a background and each Turnip Farmer being skilled in Perception and Investigation/Thieves' Tools and martial weapons.

If everyone wants to play some kind of burglar, let them.
Party will be short on other areas then.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I would leave the sample backgrounds in the book and let people that can make their own a way to do that. I can see the abuse of letting everyone free range make a background and each Turnip Farmer being skilled in Perception and Investigation/Thieves' Tools and martial weapons.

I really hope, passive perception will be decoupled from the perception skill like grapple from athletics and acrobatics.

 

[aco175]

I really hope, passive perception will be decoupled from the perception skill like grapple from athletics and acrobatics.

I tend to not use passive checks that much. Not sure if I should use them more. Letting everyone just pick 2 bonus skills means that everyone picks the 'god' skill for one and shoehorn a reason that it fits. "Turnip farmers need to have good Perception to spot blight on the plants and see if rabbits are eating the crops."

 

[gorice]

No thank you. My players would rather pick a thematic background than custom pick mechanical bits. Doesn't fit their style. The current approach of providing the custom option as default and then example background options is the best of both worlds.

Serious question: how often does the thematic background (which I also like!) come up in play?

Unfortunately, my experience is that most players kind of forget about their backgrounds, or at least don't find ways of making them relevant to what is actually happening in play. With the new changes that remove background features and encourage customisation, I only see this getting worse. In which case, yeah, ditch 'em.

 

[Morrus]

My general feeling is that freeform selection of abilities is not D&D to me. D&D was always the game where you chose a class, not picked from a menu of abilities. Same with the other modular elements. Both approaches are fine, and make for great games, but D&D is characterised by pre-written character options.

 

[delericho]

With backgrounds being fully customizable, there is no need for them at all mechanically.
Keep them in description chapter of character creation as fluff.

Add 2 skills to you 1st level class proficiencies. Drop the class skills limit.
add choice of 2 languages/tool/weapons total to your 1st level class proficiencies.
Take one feat.

I would rather they get rid of the "fully customizable" aspect. Backgrounds were great; turning them into just a free selection of some stuff is a big retrograde step, IMO.

I'd actually make race and class and background all fixed, but then add a customization step, in which players can optionally switch out a small number of "things" for other, comparable "things" - be those "things" languages, proficiencies, or whatever. So that yes, your Fighter can be proficient in Arcana, or your Dwarf can have Improved Darkvision instead of Stonecunning, or your Hermit can have picked up proficiency in land vehicles along the way... but you can't have all those things.

(Oh, if doing this I would also remove the ASIs from backgrounds. Either just by making them truly floating or, better, building them into the random roll/point buy/standard array all along.)

 

[prabe]

I have always told the players in the campaigns I'm DMing that they'd have to tell me about their Background Features, because I wasn't going to keep track of them; I think they've come up occasionally but rarely. I'm actually happier to see something more consistent with other rules/character elements--such as Feats--replacing the bespoke Features. At least they'll get used.

 

[payn]

PF2 came up with this clever little "know your ABCs" idea of character creation. Your stats will be determined by a process of choosing ancestry, then background, and finally class. However, the game math only works in a few varieties so only 2-3 stat arrays work anyways. Its a total smoke screen to make folks think the process is more organic. Probably best dropped in favor of just choose one of these arrays.

I think backgrounds a re a little different here in 5E. I can see the comparison though. The point about players never bringing up the background again is a good one. These mechanical packages dont really tie into the character or during play. So, the idea of just dropping them is, perhaps not popular, but makes some sense. I'd say expand backgrounds and give them more mechanical impact in game throughout the life of the character, but that is not the 5E way. Though, I have wanted this since PF1 introduced traits because its a flavorful idea that just doesn't have the staying power to matter. Ultimately, I think backgrounds will be the new BIFTs of 5.5E so I get where the OP is coming from.