D&D (2024) RIP, 2014 PHB backgrounds

[shadowoflameth]

I haven't seen any discussion on the 2014 PHB backgrounds that aren't in the Character Origins UA:

• Folk Hero
• Outlander

All the others seem to be represented, although Guild Artisan has been renamed to be Artisan. (Putting them in a guild was probably too restrictive and too much world building -- is the one blacksmith in a town a guild of one?)

The two left out of this UA might still show up, and they're wildly different, IMO.

Folk Hero, first off, doesn't seem like a background, but something to grow into. Your first level character is already a folk hero? And the benefits of the background seem to be things that a DM would be granting to higher level heroic PCs by default. In practice, I never saw anyone with this background ever do much with it. At my tables, it's been very much a "eh, I guess I have to have a background" background. This very much feels like a background developed early in the game's development and one that doesn't stand up well years later.

Outlander is also treated the same way -- "well, I guess I need a background" -- but it's so generic and, frankly, so good, that I saw it used for nearly every wilderness character as a way to pick up some free-floating proficiencies. I'm surprised we don't have anything exactly like it -- a Guide or a Hermit isn't the same thing and is much more specific.

Yes, yes, the UA backgrounds are meant as examples, but as is, they will be used at many tables as the list of backgrounds to choose from and it's likely D&D Beyond will present them that way. I'd like to see a generic wilderness person background included in that list.

If creating a custom background is allowed, then you can still use these if you want. I personally wonder about having all backgrounds include a feat or a language. I don't think this is really needed especially with feats being an optional rule. I'd like to see background x includes a feat, or +1 ASI and a skill or language.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I think the UA is signalling that feats aren't going to be optional in 2024.

 

[Charlaquin]

This is the problem with the precon backgrounds: no matter how you parse it, people will assume the precon = only way to do something and complain.

I don’t think that’s actually true. I have experienced a lot of people who have this concern, and no people who actually assume that the defaults are the only option. I’m sure some people may make that assumption, but for those people it will be a simple enough matter to point out to them that this isn’t the case.

Why are all gladiators strong? My gladiator is tough or agile. He favors acrobatics and intimidation. He uses a disguise kit instead of smith's tools. He speaks the true language of violence: Gnome.

And that’s 100% valid according to these rules.

But some people will read that and say according to WotC, that's "not a gladiator". People get hung up on that title but more importantly, they get hung up on that stat block under it.

Those people are factually incorrect, and it is a trivial matter to point out the text that says so.

My suggestion then would be to remove the default ASI, skills and proficiencies and just keep the flavor text "as is". Gladiator doesn't define what options you pick, it gives you a little story and the player picks the abilities that realize it. You get 18 little origin stories, the player decides how that looks mechanically.

But this leaves people having to make ten choices instead of being able to make between one and ten choices. The purpose of having the default options is so that people have the ability to take a pre-made package if they don’t want to make all those individual choices. It’s exactly the same concept as taking a starting equipment package instead of spending starting gold - another thing no one mistakes for being mandatory.

 

[Charlaquin]

If creating a custom background is allowed, then you can still use these if you want. I personally wonder about having all backgrounds include a feat or a language. I don't think this is really needed especially with feats being an optional rule. I'd like to see background x includes a feat, or +1 ASI and a skill or language.

I don’t think feats are going to be optional any more.

 

[Micah Sweet]

You live in a world where you'll get a ticket for not wearing a seatbelt, where ladder manufacturers have to put a sticker on the top rung of a ladder telling people to not stand there and where maintenance staff has to put out yellow signage warning that a wet floor is a bad place to be walking so people don't bust their heads.

The world has to be designed for regular people, not ideal ones.

If 1D&D was a fantasy heartbreaker someone was publishing on DriveThruRPG, sure, they could design it the way you suggest, but Hasbro wants D&D to be unbelievably mainstream and is hoping to have every household in America own a PHB. You bet they're going to try and make it as user-friendly as possible.

Actually, I'm pretty sure all the things you mentioned are to avoid lawsuits, not safety.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I don’t think that’s actually true. I have experienced a lot of people who have this concern, and no people who actually assume that the defaults are the only option. I’m sure some people may make that assumption, but for those people it will be a simple enough matter to point out to them that this isn’t the case.

And that’s 100% valid according to these rules.

Those people are factually incorrect, and it is a trivial matter to point out the text that says so.

But this leaves people having to make ten choices instead of being able to make between one and ten choices. The purpose of having the default options is so that people have the ability to take a pre-made package if they don’t want to make all those individual choices. It’s exactly the same concept as taking a starting equipment package instead of spending starting gold - another thing no one mistakes for being mandatory.

If it's so easy to point out where someone is incorrect, then why are we still having this issue?

 

[TwiceBorn2]

I think that the background section should also instruct players to talk to the DM before creating a background to ensure it fits the setting.

Same should go for language options, especially since many campaigns (whether homebrewed or published) include languages not mentioned in the PHB. Both standard and rare language options in the PHB should include a bullet along the lines of "other language appropriate to the campaign (consult with your DM)", or something along those lines.

EDIT: I also hate that all PCs are considered literate in every language they speak, but I'm not going to die on that hill.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I don’t think that’s actually true. I have experienced a lot of people who have this concern, and no people who actually assume that the defaults are the only option. I’m sure some people may make that assumption, but for those people it will be a simple enough matter to point out to them that this isn’t the case.

And that’s 100% valid according to these rules.

Those people are factually incorrect, and it is a trivial matter to point out the text that says so.

But this leaves people having to make ten choices instead of being able to make between one and ten choices. The purpose of having the default options is so that people have the ability to take a pre-made package if they don’t want to make all those individual choices. It’s exactly the same concept as taking a starting equipment package instead of spending starting gold - another thing no one mistakes for being mandatory.

Well, there is an equipment list (and chapter) in the PH. There's nothing marked as "background element list, please choose five".

 

[Horwath]

I think the UA is signalling that feats aren't going to be optional in 2024.

They never should have been optional.

Now they have no excuse to not balance them vs. +2 to your primary score.

 

[Charlaquin]

If it's so easy to point out where someone is incorrect, then why are we still having this issue?

Again, I’m not seeing the issue. Everyone is concerned about hypothetical players who might think the examples aren the only options, but no one seems to actually think that.