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

Kobold Stew

Last Guy in the Airlock
Supporter
I can imagine myself saying "Pick a background, but you can swap any one (or maybe two) elements.

Change your feat? Sure, but then you can't change an ASI, or vice-versa.
This is similar to what I'm thinking of for backwards compatibility: you can take one thing from previous books, but not a free-for-all. If you want an un-updated subclass, or Greenflame Blade, or to play a Satyr, you can choose one, but not more than that. I think that's the rule I'll hold myself to, in any case, even if I am given more freedom (mostly because there are some things in MotM that I'd like to keep active).
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Kobold Stew

Last Guy in the Airlock
Supporter
So, I can take the Criminal background but say my character was raised in a temple and grew up totally sheltered from any kind of criminal activity? I mean, ok I guess, but that feels pretty weird…
I went to an all-boys school, and learned absolutely none of the skills or values that it was trying to inculcate.

(except, arguably, that I use the word inculcate).
 

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
Eh, in 2014 I saw a lot of backgrounds picked because it had the (non-class) skills the player wanted, and then a character persona was developed after the fact to justify the choice.

Now with something potentially greater at stake, the starting feat, I expect to see at least one character with the same few backgrounds every single campaign, and wouldn't be surprised if sometimes a party ends up with several characters of the same background -- not through narrative choice to build a cohesive group, but for the mechanical advantage it brings.

If you look at the (2014) armor table, once the characters have enough money there's really only 3-4 non-magical armors because in 99% of the cases the characters will pick up the best armor. No one gets padded when they could have leather. I fear the same thing for the background system, where there will be in-effect only a couple of choices and a bunch of wasted ink of ones that rarely see use. That constricts diversity and makes characters across campaigns more same-sy.
 

I like almost everything about the backgrounds, but I hate that the origin feats are locked to them.
Agreed. It would be better if the players got to choose an origin feat regardless of background.

If Backgrounds had to have a locked-in origin feat, it shouldn't be just one feat. Maybe a small list of commonly associated origin feats that can be found in that background?
 

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
I went to an all-boys school, and learned absolutely none of the skills or values that it was trying to inculcate.

(except, arguably, that I use the word inculcate).
Sure, but that would suggest to me that you took the “boy’s school” background and customized what skills and tools you gained from it, not that you took the criminal (or whatever) background as-is but changed the narrative details to be that you went to an all boy’s school. I dunno, just seems like what’s the point of calling these packages of mechanics “backgrounds” if the narrative element doesn’t matter? Pick a set of mechanics and assign whatever narrative you want to them feels backwards to me.
 

Kobold Stew

Last Guy in the Airlock
Supporter
Based on what I've seen so far of the new PHB, I think there are slight changes that are going to have a big long-term impact on how players engage with the game. I believe one impact will be players thinking "Class first, background and story second."

I'm not sure that's true. I think you can start with a background and build from there just as easily.

Let's try: with Sailor as an example.

Everything that's in the feat makes sense for someone who has spent time at sea (given the level of granularity D&D offers). and from it, and looking at skills and ability scores, I can see it being great background for optimizing fighter, rogue, druid, ranger, and viable for cleric and maybe valor bard. All those class choices emerge from the background, I think, well, and are supported. Stating with the background lets those concepts emerge and be supported. And you always have the nautical feel with the navigator's tools and tavern brawler.

Now, I can cavil at the choice of Acrobatics rather than Athletics (maybe allowing a choice of two of three skills for each would allow a bit more flexibility), but I'm not going to worry about that.

I can also say, but hey, my character was a sailor but he never got into fistffights. He's officer material. And if that's the case, I can always take the noble background and reflavour it as Naval officer and no need to change anything else.

finally, as the video points out, Now I wouldn't have thought of becoming a monk if I had started with the sailor background, but it works well.

All that's to say, I don't think there's any reason why you shouldn't or couldn't start with backgrounds, and you might build something that is fun and narrativly tight.

And the same goes for species, but I think that if you want to start with species: if I want an orc cleric, say, I might make tactical choices on the background I select in order to get a feat that works for what I'm imagining. And in doing so, I might end up with a skill that I wouldn't otherwise have chosen for myself -- so at a quick glance for an orc cleric, I might choose farmer (if I want tough -- suddenly I have animal handling! cool and unexpected), or guard (because I want the athletics proficiency, which I'm not otherwise getting from cleric, which suddenly means I also get alert.

All that's to say, I think the system is working as intended, and not actually offering the straightjacket that it might seem.

The combination of presenting the Class chapter first, and also attaching ability score boosts to Backgrounds... I think that's going to reinforce that trend, and also sway some players to the "Class first, background and story second" mode of thinking.
I think that' true, and this will help new players, since the class is what changes most over the course of play.

I don't think it's locked in, though, by any means.
 

Kobold Stew

Last Guy in the Airlock
Supporter
Sure, but that would suggest to me that you took the “boy’s school” background and customized what skills and tools you gained from it, not that you took the criminal (or whatever) background as-is but changed the narrative details to be that you went to an all boy’s school. I dunno, just seems like what’s the point of calling these packages of mechanics “backgrounds” if the narrative element doesn’t matter? Pick a set of mechanics and assign whatever narrative you want to them feels backwards to me.
I see what you're saying, but this is a holdover issue from 2014. Those packages were always there, and most players did not customize.

Flavour is free.
 

So people didn't like species being pre-packaged combos of ASIs and features, as many players felt that they had to choose one that provided proper ASIs to their class, and now the exact same issue has been shifted to background...

I don't really get it. Like I was fine with species ASIs, but if that was deemed undesirable design it seems crazy to just repeat the same structure elsewhere. 🤷
 

MarkB

Legend
So, I can take the Criminal background but say my character was raised in a temple and grew up totally sheltered from any kind of criminal activity?
Yep. Or take Farmer and be a dashing urbanite who doesn't know one end of a shovel from the other.
I mean, ok I guess, but that feels pretty weird…
It feels less weird than locking in on a specific character backstory simply because you want a specific set of bonuses, proficiencies and feats - or missing out on the ones you want because they have a label that doesn't match your character. Ultimately, it's just a name.
 


Split the Hoard


Split the Hoard
Negotiate, demand, or steal the loot you desire!

A competitive card game for 2-5 players
Remove ads

Top