Unearthed Arcana WOTC still can't get the backgrounds right in the new FR book.

[Tessarael]

IMO that's completely dysfunctional player.

It also highlights the trap of tying yourself to a single weapon type from feats too early.

I don't agree. It is really campaign and DM dependent. A flexible DM will adjust things a little to make it work for all the players. For example, either switching what magic items are found so that yes, a polearm is found now and then, or providing a magic market where such items can be procured.

If you're stuck in a campaign with a DM who say only gives you specified items in the module, if none of those are polearms and if there's no way to every buy a polearm, or get one made in time to use it in the adventure, then it is an entirely appropriate player response to want to switch characters.

If a character concept doesn't work, e.g., due to a misunderstanding of the mech, or an assumption or game world mismatch vs. your DM, then switching characters is sensible. Otherwise, if you're not having fun, time to switch campaigns and/or DMs.

 

[FrogReaver]

I don't agree. It is really campaign and DM dependent. A flexible DM will adjust things a little to make it work for all the players. For example, either switching what magic items are found so that yes, a polearm is found now and then, or providing a magic market where such items can be procured.

Alternatively the player can just adapt and use the best weapon he can find with the choices he's made.

There's also a more realistic idea of potentially retraining that feat choice or if not following strictly to the module then questing for a magical +1 weapon of your preferred type.

If you're stuck in a campaign with a DM who say only gives you specified items in the module, if none of those are polearms and if there's no way to every buy a polearm, or get one made in time to use it in the adventure, then it is an entirely appropriate player response to want to switch characters.

I don't think so. The only way that makes sense is if you are just using the character as a combat widget and have no additional investment in them. That's dysfunctional for a rpg IMO.

If a character concept doesn't work, e.g., due to a misunderstanding of the mech, or an assumption or game world mismatch vs. your DM, then switching characters is sensible. Otherwise, if you're not having fun, time to switch campaigns and/or DMs.

Or the player can just go, we found this great magic item, i'm going to change characters so i can use it really effectively. That would be more fun for me. What stops us from getting there?

I'm fine with people changing characters if they really aren't having fun, but when they aren't having fun simply because they didn't find a specific kind of magical item, then it's a player problem IMO.

 

[Maxperson]

Ok fine, then you admit WOTC doesn't know how to do backgrounds because many of the ASIs are not tied thematically to the backgrounds.

They've made some questionable decisions.

No they don't. The abilities I mentioned don't make as much sense as other abilities. You even used the Guard as an example and YOU even said one of the ASIs they have don't make sense.

Please tell me how these make sense thematically:
Constitution on a Sage
Strength on an Artisan instead of Wisdom
Constitution on a Charleton instead of Wisdom or Intelligence
Intelligence on a Criminal instead of Wisdom or Strength
Strength for an Entertainer
Intelligence for a Guard instead of Constitution (your example)
Charisma for a Hermit .... really Charisma for a Hermit!
Constitution for a Merchant
Wisdom for a Wayfarer
Wisdom for a Sailor instead of Constitution

Thank you for proving my point. So even if I take your list as completely against sense, that's still only 10 out of 48 stats that don't make sense, which means that "Most of the stat bonuses make sense." 10 out of 48 isn't most, which is what you are arguing.

However,

1) Strength makes sense for sculpters and other similar artisans who would have trouble if they were weak. Stone carving requires strength.
2) Intelligence is a prime requisite for criminal masterminds, a major criminal archetype.

3) Wisdom is essential for a Wayfarer(urchin). It allows you to read people and notice dangers, which are major survival traits. Street smarts is wisdom, not intelligence.

So 3 of your 10 aren't out of theme. WotC messed up on 7 out of 48 stats, leaving my statement that they got most of the stat bonuses correct to be the true statement, not your statement that they messed up most of the stat bonuses.

Your argument about thematics would be a lot better if the ASIs matched thematically, but they don't, and those examples up there are 10 out of 16 backgrounds, which is over half of the backgrounds in the PHB.

7 out of 48 bonuses, which makes me correct in my statement that they got most of the stat bonuses correct thematically.

Moreover, something like Guard should actually have more than 3 ASIs. While I agree with you that Intelligence does not make sense, both Charisma (for deterrence) and Dexterity do. So that background should have 4 ASIs.

Guards rely more on their official status and the might of the government behind them for deterrence. Officers who receive training to be officers would be trained in charisma, but not your rank and file guard.

I do agree that some backgrounds would have more than 3 to pick from, but I don't see any that would have all 6.

Yes you do. Many if not most of the people employed as guards are primarily there for deterrence (i.e. Intimidation) reasons. When you walk into a Jewlery store or a Bank or a movie theater or when someone has a bodyguard they are there not to get in a fight but to deter it from even happening. In D&D parlance that is Charisma.

It's not charisma. First, if there were no guard in a bank, I wouldn't rob it or get into a fight. Second, it's not the guard that would be deterring me. It would be 1) the law. I don't value spending years in prison, 2) the gun he's wearing. I don't value death or major injury, and lastly 3) For some it's physical size(strength).

At no point is charisma playing into any guard I've ever met as any part of the deterrence.

The vast majority of guards do not patrol on foot for hours. I will grant that Constitution is important for some guards, but less so than Charisma or Dexterity generally ... and moreover you make my point here. Constitution is not one of the ASIs for a guard.

The ones that don't patrol for hours on end, stand at attention for hours on end. Very few guards get to sit around all day trying to inspire people with their charisma. Endurance is a major factor in being a guard or soldier.

Most of the backgrounds have stat bonuses that do not make thematic sense. 2 of three stat bonuses that make sense on a background and one that does not means that Background has a stat bonus that does not make sense.

2 out of 3 still results in most stat bonuses making thematic sense, which is my claim.

Most backgrounds have stat bonuses that do not all make sense thematically. Most of them are broken thematically, yet this is the reason you think WOTC is doing a good job with them?

Thematically damaged. They are not broken, because with 2 out of 3 making sense, just pick +2, +1 from the two that do make sense and the background functions just fine.

No you don't want other players to use stat bonuses that do make sense for their character. You don't want players to be able to take a Constitution bonus on a Guard even though you say it makes thematic sense.

:::: Your Strawmen are boring dude. Given that I said(more than once to you now) I would give bonuses that make sense if they aren't on the list, both of those statements there are ones you KNOW to be untrue about me.

Knock it off.

Exactly. This does nothing to the min-maxers. WOTC's background design only affects people who want to use a certain background for story reasons, and why shouldn't I be able to use the WOTC Guard backgroud for my sniper since you agree that is a "Guard" and that "makes sense"

A guard background is not a sniper background. You might as well ask why you can't use a sailor background to represent your charlatan or scribe.

Don't you see the hypocrisy in your position here?

:::sigh::: There is no hypocrisy anywhere in my position. You appear not to be able to understand what "most" means. Most means that there are some that are not part of the total. If most M&Ms taste good, SOME do not taste good. You with me so far? I hope so, because this is a really easy concept to get.

MOST ability scores in the backgrounds make thematic sense. That means that SOME do not make thematic sense. Pulling out these few that don't make sense as some sort of attempt at a gotcha to catch me at "hypocrisy" is not going to be effective. All you are doing is supporting what I am saying, not catching me in some sort of contradiction.

Ok, but most of the Backgrounds have stat bonuses that don't make thematic sense. I can take Intelligence on that 2024 Guard background, something you said makes no thematic sense.

If most of the backgrounds have one or more stat bonuses that make no sense, then most of the Backgrounds are not well designed thematically

They have flaws, but given that the other two stats make sense, just take +2, +1 in those and the background works perfectly in theme.

Your claim is Backgrounds provide ASI bonuses that are thematically appropriate. That is not true.

My claim is 100% true.

Acolyte provides three bonuses that are thematically appropriate.

Artisan provides three bonuses that are thematically appropriate.

Charlatan provides two bonuses that are thematically appropriate.

Criminal provides two bonuses that are thematically appropriate.

Entertainer provides two bonuses that are thematically appropriate.

Farmer provides three bonuses that are thematically appropriate.

Guard provides two bonuses that are thematically appropriate.

Guide provides three bonuses that are thematically appropriate.

Hermite provides two bonuses that are thematically appropriate.

Merchant provides two bonuses that are thematically appropriate.

Noble provides two bonuses that are thematically appropriate.

Sage provides three bonuses bonuses that are thematically appropriate.

Sailor provides three bonuses that are thematically appropriate.

Scribe provides three bonuses that are thematically appropriate.

Soldier provides two bonuses that are thematically appropriate.

Wayfarer provides three bonuses that are thematically appropriate.

That's 100% of the backgrounds providing thematically appropriate bonuses.

This is more appropriate in a discussion about class design than one about Background design, but a lot of people would agree with this.

And all I can say is that it's a good thing that they aren't designing D&D.

 

[Maxperson]

Then why limit customized backgrounds? There is no good reason.

I misread your response(still groggy from sleep).

Edit: The reason for the limitation is that some backgrounds will not fit the setting or DM's particular campaign, so the DM needs veto power.

 

[Azzy]

There is a good reason. It doesn't make sense to choose the Sage background and then pick +2 strength, +1 dex as your bonuses.

That's a scenario that doesn't have anything to do with anything.

If you want those particular bonuses, pick a background that makes sense to give those to you or customize one that makes sense.

Which brings us back to the point that I think that the rules for creating and customizing backgrounds should be in the PHB, like they were in the 2.14 PHB. Gating them in the DMG serves no purpose.

 

[Maxperson]

Maybe teach them some math?

...

To be fair, if the group is hitting a bunch of monsters who are resistant to non-magical weapons, not having one while the guy over there does have one can make you feel left behind in the dust. It's really campaign dependent and not at all based on the +1 bonus itself.

 

[Maxperson]

That's a scenario that doesn't have anything to do with anything.


Which brings us back to the point that I think that the rules for creating and customizing backgrounds should be in the PHB, like they were in the 2.14 PHB. Gating them in the DMG serves no purpose.

I edited my response. Check the edit.

 

[Maxperson]

Yes and they felt creating a new character would be more fun for them at the table, and I believe it was.



It is oversimplifying it because it had to do with their entire character design and their intended role in the party, not only the magic +1 weapon.

Also it is more than a 5% difference. A drop in attack rolls and damage is going to average quite a bit more than a 5% reduction in number of hits and therefore damage. In tier 2 losing that +1 will cut your damage by about 10-20% typically, more than that vs very high AC when an enemy is difficult to hit.

For example, both of these characters had 2014 GWM: doing 21 damage per hit with a 35% hit rate is 7.35DPA, doing 20 damage with a 30% hit rate is 6DPA. So that is an 18% reduction in damage due to that loss in +1, not a 5% reduction. Add on to that we were at a level where many monsters were resistant to non-magic weapons, which would make it effectively a 59% reduction in damage.

In a basic 1st level Fighter using a longsword and dueling going from a 15 strength to a 16 strength vs 14AC goes from 4.96 DPR with 15 Strength to 5.93 DPR with 16. That is a 20% increase in damage. Using a Greataxe with Cleave it will take you from 7.15 to 8.56, likewise a 20% increase, dual wielding a shortsword and scimitar with Vex-Nick-TWF it goes from 7.24DPR to 9.18DPR a 27% increase in damage. Not enough to make me scrap my character, but certainly enough to be noticeable.

You guys are super enamored with the meaningless percentages. If your PC does 1 point of damage and suddenly he does 2 points of damage, that's a 100%!!!!111!!!!1!!! increase! That's such a huge and meaningful contribution to combat now! It blows your paltry 27% increase out of the water.

It doesn't matter what the percentage increase is. It's still only 1 extra hit every 20 swings on average for a 1st level PC. It's still only 1 extra point of damage on a hit. Those are nearly meaningless to mechanical play.

 

[Maxperson]

You cannot simply weight a +1 in str for a fighter the same as +1 cha for a Fighter either just because they both give bonuses to a few different things.

Charisma is a much better increase for a fighter. The ability to better persuade kings, merchants, and dragons is better than an extra hit now and then.

 

[FrogReaver]

Charisma is a much better increase for a fighter. The ability to better persuade kings, merchants, and dragons is better than an extra hit now and then.

That's some spin. You should be a politician