D&D (2024) RIP, 2014 PHB backgrounds

[edosan]

I am really sorry that they appear to be getting away from the background features. They didn't come into play often, but their existence meant that backgrounds contributed something to your character you couldn't get through class or race.

I thought that was brilliant, and that it really worked to individuate a first-level character (a soldier cleric felt very different from a noble cleric or a criminal cleric); it was a wonderful access into roleplaying, I felt, which they appear to be losing.

This is what I’m going to miss out of backgrounds - the old background abilities were way more interesting and flavorful than UA’s “add two points to one ability score and one to another, then pick up a language and feat, like you do with every other background.” If you can customize every background it almost makes you wonder why bother having a background at all.

 

[Parmandur]

Farmer replaces Folk Hero, and Guide replaces Outlander.

 

[Remathilis]

Are we also going to do that with the tool, the two skills, and the ability score increases? At that point, why write the same thing 18 times instead of once at the beginning?

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. 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. 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.

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.

 

[Li Shenron]

I am really sorry that they appear to be getting away from the background features. They didn't come into play often, but their existence meant that backgrounds contributed something to your character you couldn't get through class or race.

I thought that was brilliant, and that it really worked to individuate a first-level character (a soldier cleric felt very different from a noble cleric or a criminal cleric); it was a wonderful access into roleplaying, I felt, which they appear to be losing.

Agree completely.

I never saw a background after the PHB ones have the same vibe. They clearly represented a character's role in the world or society, be it a profession or "how you earn your living" in more general terms (including stealing, begging or hunting/harvesting).

Then despite the very clear original concept, people got confused with the idea of "cultural" background and started wondering why Barbarian is a class and not a background...

 

[FitzTheRuke]

This is what I’m going to miss out of backgrounds - the old background abilities were way more interesting and flavorful than UA’s “add two points to one ability score and one to another, then pick up a language and feat, like you do with every other background.”

I don't really agree. For all their flowery language, all the 2014 background features boiled down to "Hey, DMs: Remember to have NPCs treat the PCs like they are the people who the background says they are". You could accomplish the same by just saying that in the DMG. (You know, assuming people read it).

If you can customize every background it almost makes you wonder why bother having a background at all.

You could customize every background before. That part isn't new.

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.

Do we really have to make the rules worse because people who didn't read them will complain about things that they do or don't say? What a world we live in.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I've always hated how in D&D Beyond, they make you either pick a background, or create your own from scratch. They don't make it easy to pick a background and then just change a single element (like a language, tool, or even a skill).

This is basic functionality that I hope they remember to implement when they put in whatever final form 1D&D looks like.

There's a bunch of "easy" stuff they haven't done, presumably due to manpower issues. Now that WotC owns them, hopefully they will staff up more. I've been waiting for sidekick classes to be available in the main engine since Tasha's came out. (Building a sidekick from scratch and then manually adding it to an obscure field in the character sheet doesn't exactly make managing sidekicks easy and intuitive.)

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Do we really have to make the rules worse because people who didn't read them will complain about things that they do or don't say? What a world we live in.

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.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

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.

I'm not against user friendly - I'm absolutely for it! I think there are many, many ways that user-friendliness could be improved for D&D.

"You can customize any part of this background you like"

"No we can't, because you gave us examples!"

Is not that. It's stubborn, willful ignorance.

Don't get me wrong. The part about customization will obviously need to be highlighted with arrows pointing at it or something, based on the comments here. But we don't need to do away with examples (or hide them, or make them worthless as quick-picks by making them all say "choose any" under each heading).

 

[Parmandur]

I don't really agree. For all their flowery language, all the 2014 background features boiled down to "Hey, DMs: Remember to have NPCs treat the PCs like they are the people who the background says they are". You could accomplish the same by just saying that in the DMG. (You know, assuming people read it).


You could customize every background before. That part isn't new.


Do we really have to make the rules worse because people who didn't read them will complain about things that they do or don't say? What a world we live in.

Yes, the roleplay bits are easy to keep up with...roleplaying.

 

[Remathilis]

I'm not against user friendly - I'm absolutely for it! I think there are many, many ways that user-friendliness could be improved for D&D.

"You can customize any part of this background you like"

"No we can't, because you gave us examples!"

Is not that. It's stubborn, willful ignorance.

Don't get me wrong. The part about customization will obviously need to be highlighted with arrows pointing at it or something, based on the comments here. But we don't need to do away with examples (or hide them, or make them worthless as quick-picks by making them all say "choose any" under each heading).

As a wise boss once said to me: "think about how smart the average person is. Then think about how 50% of them are dumber than that."

Even as far as the 2014 style backgrounds are, people assumed they were set in stone and would say things like don't t take criminal as a rogue because it gave thieves tools and you already get them as a rogue. The idea that backgrounds were customizable was lost, so much so many of them gave choices (pick two skills from list) rather than defined suggestions.

I just think any attempt to make them prescriptive is probably going to blow up in their face based on the initial response from the playtest packet. Better to remove the headache now.