Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer Creatures
Frozen Sick
D&D Beyond Basic Rules
Basic Rules (2014)
Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in- Marketplace
Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer CreaturesFrozen SickD&D Beyond Basic RulesBasic Rules (2014)Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in
I know there is nothing stopping people from making up their own, but I liked when they included them in the backgrounds.
I feel the backgrounds lack a lot of what the 2015 ones had, although now they all come with Feats.
Having the tables make it nice to have a jumping off point. On top of that there's the "Feature" which was much more roleplay focused than simply the feat they give us. IMO.
The Backgrounds now just feel....hollow, and mainly just a vehicle to pick an Origin Feat.
Maybe its just me, anyone else miss those more in-depth backgrounds? Even if it was "Suggested" or "Optional" it would be nice to have them back.
I actively and genuinely do miss them.
When creating a character, often a lot of their soft details are fuzzy and amorphous vibes. The idea is there forming, almost like how you forget a dream when you awaken, but in reverse, or like trying to remember someone you've never met but are sure you know... but there isn't any real words to convey it yet at that stage.
Having the suggestions and ones tailored to specific background & especially the ideals that had alignment suggestions, helped sometimes to give a small building block to build around, like a nucleating agent to help speed those vibes into an idea that can be communicated.
The details might get changed or refined later or edited later, as you play the character and feel them out & they assert themselves some, but it's good to have a quick snapshot, especially so other people can look and go "Ok, I have an *idea* of the narrative archetype this character fills some."
One of my favorite 5e characters in a game I played rather than DMed was a Hexblade (later in 5.5 remade to Archfey) Warlock with the Haunted One background, and the first night after session 0 they came to me in a dream kind of, so while trying to think of them later with the table I had that vague dream like recollection of them and few actual words, but the suggestions in the background gave me a good quick shorthand to give the DM a rough sketch.
The character eventually evolved away from those original ideas and some of the first concepts just didn't really make the cut in the end and had to be changed entirely (I would often take 2 for each category, or 1 from each category and then 1 from another similar background, as nothing says you can't take inspiration from other backgrounds) but if I read the chart back I can still recognize which ones I picked because I can still see the rough sketch of the character in them.
So I just.. I guess think they're helpful and that at worst with their inclusion you just.. don't use them.
Because Robots.
They were done away with because people didn't like being locked into them(despite not really being). Having more overt permission to put in what people wanted in those spaces was part of 10 years of feedback.
It's part of adapting to a world that's seen the possibilities of character creation open up thanks to live plays & podcasts.
DM, player & homebrewer(Current homebrew project is an unofficial conversion of SBURB/SGRUB from Homestuck into DND 5e)
Once made Maxwell's Silver Hammer come down upon Strahd's head to make sure he was dead.
Always study & sharpen philosophical razors. They save a lot of trouble.
Weird. Never encountered the pressure for that back in the day.
Honestly, the Backgrounds now feel empty and a bit "low effort" as a result. Literally 2-3 sentences and *possibly* a new feat.
Yeah, my table missed them so much, we decided to use old backgrounds for our new campaign even though we will be playing with 2024 rules mostly.
I don't - I never used them.
Most character backgrounds for me or my players did not need these things as they built them in and act on choices their character make not "Oh my randomly rolled flaw says I have to do X."
I always thought these food-for-thought guidelines were a very worthwhile inclusion in the PHB and a great way to help keep the sole focus on characters from being about maximizing power. I like most of the 5.5 changes but the elimination of soft things like this for character building or typical lore for monsters I find disappointing.
I've never rolled for them, though I know that is an option. I just used them to pick a high level aspect that fits my background. It would help me get an idea how to RP without overlooking an aspect.
A lot of my tables have an issue with every player keeping their motives, aspects, secret. A bit annoying imo.
Relying on WOTC for character concepts is the issue. Old backgrounds were very "flavorful" but nothing happened if you acted against your Ideal, Bond, Flaws unless you as a player chose to enact a penalty, WOTC provided 0 rules - ergo - in 2024 when most people are either A) powergaming or B) Basing characters on concepts outside the book, it makes sense to remove these aspects that were not interacted with by the rules and took up space.
Okay, but they were still secretive in the old system too? Like unless you wrote it down in a public forum picking the flaw "I never follow a plan" was still a secret. So how is the new system making it more secretive?
If you used to have a background and then picked things off the charts that fit that character idea that you already had, then the tables were not useful as you already had a Bond in mind and picked one that fit the concept you already thought of.
Removing these put more room in the books and imo only helped when people were randomly making characters. I've not known many people that did not have character concepts before they picked a background. I know for me sometimes my character concept fit a background, but none of the written Bonds fit how I would want to play that character which means I made up my own, which means there is no need for them in the book for me.
I play so many different characters with different flaws and traits that i do sometimes need a reminder of their personalities. So yeah, I think them not being on the 5.5 sheet is a loss. I have to keep them elsewhere and sometimes I forget to check them.
i tend to play 2024 with a 2014 character-sheet when i can, and that solves that problem, but can't always do that.
He/Him. Loooooooooong time Player.
The Dark days of the THAC0 system are behind us.
"Hope is a fire that burns in us all If only an ember, awaiting your call
To rise up in triumph should we all unite
The spark for change is yours to ignite."
Kalandra - The State of the World
A lot of the Flaws were antithetical to group gameplay, too.
A ton of them encouraged showboating, lone wolf behavior, recklessness beyond the call of duty, obnoxious social behavior in-game & so many others that, when some people took them, caused them to lean into said flaw to an obsessive degree(Sometimes because of shady RPing/writing advice from social media), at the costs of in-game success, & good standing w/a table, all because "It's what MY character would do".
DM, player & homebrewer(Current homebrew project is an unofficial conversion of SBURB/SGRUB from Homestuck into DND 5e)
Once made Maxwell's Silver Hammer come down upon Strahd's head to make sure he was dead.
Always study & sharpen philosophical razors. They save a lot of trouble.
You don't write down the flaws, and personalities of characters you make? How would the old system still help you if the sheet just has the tables on them Vs you filling in this information yourself?
Also those things are on ALL of my 2024 character sheets so again if you can still fill this in freely, you just do not have premade answers baked into backgrounds that felt like they didn't always work for a character.
Yes i wrote them down, i never said i didn't.
The 2014 sheet had them on the first page and in a place you didn't miss, where as 2024 "Backstory and personality" one thing in one box on the back page that fills up fast.
This format on the front page just made more sense to me for roleplay info.
Personality traits:
Ideals:
Bonds:
Flaws;
He/Him. Loooooooooong time Player.
The Dark days of the THAC0 system are behind us.
"Hope is a fire that burns in us all If only an ember, awaiting your call
To rise up in triumph should we all unite
The spark for change is yours to ignite."
Kalandra - The State of the World
I don't use the default ones if I can help it.
I prefer to add my own, since I remember these things better if I write them while following the format.
DM, player & homebrewer(Current homebrew project is an unofficial conversion of SBURB/SGRUB from Homestuck into DND 5e)
Once made Maxwell's Silver Hammer come down upon Strahd's head to make sure he was dead.
Always study & sharpen philosophical razors. They save a lot of trouble.
I don’t miss them for myself, since I never used them, but I do appreciate their value for others.
I remember looking at the 14 PHB and thinking, oh, that must be for new players who need help fleshing out their character and just skipped right over those parts. I don’t think I ever actually even read any of them.
But, as I said, I see their value for some folks, and I do think they had a place.
Nothing was "Secretive" in the old system. Its just so many players automatically play like that (honestly, its a bit annoying). I have a game right now and literally everyone is keeping their motivations a secret. Its super boring. I feel so many characters are based solely around an event that happened in the past and what they want to do in the future, thus anything that isn't involving that tends to be overlooked. The result is pretty bland character interactions.
Again, these were optional, and it's nice to fill out the character. Personality traits, sure, but "flaws" I don't know a lot of players who actually quantify their flaws, rather just RP and maybe a flaw comes out, but they don't even know or have a plan for that.
As I assumed in the 2014, and suggest now. These would be examples / optional choices. Nothing then involves a requirement, thus "nothing happens when" is not relevant. Just as the "well you're not acting like your alignment" argument people used to make. These have the option to be a guide to your character, they can be a reminder on how to RP your character, so many seem to devolve into "lets do the party quest" thus becoming a reactionary character progression. Secondly, "not acting like your flaw" would represent character development, but a DM could inquire to the player (on the side) if they want to do that knowing what the flaw is. If you make a flaw of "not trusting anyone" (whether you made it up or pulled it from a table) and suddenly you're acting very trustworthy the DM can make sure you want to make that shift, or did the player just forget their character design. The DM could also help progress the narrative so that a change in personality would make sense. i.e. a redemption arc, type thing.
It seems so many against these tables look at it like they railroad a character, when all they do is offer an option. Honestly, at this point so much has been stripped away that why even have backgrounds in the first place. Why not just give characters the ability to choose 1 "Origin Feat"
Why have races, when players can make up their own, why have X when players can make up their own.
This idea of "just make up your own" seems an odd claim when it can be applied to so much in the game that DnD would really have no content. So, you just need the SRT and the rest you can "make up" since SRT includes the game mechanics and that's all that is needed for a structured game.
To me it just seems lazy for a game development aspect. Backgrounds that used to be a page, are just a tiny paragraph, why spend money on that in the first place? It seems more like the Apocalypse system, where 90% if just made up every time. which is also why you don't see a breadth of content for it. It seems like there are people who play DnD who want content but also those who seem resistant to it. Magic Items? no need, just make them up. Enemies, no need, just make them up.
I miss them too, but I see people’s argument for removing them. Mine are still based on older ones in my campaign and my one-shot character.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/characters/129017634
https://www.dndbeyond.com/characters/165040730
I agree, the “just make it up” argument feels like a cop-out sometimes. Sure, creativity is great, but part of what makes DnD fun is the collaborative storytelling, and having those tools in the book helps everyone get on the same page. Stripping it down to just “pick a feat” feels like it’s missing the point of what made the game so immersive in the first place.