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

[ECMO3]

Hardly. That is counterbalanced by "If just one D&D player likes the bonuses attached to backgrounds, that's a pretty compelling reason to have it that way."

Not at all. I didn't say it should be that way because someone liked it, I said it should be that way because they wanted to put an ability increase there and there is not a good reason not to. Letting me put an ASI in Dextyerity for my soldier does not stop you from putting in strength for your Soldier.

What you are saying here is that you "like" that others can't build their character as they wish. That is not a compelling reason at all IMO.

If you want it to be unattached, get your DM to detach the bonuses

He already does (and I do when I DM), as I have explained multiple times on this thread. Why do people keep talking about how to DM or how to play the game, when this thread is clearly about WOTC?

. As it currently stands, the bonuses mostly make sense for the backgrounds in question

No they don't. They mostly don't make sense IMO.

 

[ECMO3]

ASI should have been removed entirely. "Here's a few extra points...because."

You have stat buy points. Just raise them if you think its not high enough. The way it is done now is silly.

This is a really good point. ASIs are a throwback to earlier eras when they were tied to races, then that went away, so now what.

Assuming you want to keep the same scale, the right way to do this is just through alternative methods with a higher point buy or a different way of rolling dice

 

[Maxperson]

Not at all. I didn't say it should be that way because someone liked it, I said it should be that way because they wanted to put an ability increase there and there is not a good reason not to. Letting me put an ASI in Dextyerity for my soldier does not stop you from putting in strength for your Soldier.

There is a good reason not to do it your way. Sense. It doesn't make sense for soldier to grant any stat. It makes sense for it to grant strength or constitution. Perhaps dex for those trained as scouts.

What you are saying here is that you "like" that others can't build their character as they wish. That is not a compelling reason at all IMO.

Don't put words in my mouth. I never said that, and in fact I said the opposite. Talk to your DM and make a case for it to be reasonable for you to have a dex bonus. Then you can make your character as you wish.

No they don't. They mostly don't make sense IMO.

Acolyte: Int, Wis, and Cha. All three of those make sense. Priests cloister(int), dispense advice to followers(wis), and preach to get new converts to the religion(cha). Dex, Con, and Str don't make sense at all.

Artisan: Str, Dex, and Int. Int or dex match painting. Dex and Str match sculpting. All three make sense. Wis, Con, and Cha don't make sense at all.

Charlatan: Dex, Con, and Cha. Dex and Cha make perfect sense. Con I don't get. Wisdom would have made more sense, since that's how one reads a mark. Con, Int and Str don't make sense for this one.

Criminal: Dex, Con, and Int. Again, Con is the odd one out. Dex and Int make perfect sense. Cha would have been my pick for third, because that's how social criminals succeed.

I'm going to stop here, because I've made my case. Out of the first 4 backgrounds 10 of the 12 stats chosen make perfect sense, where other stats do not make sense.

 

[WanderingMystic]

There is a good reason not to do it your way. Sense. It doesn't make sense for soldier to grant any stat. It makes sense for it to grant strength or constitution. Perhaps dex for those trained as scouts.

Don't put words in my mouth. I never said that, and in fact I said the opposite. Talk to your DM and make a case for it to be reasonable for you to have a dex bonus. Then you can make your character as you wish.

Acolyte: Int, Wis, and Cha. All three of those make sense. Priests cloister(int), dispense advice to followers(wis), and preach to get new converts to the religion(cha). Dex, Con, and Str don't make sense at all.

Artisan: Str, Dex, and Int. Int or dex match painting. Dex and Str match sculpting. All three make sense. Wis, Con, and Cha don't make sense at all.

Charlatan: Dex, Con, and Cha. Dex and Cha make perfect sense. Con I don't get. Wisdom would have made more sense, since that's how one reads a mark. Con, Int and Str don't make sense for this one.

Criminal: Dex, Con, and Int. Again, Con is the odd one out. Dex and Int make perfect sense. Cha would have been my pick for third, because that's how social criminals succeed.

I'm going to stop here, because I've made my case. Out of the first 4 backgrounds 10 of the 12 stats chosen make perfect sense, where other stats do not make sense.

So to me a social criminal is a charlatan but I do agree that wisdom would have made more sense for that instead of con. As far as the criminal goes I can see con because you are around poisons, need endurance to put run guards, take a punch when things go wrong.

I wish they had been more direct in the book that these are generic examples that your DM should be taloring these to the setting and to what you want to play. A soldier in a kingdom of mages would have magic Initiate - wizard as their feat and maybe arcana as one of their skills. An elven soldier would probably focus more on dexterity and grace.

 

[CreamCloud0]

So to me a social criminal is a charlatan but I do agree that wisdom would have made more sense for that instead of con. As far as the criminal goes I can see con because you are around poisons, need endurance to put run guards, take a punch when things go wrong.

I wish they had been more direct in the book that these are generic examples that your DM should be taloring these to the setting and to what you want to play. A soldier in a kingdom of mages would have magic Initiate - wizard as their feat and maybe arcana as one of their skills. An elven soldier would probably focus more on dexterity and grace.

yeah it's almost as if these fixed background-ASI-feat combos are counterproductive to producing flexible character design.

 

[Maxperson]

So to me a social criminal is a charlatan but I do agree that wisdom would have made more sense for that instead of con. As far as the criminal goes I can see con because you are around poisons, need endurance to put run guards, take a punch when things go wrong.

Those things are useful, but they are not the primary reason you are a criminal. You don't go out and make things always go wrong so that you can endure them. You practice your pickpocketing and lockpicking(dex) so you can be successful at it, you are a criminal mastermind(int), or you are a criminal con artist(cha). Having a higher con is useful, but that's why you place as decent score there if you want it as a player.

I wish they had been more direct in the book that these are generic examples that your DM should be taloring these to the setting and to what you want to play. A soldier in a kingdom of mages would have magic Initiate - wizard as their feat and maybe arcana as one of their skills. An elven soldier would probably focus more on dexterity and grace.

That would be excellent advice as well.

 

[Scott Christian]

yeah it's almost as if these fixed background-ASI-feat combos are counterproductive to producing flexible character design.

How?

I think what you meant to say was: "It's almost as if these fixed background-ASI-feat combos don't allow me to min/max my character the way I want."

 

[Maxperson]

yeah it's almost as if these fixed background-ASI-feat combos are counterproductive to producing flexible character design.

I don't agree. You have fully half the stats to pick bonuses from. That's pretty darn flexible. And for most backgrounds, two or three of the remaining stats just don't make sense.

 

[CreamCloud0]

How?

I think what you meant to say was: "It's almost as if these fixed background-ASI-feat combos don't allow me to min/max my character the way I want."

no, i didn't.

edit: no let's answer this properly, there's no good reason why your guard has to have alert as their designated background feat or can only be strong, intelligent or wise, there's no reason my guard couldn't of been charismatic and got along really well with the civilians with a +CHA, or been a bit rough and ready and had tavern brawler as their feat, why my merchant couldn't have +STR from loading cargo on and off the carts or learned a bit of magic from an amulet they touched in a shipment and now they have magic initiate.

 

[Scott Christian]

no, i didn't.

edit: no let's answer this properly, there's no good reason why your guard has to have alert as their designated background feat or can only be strong, intelligent or wise, there's no reason my guard couldn't of been charismatic and got along really well with the civilians with a +CHA, or been a bit rough and ready and had tavern brawler as their feat, why my merchant couldn't have +STR from loading cargo on and off the carts or learned a bit of magic from an amulet they touched in a shipment and now they have magic initiate.

Your guard can be charismatic. If you are using point buy, you place your 15 or 14 in charisma. You are now a strong social guard. You want a strong merchant, do the same but place it in strength. But you won't do this because you want, or rather feel a need, to have that extra +1.

And that has been my point the entire time. It is about a +1. That is what you are arguing for.