Actually 3rd ed was great. The restrictions there to help make things unique, while also allowing for a stupendous amount of interaction and choice. It also helped to illustrate how each class would progress uniquely, ie different skill pts, how well and often the base attacks you got per round, saving throw progression. Overall, much better than 5e and and certainly 2024 in terms of letting each have its strengths and weaknesses. And multi classing was a whole lot better.
3e definitely had some positives. For me the save system which 5e largely copies is its downfall. BECMI-2e while I wont say the save system was perfect, the idea in all areas as you progressed you got significantly better at making your saves and it eventually became expected of you as a legendary hero, or for the legendary monsters to make their saves was an important balancing point. Even when monsters with magic resistance, saving on like a 4 people would complain about how a save or die spell ended a boss fight. Now its expected they will fail their save and end a fight so they hamfisted legendary resistances into it instead of fixing the core design flaw or monsters needing to roll a 19 to save as they are weak in wisdom or whatever.
3e definitely had some positives. For me the save system which 5e largely copies is its downfall. BECMI-2e while I wont say the save system was perfect, the idea in all areas as you progressed you got significantly better at making your saves and it eventually became expected of you as a legendary hero, or for the legendary monsters to make their saves was an important balancing point. Even when monsters with magic resistance, saving on like a 4 people would complain about how a save or die spell ended a boss fight. Now its expected they will fail their save and end a fight so they hamfisted legendary resistances into it instead of fixing the core design flaw or monsters needing to roll a 19 to save as they are weak in wisdom or whatever.
That one's at least partly a matter of taste. If high-level monsters are expected to make their saves, then save-or-nothing spells are bad, and will only be tried if the unlikely success results are really good, which leads to a very high variance situation, where neither result is satisfying. If monsters have saving throw strengths and weaknesses, then a well-prepared party can take advantage of that, and be rewarded by making their fights easier.
5e's spells of that type are also generally less powerful -- they're usually an advantage, not a win, because even if you can disable a monster for a round, you can't kill it outright in that time, and they have repeated saves. Legendary resistances both help prevent anticlimax, and give the feel of the enemy having defenses you can burn through. They're not great, but there's probably no good solution -- once you have disabling spells, it's nearly impossible to strike the right balance between "they don't work" and "you just win now". (And it probably can't be solved at all outside of a single table -- play styles and group mixes are too varied.)
As for players, the varying strengths and weaknesses in character saving throws are the balancing factor. It allows enemies to have mass-disabling effects where they are dramatic and useful, but not TPK. Some of the PCs will still be standing, and they can scramble to hold out until their friends recover. (And, if they're well-prepared, help them do so.)
At least some bloody thought was given to how a martial class would obviously improve at a greater rate than a wizard when it came to wielding a weapon both can use.
Why is that obvious? Classes in general aren't realistic, and realistic training has enough diminishing returns that the specialist often improves slower than the novice (just from a much higher baseline), and the higher baseline is mostly represented via stats in D&D. D&D is at best accidentally related to reality, the point is to provide engaging gameplay (which is a reasonable aesthetic argument, but that's all it is).
At least some bloody thought was given to how a martial class would obviously improve at a greater rate than a wizard when it came to wielding a weapon both can use.
Why is that obvious? Classes in general aren't realistic, and realistic training has enough diminishing returns that the specialist often improves slower than the novice (just from a much higher baseline), and the higher baseline is mostly represented via stats in D&D. D&D is at best accidentally related to reality, the point is to provide engaging gameplay (which is a reasonable aesthetic argument, but that's all it is).
Also, if wizards were actually as capable with weapons as martials were, we'd see wizards fighting with weapons a lot more often than we do. But there's more to the combat system than that one number, so we don't.
Some of the abilities assigned to the backgrounds don’t even really make sense thematically. Noble’s, who notoriously don’t do manual labor have STR (rather than DEX, perhaps). Sailors don’t have CON? Acolyte, which I envision as a cloistered religious scholar, have CHA?
Some of the abilities assigned to the backgrounds don’t even really make sense thematically. Noble’s, who notoriously don’t do manual labor have STR (rather than DEX, perhaps). Sailors don’t have CON? Acolyte, which I envision as a cloistered religious scholar, have CHA?
Yeah, I fully agree, I mean when I read the PhP for the first time, most things where like "interesting... cool....have to try and see" but backgrounds immediately motivated me to write The Book of Backgrounds and I think by the time I'm done that will be a 5 volume set if not more because..... I just think that Backgrounds in 5e are a huge missed opportunity.
I don't want to say they are bad as written because it's not that really it, I just think they are really generic. Why Sailor? Why not Pirate? Sea Captain? Why not create feats dedicated to the background, something unique that is for them only? To me it just feels like the backgrounds were "minimal effort" and given that the 5e community is huge on story, this probably should have been its own 40-page chapter. Like, lean into the story part of the game.
Some of the abilities assigned to the backgrounds don’t even really make sense thematically. Noble’s, who notoriously don’t do manual labor have STR (rather than DEX, perhaps). Sailors don’t have CON? Acolyte, which I envision as a cloistered religious scholar, have CHA?
Yeah, I fully agree, I mean when I read the PhP for the first time, most things where like "interesting... cool....have to try and see" but backgrounds immediately motivated me to write The Book of Backgrounds and I think by the time I'm done that will be a 5 volume set if not more because..... I just think that Backgrounds in 5e are a huge missed opportunity.
I don't want to say they are bad as written because it's not that really it, I just think they are really generic. Why Sailor? Why not Pirate? Sea Captain? Why not create feats dedicated to the background, something unique that is for them only? To me it just feels like the backgrounds were "minimal effort" and given that the 5e community is huge on story, this probably should have been its own 40-page chapter. Like, lean into the story part of the game.
The thing is that Sea Captain and Pirate can fit under the generic Sailor background. And if they put in 40 pages of backgrounds and background info then that’s 40 pages of classes and subclasses etc that will not be in the book. They just can’t keep making the book bigger and bigger. And if you had a Sailor and Sea Captain and Pirate background then someone would be on here with “where is my Royal Navy background! The other three don’t fit the exact specific niche I want for my character!” You have to be vague so that players can build off of that scaffolding to play what they want
Some of the abilities assigned to the backgrounds don’t even really make sense thematically. Noble’s, who notoriously don’t do manual labor have STR (rather than DEX, perhaps). Sailors don’t have CON? Acolyte, which I envision as a cloistered religious scholar, have CHA?
For nobles, you can be strong without doing manual labor. Those nobles will also have good nutrition and, depending on the kind you are going for (aka flexibility of options for the player) may have spent many years training in swordplay, etc. Nobles in fictional pseudo-medieval times were often called upon to be warriors. Maybe also irl. Sailors already had str and dex. They can’t just have physical stats. If that’s your vision of an acolyte, then you can quite easily choose not to take the cha boost. They could, however, just as easily be a member of the clergy who works in and with the community, feeding the poor, teaching Pelor’s version of Sunday school, visiting the sick. And generally developing their people skills
I don't want to say they are bad as written because it's not that really it, I just think they are really generic. Why Sailor? Why not Pirate? Sea Captain? Why not create feats dedicated to the background, something unique that is for them only?
It seems to me that all pirates and sea captains are sailors. Keeping it broader allows more flexibility in creating what you are looking for. Though pirate may appear one day. But probably not captain. A 1st level character won’t have been the captain. That said, I am looking forward to seeing them publish more backgrounds. I find these options perfectly serviceable, but I’d still love to see more.
Some of the abilities assigned to the backgrounds don’t even really make sense thematically. Noble’s, who notoriously don’t do manual labor have STR (rather than DEX, perhaps). Sailors don’t have CON? Acolyte, which I envision as a cloistered religious scholar, have CHA?
Yeah, I fully agree, I mean when I read the PhP for the first time, most things where like "interesting... cool....have to try and see" but backgrounds immediately motivated me to write The Book of Backgrounds and I think by the time I'm done that will be a 5 volume set if not more because..... I just think that Backgrounds in 5e are a huge missed opportunity.
I don't want to say they are bad as written because it's not that really it, I just think they are really generic. Why Sailor? Why not Pirate? Sea Captain? Why not create feats dedicated to the background, something unique that is for them only? To me it just feels like the backgrounds were "minimal effort" and given that the 5e community is huge on story, this probably should have been its own 40-page chapter. Like, lean into the story part of the game.
The thing is that Sea Captain and Pirate can fit under the generic Sailor background. And if they put in 40 pages of backgrounds and background info then that’s 40 pages of classes and subclasses etc that will not be in the book. They just can’t keep making the book bigger and bigger. And if you had a Sailor and Sea Captain and Pirate background then someone would be on here with “where is my Royal Navy background! The other three don’t fit the exact specific niche I want for my character!” You have to be vague so that players can build off of that scaffolding to play what they want
I think the opposite is true about D&D players. Players don't want the game to be vague so that they can build off the scaffolding, they want details to be front-loaded so that they create and play detailed characters. The most important information, the most important moment in D&D is the character creation of 1st level characters. It is better to front load this with the most options, most decisions, and most flavor and cut out the back part of the game rarely ever used. Like you could cut everything after 10th level (classes, spells etc..) out of the book and you would probably get around 100 pages back and use that to make character creation more detailed. 90% of players will never play a game above 10th level and those that do, will rarely do so.
I don't want to say they are bad as written because it's not that really it, I just think they are really generic. Why Sailor? Why not Pirate? Sea Captain? Why not create feats dedicated to the background, something unique that is for them only?
It seems to me that all pirates and sea captains are sailors. Keeping it broader allows more flexibility in creating what you are looking for. Though pirate may appear one day. But probably not captain. A 1st level character won’t have been the captain. That said, I am looking forward to seeing them publish more backgrounds. I find these options perfectly serviceable, but I’d still love to see more.
Yeah your right of course and I think that for the PhB, this method of broad approach is fine, but yeah, as you said, I definitely think we need a lot more backgrounds, not just to have new things to pick, but to have backgrounds inspire character types.
Each new background should have a couple of new origin feats to choose from, new tool proficiencies and new tools.
I can definitely see stuff like Sea Captain, Pirate, Swashbuckler, Cabin Boy, Shipwright, Privateer... I could create backgrounds and origins feats all day, every day.
I don't want to say they are bad as written because it's not that really it, I just think they are really generic. Why Sailor? Why not Pirate? Sea Captain? Why not create feats dedicated to the background, something unique that is for them only?
It seems to me that all pirates and sea captains are sailors. Keeping it broader allows more flexibility in creating what you are looking for. Though pirate may appear one day. But probably not captain. A 1st level character won’t have been the captain. That said, I am looking forward to seeing them publish more backgrounds. I find these options perfectly serviceable, but I’d still love to see more.
Yeah your right of course and I think that for the PhB, this method of broad approach is fine, but yeah, as you said, I definitely think we need a lot more backgrounds, not just to have new things to pick, but to have backgrounds inspire character types.
Given that one of the 2025 books announced is a entirely player facing Forgotten Realms book I suspect setting specific backgrounds are going to become a big thing going forward. It's frustrating that we've only got a few very basic ones right now I agree but so long as they add to them frequently it'll hopefully not be long before we've got a decent selection without having to homebrew too much
The lifecycle of an edition is that it typically starts off well, but the publishing house has to figure out a way to make a profit. To do so, the edition ends up bloated and broken as more and more books are published.
That has happened with every successful TTRPG ever created. It becomes a victim of its own success.
I think WotC tried to avoid that with 5e, but pressured by Hasbto, they tried to create some alternative revenue streams and several of those were ill-advised.
The thing is, though, I don’t think anyone has figured out how to keep a TTRPG financially healthy without the inevitable self-destructive bloat. What the industry needs is a new business model. I have no clue what that might be, so I’m not pointing fingers.
The lifecycle of an edition is that it typically starts off well, but the publishing house has to figure out a way to make a profit. To do so, the edition ends up bloated and broken as more and more books are published.
That has happened with every successful TTRPG ever created. It becomes a victim of its own success.
I think WotC tried to avoid that with 5e, but pressured by Hasbto, they tried to create some alternative revenue streams and several of those were ill-advised.
The thing is, though, I don’t think anyone has figured out how to keep a TTRPG financially healthy without the inevitable self-destructive bloat. What the industry needs is a new business model. I have no clue what that might be, so I’m not pointing fingers.
I know of a way, but most people loath it.
First, ditch books as the primary medium for TTRPGs. Books are costly, unwieldy, out of date the moment they are printed and take up physical space. The only upside they have is that they are offline available.
Second, make the TTRPG easily online accessible. It should work on any phone, tablet, PC, even stuff like consoles wouldn't hurt.
Third, provide a environment where all the needs are covered on a base level to run the TTRPG (free character builder, maps/VTT, campagin notes)
Fourth, provide optional services that will likely see sales: ability to share content, extra customization options for the character builder UI, extra maps, unique VTT features like fog, lighting or line of sight, unique 3d minis if it is a 3d VTT.
And if you think: Hey, that sounds like D&DBeyond and the Project Sigil VTT! You are right. For a TTRPG to make money in the long run, without going into the bloated content territory, they have to go the way of non-core things to be monetized. The core of a TTRPG is something you buy once and don't need more stuff for it, and even than many people pirate stuff. But, think about what every TTRPG player buys all the time? Dice, minis, maps, custom art. All the stuff that is explicitly not the core of the game, but the surrounding stuff.
And i know a lot of people hate the direction WotC seems to go with D&D, with their VTT and DNDBeyond. But if they want to make money, without bloating the core game with a new book every month, they have to monetized the things surrounding the core too.
I, too, am annoyed they didn't keep the custom background as per the UA.
It seems that they have a custom background option in the DMG 2024. I am not sure if you have had a chance to review that yet. The character creator still is using the 2014 background customization, but I am thinking that will soon be changed.
I, too, am annoyed they didn't keep the custom background as per the UA.
It seems that they have a custom background option in the DMG 2024. I am not sure if you have had a chance to review that yet. The character creator still is using the 2014 background customization, but I am thinking that will soon be changed.
It's encouraging. No, I haven't had the chance to review that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
I, too, am annoyed they didn't keep the custom background as per the UA.
It seems that they have a custom background option in the DMG 2024. I am not sure if you have had a chance to review that yet. The character creator still is using the 2014 background customization, but I am thinking that will soon be changed.
It is there, and works basically the way ~everyone expects. Except it is phrased not as a player option but as a DM option, such as "You can also create a background to help a player craft the story they have in mind for their character." So it's unclear if it'll be supported as a direct player option in the tool.
Some of the abilities assigned to the backgrounds don’t even really make sense thematically. Noble’s, who notoriously don’t do manual labor have STR (rather than DEX, perhaps). Sailors don’t have CON? Acolyte, which I envision as a cloistered religious scholar, have CHA?
Yeah, I fully agree, I mean when I read the PhP for the first time, most things where like "interesting... cool....have to try and see" but backgrounds immediately motivated me to write The Book of Backgrounds and I think by the time I'm done that will be a 5 volume set if not more because..... I just think that Backgrounds in 5e are a huge missed opportunity.
I don't want to say they are bad as written because it's not that really it, I just think they are really generic. Why Sailor? Why not Pirate? Sea Captain? Why not create feats dedicated to the background, something unique that is for them only? To me it just feels like the backgrounds were "minimal effort" and given that the 5e community is huge on story, this probably should have been its own 40-page chapter. Like, lean into the story part of the game.
The thing is that Sea Captain and Pirate can fit under the generic Sailor background. And if they put in 40 pages of backgrounds and background info then that’s 40 pages of classes and subclasses etc that will not be in the book. They just can’t keep making the book bigger and bigger. And if you had a Sailor and Sea Captain and Pirate background then someone would be on here with “where is my Royal Navy background! The other three don’t fit the exact specific niche I want for my character!” You have to be vague so that players can build off of that scaffolding to play what they want
I think the opposite is true about D&D players. Players don't want the game to be vague so that they can build off the scaffolding, they want details to be front-loaded so that they create and play detailed characters. The most important information, the most important moment in D&D is the character creation of 1st level characters. It is better to front load this with the most options, most decisions, and most flavor and cut out the back part of the game rarely ever used. Like you could cut everything after 10th level (classes, spells etc..) out of the book and you would probably get around 100 pages back and use that to make character creation more detailed. 90% of players will never play a game above 10th level and those that do, will rarely do so.
I don’t think, nor was it my intention to imply, that the game should be vague. But backgrounds that can have millions of different iterations can’t be too specific unless you are going to publish books just for backgrounds
case in point:
I can definitely see stuff like Sea Captain, Pirate, Swashbuckler, Cabin Boy, Shipwright, Privateer... I could create backgrounds and origins feats all day, every day.
You say players want it all to be front loaded and laid out for them. Then in the next post you say “Yeah your right of course and I think that for the PhB, this method of broad approach is fine,”
I definitely would like to see more backgrounds as well, and a few more in the PHB would have been welcome. But 40 pages of them? I’m sure more will come when they start publishing new books, after the MM comes out. Plenty of subclasses to be revised and just like feats that didn’t make the cut, backgrounds will be in those books as well.
I think D&D players will do just fine coming up with interesting backgrounds with even the handful given so far as inspiration.
I, too, am annoyed they didn't keep the custom background as per the UA.
It seems that they have a custom background option in the DMG 2024. I am not sure if you have had a chance to review that yet. The character creator still is using the 2014 background customization, but I am thinking that will soon be changed.
It's encouraging. No, I haven't had the chance to review that.
Ah! In case you don't yet have access, they have a section on it where you can choose any three ability scores that are relevant to you, an Origin feat, two skill proficiency improvements, a tool proficiency, and the equipment associated with the background worth up to 50gp.
I am not sure if this hits what you are looking for, but it seems to be allowing for complete customization. The most limiting thing IMO, is the Origin feat.
I, too, am annoyed they didn't keep the custom background as per the UA.
It seems that they have a custom background option in the DMG 2024. I am not sure if you have had a chance to review that yet. The character creator still is using the 2014 background customization, but I am thinking that will soon be changed.
To be precise, there is no "Custom Backgrounds" in the 2024 DMG, but a "Creating a Background" section, like it is for Monsters, Magic Items or Spells. From how i read it, it is not meant for players, but for the DM to create a specific background for the player to fit their game. From the DMG:
Creating a unique background or customizing an existing one from the Player’s Handbook can reflect the particular theme of your campaign or elements of your world. You can also create a background to help a player craft the story they have in mind for their character.
It is a DM facing text how to create a background that fits your world. Not simply letting player's run hogwild with backgrounds. I would even go so far and say, the DM has the final word on Backgrounds and not players, unless the DM doesn't care.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
3e definitely had some positives. For me the save system which 5e largely copies is its downfall. BECMI-2e while I wont say the save system was perfect, the idea in all areas as you progressed you got significantly better at making your saves and it eventually became expected of you as a legendary hero, or for the legendary monsters to make their saves was an important balancing point. Even when monsters with magic resistance, saving on like a 4 people would complain about how a save or die spell ended a boss fight. Now its expected they will fail their save and end a fight so they hamfisted legendary resistances into it instead of fixing the core design flaw or monsters needing to roll a 19 to save as they are weak in wisdom or whatever.
That one's at least partly a matter of taste. If high-level monsters are expected to make their saves, then save-or-nothing spells are bad, and will only be tried if the unlikely success results are really good, which leads to a very high variance situation, where neither result is satisfying. If monsters have saving throw strengths and weaknesses, then a well-prepared party can take advantage of that, and be rewarded by making their fights easier.
5e's spells of that type are also generally less powerful -- they're usually an advantage, not a win, because even if you can disable a monster for a round, you can't kill it outright in that time, and they have repeated saves. Legendary resistances both help prevent anticlimax, and give the feel of the enemy having defenses you can burn through. They're not great, but there's probably no good solution -- once you have disabling spells, it's nearly impossible to strike the right balance between "they don't work" and "you just win now". (And it probably can't be solved at all outside of a single table -- play styles and group mixes are too varied.)
As for players, the varying strengths and weaknesses in character saving throws are the balancing factor. It allows enemies to have mass-disabling effects where they are dramatic and useful, but not TPK. Some of the PCs will still be standing, and they can scramble to hold out until their friends recover. (And, if they're well-prepared, help them do so.)
Why is that obvious? Classes in general aren't realistic, and realistic training has enough diminishing returns that the specialist often improves slower than the novice (just from a much higher baseline), and the higher baseline is mostly represented via stats in D&D. D&D is at best accidentally related to reality, the point is to provide engaging gameplay (which is a reasonable aesthetic argument, but that's all it is).
Also, if wizards were actually as capable with weapons as martials were, we'd see wizards fighting with weapons a lot more often than we do. But there's more to the combat system than that one number, so we don't.
Some of the abilities assigned to the backgrounds don’t even really make sense thematically. Noble’s, who notoriously don’t do manual labor have STR (rather than DEX, perhaps). Sailors don’t have CON? Acolyte, which I envision as a cloistered religious scholar, have CHA?
Yeah, I fully agree, I mean when I read the PhP for the first time, most things where like "interesting... cool....have to try and see" but backgrounds immediately motivated me to write The Book of Backgrounds and I think by the time I'm done that will be a 5 volume set if not more because..... I just think that Backgrounds in 5e are a huge missed opportunity.
I don't want to say they are bad as written because it's not that really it, I just think they are really generic. Why Sailor? Why not Pirate? Sea Captain? Why not create feats dedicated to the background, something unique that is for them only? To me it just feels like the backgrounds were "minimal effort" and given that the 5e community is huge on story, this probably should have been its own 40-page chapter. Like, lean into the story part of the game.
The thing is that Sea Captain and Pirate can fit under the generic Sailor background. And if they put in 40 pages of backgrounds and background info then that’s 40 pages of classes and subclasses etc that will not be in the book. They just can’t keep making the book bigger and bigger. And if you had a Sailor and Sea Captain and Pirate background then someone would be on here with “where is my Royal Navy background! The other three don’t fit the exact specific niche I want for my character!” You have to be vague so that players can build off of that scaffolding to play what they want
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
For nobles, you can be strong without doing manual labor. Those nobles will also have good nutrition and, depending on the kind you are going for (aka flexibility of options for the player) may have spent many years training in swordplay, etc. Nobles in fictional pseudo-medieval times were often called upon to be warriors. Maybe also irl.
Sailors already had str and dex. They can’t just have physical stats.
If that’s your vision of an acolyte, then you can quite easily choose not to take the cha boost. They could, however, just as easily be a member of the clergy who works in and with the community, feeding the poor, teaching Pelor’s version of Sunday school, visiting the sick. And generally developing their people skills
It seems to me that all pirates and sea captains are sailors. Keeping it broader allows more flexibility in creating what you are looking for. Though pirate may appear one day. But probably not captain. A 1st level character won’t have been the captain.
That said, I am looking forward to seeing them publish more backgrounds. I find these options perfectly serviceable, but I’d still love to see more.
I think the opposite is true about D&D players. Players don't want the game to be vague so that they can build off the scaffolding, they want details to be front-loaded so that they create and play detailed characters. The most important information, the most important moment in D&D is the character creation of 1st level characters. It is better to front load this with the most options, most decisions, and most flavor and cut out the back part of the game rarely ever used. Like you could cut everything after 10th level (classes, spells etc..) out of the book and you would probably get around 100 pages back and use that to make character creation more detailed. 90% of players will never play a game above 10th level and those that do, will rarely do so.
Yeah your right of course and I think that for the PhB, this method of broad approach is fine, but yeah, as you said, I definitely think we need a lot more backgrounds, not just to have new things to pick, but to have backgrounds inspire character types.
Each new background should have a couple of new origin feats to choose from, new tool proficiencies and new tools.
I can definitely see stuff like Sea Captain, Pirate, Swashbuckler, Cabin Boy, Shipwright, Privateer... I could create backgrounds and origins feats all day, every day.
Given that one of the 2025 books announced is a entirely player facing Forgotten Realms book I suspect setting specific backgrounds are going to become a big thing going forward. It's frustrating that we've only got a few very basic ones right now I agree but so long as they add to them frequently it'll hopefully not be long before we've got a decent selection without having to homebrew too much
I, too, am annoyed they didn't keep the custom background as per the UA.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
The lifecycle of an edition is that it typically starts off well, but the publishing house has to figure out a way to make a profit. To do so, the edition ends up bloated and broken as more and more books are published.
That has happened with every successful TTRPG ever created. It becomes a victim of its own success.
I think WotC tried to avoid that with 5e, but pressured by Hasbto, they tried to create some alternative revenue streams and several of those were ill-advised.
The thing is, though, I don’t think anyone has figured out how to keep a TTRPG financially healthy without the inevitable self-destructive bloat. What the industry needs is a new business model. I have no clue what that might be, so I’m not pointing fingers.
I know of a way, but most people loath it.
First, ditch books as the primary medium for TTRPGs. Books are costly, unwieldy, out of date the moment they are printed and take up physical space. The only upside they have is that they are offline available.
Second, make the TTRPG easily online accessible. It should work on any phone, tablet, PC, even stuff like consoles wouldn't hurt.
Third, provide a environment where all the needs are covered on a base level to run the TTRPG (free character builder, maps/VTT, campagin notes)
Fourth, provide optional services that will likely see sales: ability to share content, extra customization options for the character builder UI, extra maps, unique VTT features like fog, lighting or line of sight, unique 3d minis if it is a 3d VTT.
And if you think: Hey, that sounds like D&DBeyond and the Project Sigil VTT!
You are right. For a TTRPG to make money in the long run, without going into the bloated content territory, they have to go the way of non-core things to be monetized. The core of a TTRPG is something you buy once and don't need more stuff for it, and even than many people pirate stuff. But, think about what every TTRPG player buys all the time? Dice, minis, maps, custom art. All the stuff that is explicitly not the core of the game, but the surrounding stuff.
And i know a lot of people hate the direction WotC seems to go with D&D, with their VTT and DNDBeyond. But if they want to make money, without bloating the core game with a new book every month, they have to monetized the things surrounding the core too.
It seems that they have a custom background option in the DMG 2024. I am not sure if you have had a chance to review that yet. The character creator still is using the 2014 background customization, but I am thinking that will soon be changed.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
It's encouraging. No, I haven't had the chance to review that.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
It is there, and works basically the way ~everyone expects. Except it is phrased not as a player option but as a DM option, such as "You can also create a background to help a player craft the story they have in mind for their character." So it's unclear if it'll be supported as a direct player option in the tool.
I don’t think, nor was it my intention to imply, that the game should be vague. But backgrounds that can have millions of different iterations can’t be too specific unless you are going to publish books just for backgrounds
case in point:
You say players want it all to be front loaded and laid out for them. Then in the next post you say “Yeah your right of course and I think that for the PhB, this method of broad approach is fine,”
I definitely would like to see more backgrounds as well, and a few more in the PHB would have been welcome. But 40 pages of them? I’m sure more will come when they start publishing new books, after the MM comes out. Plenty of subclasses to be revised and just like feats that didn’t make the cut, backgrounds will be in those books as well.
I think D&D players will do just fine coming up with interesting backgrounds with even the handful given so far as inspiration.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Ah! In case you don't yet have access, they have a section on it where you can choose any three ability scores that are relevant to you, an Origin feat, two skill proficiency improvements, a tool proficiency, and the equipment associated with the background worth up to 50gp.
I am not sure if this hits what you are looking for, but it seems to be allowing for complete customization. The most limiting thing IMO, is the Origin feat.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
To be precise, there is no "Custom Backgrounds" in the 2024 DMG, but a "Creating a Background" section, like it is for Monsters, Magic Items or Spells. From how i read it, it is not meant for players, but for the DM to create a specific background for the player to fit their game. From the DMG:
It is a DM facing text how to create a background that fits your world. Not simply letting player's run hogwild with backgrounds. I would even go so far and say, the DM has the final word on Backgrounds and not players, unless the DM doesn't care.