D&D (2024) Learning to Love the Background System

[EzekielRaiden]

Please, go ahead.

5th Edition D&D is, at its heart, an effort to be an impossible thing. This is well illustrated by the tension over spellcasting and magic items. What did we hear nearly constantly during the "Next" playtest? People wanted magic to "feel magical" again. They wanted magic items to be "special."

And here we are, twelve years later, with magic that isn't any more magical-feeling than it was in 3e, and items that aren't any more special than they were in 3e. Why?

Because what people actually want is the feeling they had when they were first discovering D&D, while keeping everything perfectly consistent with tradition and the things they're familiar with. This is an impossible request. The very thing that would make it magical IS unfamiliarity, but when they were given something that seemed unfamiliar before, it was rejected as "wrong."

Hence, 5e is trapped in a cycle of repeatedly trying to square circles. It can't commit to a design philosophy or creative voice, because familiar is boring and different is wrong. It tries to be just different enough to not be wrong, and that goes for a while, but then gets boring. They've recapitulated the same problems races had before (with the minor tweak of three stats, not two) because they're waffling, unwilling to be the different that got backlash (remember how controversial Tasha's stats were at launch!) but unable to remain familiar.

When you chase feel and then grasp for mechanics, you're doomed to making the same mistakes over and over. But there was no other direction 5e could have gone.

 

[Krachek]

I like those background.
They make sense, are thematic, perfect to introduce to DnD.
Optimizers and Experienced players will ask for and use custom backgrounds.

 

[Belen]

The new backgrounds are garbage. I will be immediately house ruling that ALL Origin Feats provide a +1 stat and that a player can chose the feat they want at character creation.

Additionally, the ASI will become floating and divorced from background.

 

[Belen]

5th Edition D&D is, at its heart, an effort to be an impossible thing. This is well illustrated by the tension over spellcasting and magic items. What did we hear nearly constantly during the "Next" playtest? People wanted magic to "feel magical" again. They wanted magic items to be "special."

And here we are, twelve years later, with magic that isn't any more magical-feeling than it was in 3e, and items that aren't any more special than they were in 3e. Why?

Because what people actually want is the feeling they had when they were first discovering D&D, while keeping everything perfectly consistent with tradition and the things they're familiar with. This is an impossible request. The very thing that would make it magical IS unfamiliarity, but when they were given something that seemed unfamiliar before, it was rejected as "wrong."

Hence, 5e is trapped in a cycle of repeatedly trying to square circles. It can't commit to a design philosophy or creative voice, because familiar is boring and different is wrong. It tries to be just different enough to not be wrong, and that goes for a while, but then gets boring. They've recapitulated the same problems races had before (with the minor tweak of three stats, not two) because they're waffling, unwilling to be the different that got backlash (remember how controversial Tasha's stats were at launch!) but unable to remain familiar.

When you chase feel and then grasp for mechanics, you're doomed to making the same mistakes over and over. But there was no other direction 5e could have gone.

I think it is worse because they have consistently been removing the flavor of D&D to be more homogenous. Paladins should be called by a deity to serve as a holy warrior. I like the oath but they should still be tied to a church. They are now moving in the same direction with clerics.

These are just examples of a larger issue.

 

[Vael]

I think it is worse because they have consistently been removing the flavor of D&D to be more homogenous. Paladins should be called by a deity to serve as a holy warrior. I like the oath but they should still be tied to a church. They are now moving in the same direction with clerics.

These are just examples of a larger issue.

Which church? For which setting? Which Diety? Do we need Eberron-specific Paladins with separate class features than Forgotten Realms Paladins?

A slightly more generic Paladin is to widen the appeal and simplify design. I view this as a feature, not a bug.

 

[CreamCloud0]

Which church? For which setting? Which Diety? Do we need Eberron-specific Paladins with separate class features than Forgotten Realms Paladins?

A slightly more generic Paladin is to widen the appeal and simplify design. I view this as a feature, not a bug.

I assumed they meant any church, but still A church, as it is paladins kind of float about beholden to nothing but their oath.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I think it is worse because they have consistently been removing the flavor of D&D to be more homogenous. Paladins should be called by a deity to serve as a holy warrior. I like the oath but they should still be tied to a church. They are now moving in the same direction with clerics.

These are just examples of a larger issue.

I agree, DND is sort of strung between wizards trying to make it totally accessible to everyone with no continuity lockout and it being built on this legacy of very specific lore, other iconic elements and flavour.

 

[Xeviat]

I really miss the flavorful background benefits. I'll be porting them back in; they were really helpful when writing more open adventures.

 

[Horwath]

5th Edition D&D is, at its heart, an effort to be an impossible thing. This is well illustrated by the tension over spellcasting and magic items. What did we hear nearly constantly during the "Next" playtest? People wanted magic to "feel magical" again. They wanted magic items to be "special."

And here we are, twelve years later, with magic that isn't any more magical-feeling than it was in 3e, and items that aren't any more special than they were in 3e. Why?

Because what people actually want is the feeling they had when they were first discovering D&D, while keeping everything perfectly consistent with tradition and the things they're familiar with. This is an impossible request. The very thing that would make it magical IS unfamiliarity, but when they were given something that seemed unfamiliar before, it was rejected as "wrong."

Hence, 5e is trapped in a cycle of repeatedly trying to square circles. It can't commit to a design philosophy or creative voice, because familiar is boring and different is wrong. It tries to be just different enough to not be wrong, and that goes for a while, but then gets boring. They've recapitulated the same problems races had before (with the minor tweak of three stats, not two) because they're waffling, unwilling to be the different that got backlash (remember how controversial Tasha's stats were at launch!) but unable to remain familiar.

When you chase feel and then grasp for mechanics, you're doomed to making the same mistakes over and over. But there was no other direction 5e could have gone.

players want magic items because the idea to have the same rusty sword you picked up at boot camp be with you for 10+ levels is depressing.

 

[Corinnguard]

I really miss the flavorful background benefits. I'll be porting them back in; they were really helpful when writing more open adventures.

The Bonds, Ideals, Flaws and Personality traits? Those were okay, but I don't feel like anyone actually followed them as they were role-playing their characters.