Previous D&D books contain a plethora of backgrounds that are beloved by players. If you don’t see your favorite background listed, don’t despair! The scribes have scrawled some handy tips for converting a background from an older book to work with your new character using the 2024 Player’s Handbook. When using an older background, simply select the ability scores you want to add your 3 total points to, so adjusting one score by 2 and another by 1, or three scores by 1.
This comes in place of your species' Ability Score Improvements. So, if you also choose an older species that has an Ability Score Improvement, ignore it.
If the background you select does not already provide a feat, you gain the Origin feat of your choice.
"Older background" of course just means one they haven't updated in 2024. So just pick one such unupdated background - say, Folk Hero, or Outlander - and assign the stats and feat for it wherever you wish.
You're technically stuck with the skills that came with that older background (I'm assuming they got rid of the "redundant proficiency = pick a different one" rule from 2014, but hey, can't have everything.
It's a bit silly we have to go with these workarounds until the new DMG comes out (and maybe after?) but custom backgrounds are back on the menu!
Yeah, it bothers me they went back to thisd rigid form of character creation when it comes to the attributes. Like, I'll use the newer ones when they fit but ill probably use the old ones when I have a specific character background in mind.
I think I can understand why they took this approach in the PHB, as it’s intended, in part, as a gateway for newer players. Presenting fixed choices reduces the decision overload and also encourages a narrative, rather than purely mechanical, approach to character creation. That said, customising backgrounds is trivially easy to do (on paper anyway: I don’t know about DDB implementation), as long as your DM is happy with it.
There's no reason why they couldn't just do what I've been suggesting for years - give suggestions, or defaults as it were, but make the choice to assign them as you wish. So one might default to be Dex +2, Int +1, but then you can change them to whatever you want.
We'll see in September if they really are going to be daft about this, or if this is just a nothingbirger.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I think I can understand why they took this approach in the PHB, as it’s intended, in part, as a gateway for newer players. Presenting fixed choices reduces the decision overload and also encourages a narrative, rather than purely mechanical, approach to character creation. That said, customising backgrounds is trivially easy to do (on paper anyway: I don’t know about DDB implementation), as long as your DM is happy with it.
The problem is that this system punishes players who make their character choices for narrative reasons, because picking choices for narrative reasons will most likely not get you the stats your class wants or the feat that might fit your playstyle.
For instance, Tavern Brawler is an origin feat that would be a strong pick for a Monk, but I'd be surprised if Dexterity or Wisdom were options for the relevant background.
The end result is that most players are just going to create their own background, because there's no good reason not to, except for newer/less experienced players who are going to be tethered to arbitrary choices.
For your specific example, tavern brawler in its 2014 writing would be useless to a monk. It would be an active downgrade of their abilities. Of course, we don’t know what the ‘24 tavern brawler will look like.
But to the larger point, you seem to be saying it’s a bad thing that new players will have simple options while experienced players will have more complex options. That’s a feature, not a bug.
For your specific example, tavern brawler in its 2014 writing would be useless to a monk. It would be an active downgrade of their abilities. Of course, we don’t know what the ‘24 tavern brawler will look like.
The article describes it - reroll 1s on unarmed strike damage (actually quite solid for monk as their unarmed die size grows, getting a 1 on a d12 is pretty painful), and a 1/round free 5ft shove which can potentially save them needing to Patient Defense Disengage if they need to skirmish out of melee.
But to the larger point, you seem to be saying it’s a bad thing that new players will have simple options while experienced players will have more complex options. That’s a feature, not a bug.
I don't mind steering experienced players more to custom backgrounds. The problem is (a) we won't have those the custom rule for a few more months, (b) we have no idea how it'll be implemented on this site, and (c) we have no idea whether it will be legal for sanctioned play either. All three of those issues affect experienced players too.
For your specific example, tavern brawler in its 2014 writing would be useless to a monk. It would be an active downgrade of their abilities. Of course, we don’t know what the ‘24 tavern brawler will look like.
The article describes it - reroll 1s on unarmed strike damage (actually quite solid for monk as their unarmed die size grows, getting a 1 on a d12 is pretty painful), and a 1/round free 5ft shove which can potentially save them needing to Patient Defense Disengage if they need to skirmish out of melee.
But to the larger point, you seem to be saying it’s a bad thing that new players will have simple options while experienced players will have more complex options. That’s a feature, not a bug.
I don't mind steering experienced players more to custom backgrounds. The problem is (a) we won't have those the custom rule for a few more months, (b) we have no idea how it'll be implemented on this site, and (c) we have no idea whether it will be legal for sanctioned play either. All three of those issues affect experienced players too.
Ahh, thank you, I hadn’t caught that about the new tavern brawler. As for custom backgrounds, I have lots of other things I’m curious about for the new rules before I’ll worry about how they’ll work. I appreciate others have concerns and don’t want to minimize them, but this is just not likely to be a big deal, imo.
I don't think it'll be a big deal either, but I do play quite a bit of AL (I attend several conventions) and depending on what they allow there I could see the shift to fixed backgrounds being annoying to deal with.
I think I can understand why they took this approach in the PHB, as it’s intended, in part, as a gateway for newer players. Presenting fixed choices reduces the decision overload and also encourages a narrative, rather than purely mechanical, approach to character creation. That said, customising backgrounds is trivially easy to do (on paper anyway: I don’t know about DDB implementation), as long as your DM is happy with it.
The problem is that this system punishes players who make their character choices for narrative reasons, because picking choices for narrative reasons will most likely not get you the stats your class wants or the feat that might fit your playstyle.
For instance, Tavern Brawler is an origin feat that would be a strong pick for a Monk, but I'd be surprised if Dexterity or Wisdom were options for the relevant background.
The end result is that most players are just going to create their own background, because there's no good reason not to, except for newer/less experienced players who are going to be tethered to arbitrary choices.
Just for the example of Tavern Brawler, we don’t know how things look in the new PHB, but in UA1, the Sailor example background included Tavern Brawler, with ASIs in DEX and WIS and proficiency in Perception and Acrobatics. Mechanically, a great fit for the Monk, though narratively rather… niche.
I think I can understand why they took this approach in the PHB, as it’s intended, in part, as a gateway for newer players. Presenting fixed choices reduces the decision overload and also encourages a narrative, rather than purely mechanical, approach to character creation. That said, customising backgrounds is trivially easy to do (on paper anyway: I don’t know about DDB implementation), as long as your DM is happy with it.
In my opinion, the PHB should not be a gateway for new players; that is the BR/SRD's job. The PHB as is already overloads new players with lots of choices. The SRD, and especially BR, significantly cuts down on character creation choices, so new players can just focus on learning the rules of the game first.
Additionally, the PHB also costs money, whereas BR/SRD is free. TTRPGs might be growing as a hobby, but it is still niche for a reason, and I do not think it is a good idea to encourage people to spend money on a hobby that there is a high likelihood that they might not like, especially if there is a free product like BR/SRD for people to try it out first. If new people really want to spend money on D&D, spending it on snacks and drinks makes more sense since they are guaranteed to actually enjoy those things and makes their game experience more comfortable, unlike a book for a hobby that they might never open again if they do not enjoy it.
Obviously, Wizards needs to make money, so them promoting BR/SRD in any significant way is highly unlikely. However, we as a community can steer new GMs and players towards all the free stuff first, and we need to do a better job of dispelling the idea that people need the PHB to play D&D. D&D can be played for free.
At least before, you can argue that spending two bucks on a background on Beyond is no big deal, but not anymore now that you have to get the whole book. A veteran GM buying the whole PHB is fine, but expecting a new GM to do the same is not ideal.
For your specific example, tavern brawler in its 2014 writing would be useless to a monk. It would be an active downgrade of their abilities. Of course, we don’t know what the ‘24 tavern brawler will look like.
The article describes it - reroll 1s on unarmed strike damage (actually quite solid for monk as their unarmed die size grows, getting a 1 on a d12 is pretty painful), and a 1/round free 5ft shove which can potentially save them needing to Patient Defense Disengage if they need to skirmish out of melee.
But to the larger point, you seem to be saying it’s a bad thing that new players will have simple options while experienced players will have more complex options. That’s a feature, not a bug.
I don't mind steering experienced players more to custom backgrounds. The problem is (a) we won't have those the custom rule for a few more months, (b) we have no idea how it'll be implemented on this site, and (c) we have no idea whether it will be legal for sanctioned play either. All three of those issues affect experienced players too.
As the die grows, the odds of a 1 shrink, though. Shove to disengage when there are likely squishier characters in the party and unless you are hiding behind everyone else in the party, your opponent will likely just close with you again anyway.
As the die grows, the odds of a 1 shrink, though. Shove to disengage when there are likely squishier characters in the party and unless you are hiding behind everyone else in the party, your opponent will likely just close with you again anyway.
I'm not trying to claim it's a must-have or anything, at the end of the day it's still just an origin feat. The ultimate impact is relatively small, but so is the cost.
Thanks to the content creator embargo lifting, we now know the ASI and feat combinations for all 16 backgrounds:
Acolyte: Int / Wis / Cha. Feat: Magic Initiate (Cleric)
Artisan: Str / Dex / Int. Feat: Crafter
Charlatan: Dex / Con / Cha. Feat: Skilled
Criminal: Dex / Con / Int. Feat: Alert
Entertainer: Str / Dex / Cha. Feat: Musician
Guard: Str / Int / Wis. Feat: Alert
Farmer: Str / Con / Wis. Feat: Tough
Guide: Dex / Con / Wis. Feat: Magic Initiate (Druid).
Hermit: Con / Wis / Cha. Feat: Healer
Noble: Str / Int / Cha. Feat: Skilled
Merchant: Con / Int / Cha. Feat: Lucky
Sage: Con / Int / Wis. Feat: Magic Initiate (Wizard)
Sailor: Str / Dex/ Wis. Feat: Tavern Brawler
Soldier: Str / Dex / Con. Feat: Savage Attacker
Scribe: Dex / Int / Wis. Feat: Skilled
Wayfarer: Dex / Wis/ Cha. Feat: Lucky
My gears are turning with combos already. Guide for Ranger and Criminal for Rogue seem like no-brainer. Wayfarer is pretty nice for Monk. One I might not have considered before is Entertainer for a WIld Magic Sorcerer, using your Musician feat to give yourself Heroic Inspiration that you can use to reroll your Wild Magic Surge table once per SR. If you don't want extra cantrips on your Wizard, go for Merchant instead of Sage, etc.
Why bother with fixed backgrounds if you all just swap to custom backgrounds.
I think custom backgrounds (and custom lineage) are a mistake in a game that tries to present narrative choices.
I know i will ban any and all custom backgrounds/lineage on my table, as it is a gameist choice, not a narrative one. If you want to have a background that doesn't fit with one of the provided, i'm fine with creating one for the players that fit. but i would never let the players make ones on their own.
I would rather see backgrounds removed completely from the system before using custom backgrounds, though whats the difference? with custom backgrounds you can just ignore the background system as a whole. Just pick the abilities and feats for your "build" and don't bother with a choice that could have some narrative and also mechanical consequence's.
Poor Warlock doesnt have one that fits like a glove. Well, there's always custom background or just pick one based on roleplay
Merchant is Con/Cha and Lucky, and someone known for making deals running a shop seems like it fits pretty great to me. Wayfarer is Dex/Cha and also Lucky. and a societal outcast/downtrodden seems like just the person that would end up getting exploited by a Patron.
(Not to mention - Warlock can get any Origin Feat they want via LotFO, so just about any Cha background works for them regardless of feat. Though I'm hopeful we get Intlocks in a future optional feature supplements so mine can be a Sage or Scribe.)
Why bother with fixed backgrounds if you all just swap to custom backgrounds.
I think custom backgrounds (and custom lineage) are a mistake in a game that tries to present narrative choices.
I know i will ban any and all custom backgrounds/lineage on my table, as it is a gameist choice, not a narrative one. If you want to have a background that doesn't fit with one of the provided, i'm fine with creating one for the players that fit. but i would never let the players make ones on their own.
I would rather see backgrounds removed completely from the system before using custom backgrounds, though whats the difference? with custom backgrounds you can just ignore the background system as a whole. Just pick the abilities and feats for your "build" and don't bother with a choice that could have some narrative and also mechanical consequence's.
I do have to admit there's a bit of narrative and mechanical challenge I find interesting in trying to make the best of the printed backgrounds . Some of them fit certain builds like a glove, e.g. Criminal Assassin Rogue for Dex/Con/Int+Alert, or Guide Rangers for Dex/Wis + Druid MI.
Poor Warlock doesnt have one that fits like a glove. Well, there's always custom background or just pick one based on roleplay
Merchant is Con/Cha and Lucky, and someone known for making deals running a shop seems like it fits pretty great to me. Wayfarer is Dex/Cha and also Lucky. and a societal outcast/downtrodden seems like just the person that would end up getting exploited by a Patron.
(Not to mention - Warlock can get any Origin Feat they want via LotFO, so just about any Cha background works for them regardless of feat. Though I'm hopeful we get Intlocks in a future optional feature supplements so mine can be a Sage or Scribe.)
Why bother with fixed backgrounds if you all just swap to custom backgrounds.
I think custom backgrounds (and custom lineage) are a mistake in a game that tries to present narrative choices.
I know i will ban any and all custom backgrounds/lineage on my table, as it is a gameist choice, not a narrative one. If you want to have a background that doesn't fit with one of the provided, i'm fine with creating one for the players that fit. but i would never let the players make ones on their own.
I would rather see backgrounds removed completely from the system before using custom backgrounds, though whats the difference? with custom backgrounds you can just ignore the background system as a whole. Just pick the abilities and feats for your "build" and don't bother with a choice that could have some narrative and also mechanical consequence's.
I do have to admit there's a bit of narrative and mechanical challenge I find interesting in trying to make the best of the printed backgrounds . Some of them fit certain builds like a glove, e.g. Criminal Assassin Rogue for Dex/Con/Int+Alert, or Guide Rangers for Dex/Wis + Druid MI.
Here is a reply i made in a thread on reddit, that perhaps explains what i mean
Seems i'm in the minority. I think backgrounds being restrictive is fine and ADDS, rather then subtracts. Sure your pirate Wizard doesn't get a boost to int. So what? Every general feat in the game is a half feat now. You will get your int up quickly enough anyway. But your Pirate Wizard has a boost to wis and dex, making them more durable then other wizards, which makes sense for a pirate wizard compared to a Sage Wizard.
The wrong feat? Tavern Brawler is perhaps not desirable for wizards, ok. But you don't have to be a sailor to be a pirate wizard in the first place. Artisan, Criminal, Guide, Merchant, Scribe, Wayfarer all can apply just as well to a Pirate Wizard. And among Crafter, Alert, Magic Initiate (druid), Lucky, Skilled you certainly find a feat you like to take.
There is a very well known concept: Creative limitation is the concept of how purposely limiting oneself can actually drive creativity.
And we do this all the time with species and classes, so why not include background too?
I do understand what you mean - but realistically, most people aren't going to do that, they're going to just pick Sage / Criminal / Merchant for Int+Con (or Scribe/Artisan for Int+Dex) and justify their Wizard's backstory as having been one of those later. For the majority of wizard players I'd be willing to bet the remaining options might as well not exist.
I do understand what you mean - but realistically, most people aren't going to do that, they're going to just pick Sage / Criminal / Merchant for Int+Con (or Scribe/Artisan for Int+Dex) and justify their Wizard's backstory as having been one of those later. For the majority of wizard players I'd be willing to bet the remaining options might as well not exist.
Which is one of the symptoms i despise in the TTRPG community (and general gamer culture too to some degree). Builds, not Characters. The gamification of a character, and wanting to having the best build. The use of pointbuy/array instead of rolling for stats. The super flexible ability scores from races (this is a bit eh, but fits in here). People want to have ultimate freedom, without consequences or downsides. But consequences and downsides... flaws... makes things interesting.
Which is one of the symptoms i despise in the TTRPG community (and general gamer culture too to some degree). Builds, not Characters. The gamification of a character, and wanting to having the best build. The use of pointbuy/array instead of rolling for stats. The super flexible ability scores from races (this is a bit eh, but fits in here). People want to have ultimate freedom, without consequences or downsides. But consequences and downsides... flaws... makes things interesting.
If you don't want people to game their background selection, then you shouldn't gamify backgrounds.
As it is, the backgrounds are fundamentally set up to say that certain narrative choices are better fits for certain game choices. That's literally gamification: the opposite of what you want.
What you (seem to) want is players who ignore game incentives. But following incentives is human nature.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
From the sidebar in the new Backgrounds and Origin Feats article:
"Older background" of course just means one they haven't updated in 2024. So just pick one such unupdated background - say, Folk Hero, or Outlander - and assign the stats and feat for it wherever you wish.
You're technically stuck with the skills that came with that older background (I'm assuming they got rid of the "redundant proficiency = pick a different one" rule from 2014, but hey, can't have everything.
It's a bit silly we have to go with these workarounds until the new DMG comes out (and maybe after?) but custom backgrounds are back on the menu!
Yeah, it bothers me they went back to thisd rigid form of character creation when it comes to the attributes. Like, I'll use the newer ones when they fit but ill probably use the old ones when I have a specific character background in mind.
I think I can understand why they took this approach in the PHB, as it’s intended, in part, as a gateway for newer players. Presenting fixed choices reduces the decision overload and also encourages a narrative, rather than purely mechanical, approach to character creation. That said, customising backgrounds is trivially easy to do (on paper anyway: I don’t know about DDB implementation), as long as your DM is happy with it.
There's no reason why they couldn't just do what I've been suggesting for years - give suggestions, or defaults as it were, but make the choice to assign them as you wish. So one might default to be Dex +2, Int +1, but then you can change them to whatever you want.
We'll see in September if they really are going to be daft about this, or if this is just a nothingbirger.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
For your specific example, tavern brawler in its 2014 writing would be useless to a monk. It would be an active downgrade of their abilities. Of course, we don’t know what the ‘24 tavern brawler will look like.
But to the larger point, you seem to be saying it’s a bad thing that new players will have simple options while experienced players will have more complex options. That’s a feature, not a bug.
The article describes it - reroll 1s on unarmed strike damage (actually quite solid for monk as their unarmed die size grows, getting a 1 on a d12 is pretty painful), and a 1/round free 5ft shove which can potentially save them needing to Patient Defense Disengage if they need to skirmish out of melee.
I don't mind steering experienced players more to custom backgrounds. The problem is (a) we won't have those the custom rule for a few more months, (b) we have no idea how it'll be implemented on this site, and (c) we have no idea whether it will be legal for sanctioned play either. All three of those issues affect experienced players too.
Ahh, thank you, I hadn’t caught that about the new tavern brawler.
As for custom backgrounds, I have lots of other things I’m curious about for the new rules before I’ll worry about how they’ll work. I appreciate others have concerns and don’t want to minimize them, but this is just not likely to be a big deal, imo.
I don't think it'll be a big deal either, but I do play quite a bit of AL (I attend several conventions) and depending on what they allow there I could see the shift to fixed backgrounds being annoying to deal with.
Just for the example of Tavern Brawler, we don’t know how things look in the new PHB, but in UA1, the Sailor example background included Tavern Brawler, with ASIs in DEX and WIS and proficiency in Perception and Acrobatics. Mechanically, a great fit for the Monk, though narratively rather… niche.
In my opinion, the PHB should not be a gateway for new players; that is the BR/SRD's job. The PHB as is already overloads new players with lots of choices. The SRD, and especially BR, significantly cuts down on character creation choices, so new players can just focus on learning the rules of the game first.
Additionally, the PHB also costs money, whereas BR/SRD is free. TTRPGs might be growing as a hobby, but it is still niche for a reason, and I do not think it is a good idea to encourage people to spend money on a hobby that there is a high likelihood that they might not like, especially if there is a free product like BR/SRD for people to try it out first. If new people really want to spend money on D&D, spending it on snacks and drinks makes more sense since they are guaranteed to actually enjoy those things and makes their game experience more comfortable, unlike a book for a hobby that they might never open again if they do not enjoy it.
Obviously, Wizards needs to make money, so them promoting BR/SRD in any significant way is highly unlikely. However, we as a community can steer new GMs and players towards all the free stuff first, and we need to do a better job of dispelling the idea that people need the PHB to play D&D. D&D can be played for free.
At least before, you can argue that spending two bucks on a background on Beyond is no big deal, but not anymore now that you have to get the whole book. A veteran GM buying the whole PHB is fine, but expecting a new GM to do the same is not ideal.
Check Licenses and Resync Entitlements: < https://www.dndbeyond.com/account/licenses >
Running the Game by Matt Colville; Introduction: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-YZvLUXcR8 >
D&D with High School Students by Bill Allen; Season 1 Episode 1: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52NJTUDokyk&t >
As the die grows, the odds of a 1 shrink, though. Shove to disengage when there are likely squishier characters in the party and unless you are hiding behind everyone else in the party, your opponent will likely just close with you again anyway.
I'm not trying to claim it's a must-have or anything, at the end of the day it's still just an origin feat. The ultimate impact is relatively small, but so is the cost.
Thanks to the content creator embargo lifting, we now know the ASI and feat combinations for all 16 backgrounds:
My gears are turning with combos already. Guide for Ranger and Criminal for Rogue seem like no-brainer. Wayfarer is pretty nice for Monk. One I might not have considered before is Entertainer for a WIld Magic Sorcerer, using your Musician feat to give yourself Heroic Inspiration that you can use to reroll your Wild Magic Surge table once per SR. If you don't want extra cantrips on your Wizard, go for Merchant instead of Sage, etc.
Poor Warlock doesnt have one that fits like a glove. Well, there's always custom background or just pick one based on roleplay
Why bother with fixed backgrounds if you all just swap to custom backgrounds.
I think custom backgrounds (and custom lineage) are a mistake in a game that tries to present narrative choices.
I know i will ban any and all custom backgrounds/lineage on my table, as it is a gameist choice, not a narrative one. If you want to have a background that doesn't fit with one of the provided, i'm fine with creating one for the players that fit. but i would never let the players make ones on their own.
I would rather see backgrounds removed completely from the system before using custom backgrounds, though whats the difference? with custom backgrounds you can just ignore the background system as a whole. Just pick the abilities and feats for your "build" and don't bother with a choice that could have some narrative and also mechanical consequence's.
Merchant is Con/Cha and Lucky, and someone known for making deals running a shop seems like it fits pretty great to me. Wayfarer is Dex/Cha and also Lucky. and a societal outcast/downtrodden seems like just the person that would end up getting exploited by a Patron.
(Not to mention - Warlock can get any Origin Feat they want via LotFO, so just about any Cha background works for them regardless of feat. Though I'm hopeful we get Intlocks in a future optional feature supplements so mine can be a Sage or Scribe.)
I do have to admit there's a bit of narrative and mechanical challenge I find interesting in trying to make the best of the printed backgrounds . Some of them fit certain builds like a glove, e.g. Criminal Assassin Rogue for Dex/Con/Int+Alert, or Guide Rangers for Dex/Wis + Druid MI.
Here is a reply i made in a thread on reddit, that perhaps explains what i mean
I do understand what you mean - but realistically, most people aren't going to do that, they're going to just pick Sage / Criminal / Merchant for Int+Con (or Scribe/Artisan for Int+Dex) and justify their Wizard's backstory as having been one of those later. For the majority of wizard players I'd be willing to bet the remaining options might as well not exist.
Which is one of the symptoms i despise in the TTRPG community (and general gamer culture too to some degree). Builds, not Characters. The gamification of a character, and wanting to having the best build. The use of pointbuy/array instead of rolling for stats. The super flexible ability scores from races (this is a bit eh, but fits in here). People want to have ultimate freedom, without consequences or downsides. But consequences and downsides... flaws... makes things interesting.
If you don't want people to game their background selection, then you shouldn't gamify backgrounds.
As it is, the backgrounds are fundamentally set up to say that certain narrative choices are better fits for certain game choices. That's literally gamification: the opposite of what you want.
What you (seem to) want is players who ignore game incentives. But following incentives is human nature.