I completely agree. I was excited until I read the implementation and that was discouraging.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Its pretty bad and I suspect everyone will end up just doing custom when if they had designed it better I could see DMs sticking with this to avoid the perfect build syndrome.
But its a lot more limiting than people suggest. Sure each stat has like 7 backgrounds that fit it. So you have 7 options from that perspective. But this isn't 1E or BECMI where you are making disposable characters where you will barely write or consider a background and class/race are really the only choices you make.
There are multiple fixed points in each background.
Attribute bonuses
Skills.
Feat.
Under gear they understood that some flexibility matters, the rest nope.
end of the day when making your character you will have an idea of who they are, and while you might not need the perfect fit, you will rule things out. My character isn't lucky, or tough, they are the opposite of that they are unlucky and frail. So out of those 7 2 are taken out, then you go say oh they are pretty naive, no real skills at deception or sneaking, okay now you knock out another 3. And then you look and think, hmm I don't know they are a people person I don't really see them being a hermit(by the way hermit gets charisma, don't' tell me about force of personality, it also includes social ability and hermit gets it not that hermit really describes a guy with a strong force of personality anyway) So really you have one option and you are kind of meh on it.
Like sure maybe you luck out and you are like criminal fits me like a glove, and its got my stats, skills I want, alert probably the best feat, win win, win.
But odds are I think most players are just going to feel frustrated and disappointed by getting shoe horned into something they don't want. And it would not have taken that much to fix it so even if not perfect it at least wasn't bad. Make 1 of the stats a flex stat, make 1 of the skills a flex skill, let people choose between 2 feats for each background. Odds are then it would have opened up 80% of the backgrounds to each player not 10%.
And the thing is this isn't even making it easier on new players if anything its making it harder. Experienced players are more open to playing off builds, for the challenge or just because everything else is old hat at this point. New players are going to freeze up trying to juggle 7 bad options. Full custom would have been far easier on new players than this, just create some personality/history archetypes to spur some ideas on their characters history and ways to role play them.
I think, after giving this more thought, that I personally like the given feats to be tied to the specific backgrounds. It gives them a weight, and I will admit to missing the "feature" as well, even if they were a bit of a mess, they added to the inherent narrative of the backgrounds.
Beyond that, stats should be able to placed any which way you like, and I would have preferred proficiency to be handled one hard-coded, and one optional. With the tool vs language dependent on the background in question.
A good fix for the "people want as much customization as possible" would be this:
Initial ASIs tied to class (a fighter gets +2 STR/+1 CON, a rogue gets +2 Dex/+1 CHA*, etc.)
Backgrounds are more like 2014 rules, granting languages and skills, any character can have any background
Origin feats are ala cart and not tied to any backgrounds or classes.
This is such a simple and easy to implement fix it's very puzzling why they wouldn't use it.
*Don't @ me, these are just off the top of my head examples. I didn't really give it a hard think about which specific abilities get initial ASIs for each class!
While slightly better than those complaining that not all backgrounds grant all ASI bs, and while keeping the races to basically be skins rather than materially different, at least tying the ASIs to Classes DOES make some amount of sense. I suppose, becuase of how much they hate multi classing, it would have to be specified that like Save Throw bonuses you only get the ASI from the main/first class.
As for the other changes, I'd agree.
Sill seems VERY bland and basic to me. I would have preferred to keep the ASIs tied to race or even have some in race and some in background if that scratches the itch, but how many, maybe adding negatives, different number of skills learned in backgrounds, even number of feats....variety it up...it would have been way more interesting. Yes, sure there would be some primo combo in the mix, ok....but who cares? In a game where some players are making their wishes come true, toss the conceit of "balance" and go for fun and interesting. Power gamers like me will find a way, and odd balls will too, encourage it, dont run from it.
While slightly better than those complaining that not all backgrounds grant all ASI bs, and while keeping the races to basically be skins rather than materially different, at least tying the ASIs to Classes DOES make some amount of sense. I suppose, becuase of how much they hate multi classing, it would have to be specified that like Save Throw bonuses you only get the ASI from the main/first class.
I'll cop to not thinking about multiclassing when I came up with the fix. I'm not a fan in general, and lean heavily away from optimization/min-maxing.
Maybe allow for a single +1 ASI when a character takes on a level in a new class? I dunno. I was going for simple, easy, and allowing for as much customization as possible while still retaining some kind of logic or meaning to initial ASIs.
And again, we are back to the same pre-Tasha’s issue with ASI tied to race that WotC wanted to get away from
Mmmm, I wouldn't call it *exactly* the same issue...
Well pretty dang close. So now instead of choosing a race that had the right ASI you’re picking the background that has the right ASI. Sure you get a choice of three ability scores to increase instead of two (3 for half elf that is no more) but now you’re looking for the right ASI range and feat you want and you can’t always have both (unlike when you could do Vhuman or Custom Lineage)
The implications of tying ASIs to backgrounds (nurture) is very different from the implications of tying them to species (nature)
Who said anything about implications? I’m talking mechanics. I’m fine with moving them. I’m fine if ASIs were tied to nothing and you selected when you rolled, point buy, or Array your ability scores. My only point is it went from restricted, some people chose race to fit the class, to unrestricted with Tasha’s and UA, back to restricted some choosing background to fit class.
I guess I'm really just venting, but I'm so disappointed in the 2024 background mechanics.
I understand that it's logical to tie ability score increases and origin feats and skill proficiencies to backgrounds. It makes a ton of sense. But after being freed from racial/species pigeonholing (with Tasha's), now I'm back to... wizards are scribes, rogues are criminals, clerics are acolytes, etc. Sure, you can go against that grain; I'm sure plenty will. Whether it has a big impact at your table or not, though, your character will not be as good at their role as those who don't go with the flow.
The larger point I want to make here is this: I was really looking forward making my first new character in the 2024 rules. And suddenly I'm back to fretting as I weigh the plusses and minuses of this background over that background. Same as I used to have to do with species. Back then, I'd wonder what it would be like to play a species and would never quite be able to because the mechanics would have held my character back.
It should have been fun to make the new character. New rules! New abilities! Lots of stuff to inspire character creation! Instead, I got mired in the mechanics. Really wish they had just let players choose the origin feats and ability score increases they wanted, and have the backgrounds just provide the skills. I cannot fathom why they chose to transport the species issue to backgrounds. And I say that as someone who is absolutely going to play in the 2024 rules and happily pays WotC money for their products.
And YES, I'm assuming the DMG will have rules for custom backgrounds (optional or otherwise), but that's definitely not the book they belong in. I just wanted to make a character, guys. Now I've got this bitter experience to kick things off after months upon years of anticipation.
Unless I am misunderstanding you, the software allows you to customize your background.
This idea is absolutely bizarre, it was NOT in the playtest, and I don't understand how anyone could have thought it was a good idea to take away custom background which was in the 2014 PHB and move it to the 2024 DMG. Some of the problems include:
Despite 16 backgrounds, there are still four combinations of 3 attributes which are missing: (1) STR/CON/CHA, (2) STR/CON/INT, (3) STR/WIS/CHA, (4) DEX/INT/CHA.
Some of the attribute combinations are just plain BAD, and few, if any characters would want to prioritize them. Acolyte has INT/WIS/CHA. ...How many characters desperately want points into TWO mental casting stats? Similarly, Noble has STR/INT/CHA, which might be good for Paladins, and that's about it.
Something which most people seem to entirely ignore for some reason is that a big reason for old backgrounds (and custom backgrounds) was to be able to pick skill proficiencies which were outside of your normal class list. These custom ones are now fixed and locked into place. Want to be a Merchant? Congratulations, you're stuck with Animal Handling, whether you want that or not.
It's too much to tie together: 3 ASI's to 2 fixed skill proficiencies to 1 fixed origin feat. Most players will end up getting stuck with at least one piece they do not want and which does not fit with their vision.
Giving "titles" for these backgrounds is just for decoration. The PHB specifically says you are allowed to change the flavor text however you want. I want to be a Monk who was raised in a monastery... but Hermit has no DEX bump, and the Medicine skill doesn't fit. So what I have to do is choose Sailor, then cross out all it's flavor text and replace it with the flavor text from the Hermit background. Which is fine, it makes no difference. And almost all players will toss out the flavor text anyway to personalize their own individual backstory.
Some people here are saying the fixed backgrounds are good because "restrictions are great and lead to creativity," which is a false dichotomy. If you really want to do that, then you can still take those sub-optimal choices in a system which doesn't have these strict restrictions. Removing the restriction doesn't hurt anyone's fun or ability to choose.
A sampling of my character concepts which don't fit the backgrounds as presented:
A former Guard (Investigator) who left the force and became a private detective Rogue after corruption and murder of a loved one. The "Guard" does not have the DEX for a Rogue, nor does that Rogue really need Athletics. A closer choice would be a Scribe, which has good ASI's and good skills for a detective, but also has the Skilled feat, and I don't know what a Rogue would do with 9 proficiencies after the core ones were taken. Two proficiencies from your class is too small, but nine is more than you really have a place to use them.
A wild-west-like bailiff officer turned Warlock. The Guide is the closest it comes to an outdoorsy bounty hunter I envision, and even the Magic Initiate (Druid) could really work... but again, no Charisma ASI.
A Halfling Wizard Apprentice who is searching for the old Wizard he is apprenticed to - the Sage background nearly works for me, but this character was raised on a farm and became a gardener as his first job, so I thought it would be neat to have Druidcraft as a cantrip. I would love to switch out Magic Initiate (Wizard) for Magic Initiate (Druid).
And yes, I can work with the DM to get custom backgrounds, but if the whole point of making this new Background/Origin system was to balance things, why do I have to play "Mother May I...?" instead of being able to select from dropdown menus of "ASI +1, ASI +2", "Skill Proficency 1, Skill Proficency 2," and "Origin Feat"?
Well at that point you might as well get rid of origin ASIs completely. As stated earlier, if you make choosing your starting ASIs the default, there is no reason to have them at all. Just incorporate the stat boosts into the standard array or point buy system. Then, you can simply add them back for rolled stats only, as that's the only place where it would make sense.
I disagree that it removes the value of ASI at all, it allows you to use the point buy system as is, and distribute either a (+1, +1, +1) or (+2, +1), which caps out starting stats at three 16's max, or one 17, and one 16 when using point buy or array. It also simplifies that you only have to input whatever you literally rolled, and then the math is input per a codified and consistent set of rules. In the old system when using array or point buy, with variant human you could reliable start with 18 in your preferred stat. This adds more options, while limiting the max starting stats. I never considered this a real problem, but I don't see it as a big problem to limit it either.
That's more or less what I did with my hombrew when I created my own version of this: Every race had a choice of +1 to 2 stats of their choice and a feat ala variant human, or +2 to two stats and no feat. I added other goodies to variant human. I think this works fine, in my long running campaign "playtests".
This implementation is slightly different, and I miss the background features. I also like the feats being tied to specific backgrounds.
It's a weird hybrid system here, with a LOT of locked in choices. Interestingly, if you pick a background that isn't in the new PHB, it does in fact just let you pick the stat distribution. When I finish up one of my campaigns, and we decide to move as a group to the new PHB, that's probably what I will have them do, while still tying the "free" starter feat with the associated background. It gives a slight bonus to Rewarded and Ruined backgrounds, but sometimes life be that way. It still leaves the other feat granting backgrounds as interesting choices in opportunity costs, and puts back in the background features.
Well at that point you might as well get rid of origin ASIs completely. As stated earlier, if you make choosing your starting ASIs the default, there is no reason to have them at all. Just incorporate the stat boosts into the standard array or point buy system. Then, you can simply add them back for rolled stats only, as that's the only place where it would make sense.
Unless I am misunderstanding you, the software allows you to customize your background.
Yes, but its with DM approval. The reason people are complaining for the most part wont be for their tables, as most people here will just go custom. But for whatever the living campaign thing is called you will follow their rules, for new DMs who aren't sure what to do they may stick with the backgrounds etc.
for me I'm the DM. I kind of agree with the restrictions breed creativity idea. So I like the idea of a backgrounds that have some things that are not perfect for you. But I feel this is so hit or miss like if you are a wizard your background options rock, which I guess I understand as Wizards clearly are the weakest class and needed the boost. And for the classes that feel like a miss, lots of times you feel pushed into 1 or 2 options which is too restrictive. But I am not a fan of full custom as I don't really think perfection is good, you should have some flaws. And sometimes people need to be nudged into that. And if they had just added a bit of flexibility into it new DMs would be able to use this with no issues.
Unless I am misunderstanding you, the software allows you to customize your background.
But I am not a fan of full custom as I don't really think perfection is good, you should have some flaws. And sometimes people need to be nudged into that. And if they had just added a bit of flexibility into it new DMs would be able to use this with no issues.
That might be the fundamental dividing line there. Whereas I want to have the option to experiment without many downsides (in a hobby that's specifically about having fun and escapism), you're more on the side of forcing a few more tradeoffs.
It occurs to me that I probably started the thread because I feel like I've already made quite a few tradeoffs when I choose class, species, weapons, skill proficiencies, etc. Then once we get to the feats and ability score increases, I got a chance to make those choices very freely for a little while--after being frustrated for years by that step. (Not pissed off; just irritated.) And now that irritation is back and it feels unnecessary. It's just preference/taste.
No, it doesn't. I'm not an optimizer nor a min/maxer. I put a large emphasis on role-playing, which is best when the player can create the character they want - I also happen to want my character to be strong in their primary ability score and at least one other.
Simply decoupling origin feats from backgrounds goes a long way to fix this. Moving ASIs to classes fixes most of the rest.
No, it doesn't. I'm not an optimizer nor a min/maxer. I put a large emphasis on role-playing, which is best when the player can create the character they want - I also happen to want my character to be strong in their primary ability score and at least one other.
Simply decoupling origin feats from backgrounds goes a long way to fix this. Moving ASIs to classes fixes most of the rest.
Please, enlighten us with your ASIs by class.
Then explain how ASIs by class don't affect a lot of subclasses which turn classes such as Rogues into even more Multi-Attribute Dependent(MAD) setups if they weren't already.
Because again, the more you try and nail down, the more nails pop out of the wood.
And again, we are back to the same pre-Tasha’s issue with ASI tied to race that WotC wanted to get away from
Mmmm, I wouldn't call it *exactly* the same issue...
Well pretty dang close. So now instead of choosing a race that had the right ASI you’re picking the background that has the right ASI. Sure you get a choice of three ability scores to increase instead of two (3 for half elf that is no more) but now you’re looking for the right ASI range and feat you want and you can’t always have both (unlike when you could do Vhuman or Custom Lineage)
The implications of tying ASIs to backgrounds (nurture) is very different from the implications of tying them to species (nature)
Who said anything about implications? I’m talking mechanics.
Mechanics were not the only reason they made the change
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Green Hill Sunrise, jaded tabaxi mercenary trapped in the Dark Domains (Battle Master fighter) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The way I see it, even if you limit yourself to the backgrounds in the new PHB (which you absolutely don't have to, the book tells you you can use an old background and do whatever with your ASI and Origin Feat), 2024 characters are still better off than 2014 characters.
Everyone is guaranteed a feat at 1st level regardless of race, and there's no longer a massive disparity between the people that started as Variant Human with Crossbow Expert/Polearm Master and everyone else.
As long as you pick the right background, otherwise every character you make that doesn't have a backstory built for the class will be broken right from creation.
I completely agree. I was excited until I read the implementation and that was discouraging.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
Its pretty bad and I suspect everyone will end up just doing custom when if they had designed it better I could see DMs sticking with this to avoid the perfect build syndrome.
But its a lot more limiting than people suggest. Sure each stat has like 7 backgrounds that fit it. So you have 7 options from that perspective. But this isn't 1E or BECMI where you are making disposable characters where you will barely write or consider a background and class/race are really the only choices you make.
There are multiple fixed points in each background.
Attribute bonuses
Skills.
Feat.
Under gear they understood that some flexibility matters, the rest nope.
end of the day when making your character you will have an idea of who they are, and while you might not need the perfect fit, you will rule things out. My character isn't lucky, or tough, they are the opposite of that they are unlucky and frail. So out of those 7 2 are taken out, then you go say oh they are pretty naive, no real skills at deception or sneaking, okay now you knock out another 3. And then you look and think, hmm I don't know they are a people person I don't really see them being a hermit(by the way hermit gets charisma, don't' tell me about force of personality, it also includes social ability and hermit gets it not that hermit really describes a guy with a strong force of personality anyway) So really you have one option and you are kind of meh on it.
Like sure maybe you luck out and you are like criminal fits me like a glove, and its got my stats, skills I want, alert probably the best feat, win win, win.
But odds are I think most players are just going to feel frustrated and disappointed by getting shoe horned into something they don't want. And it would not have taken that much to fix it so even if not perfect it at least wasn't bad. Make 1 of the stats a flex stat, make 1 of the skills a flex skill, let people choose between 2 feats for each background. Odds are then it would have opened up 80% of the backgrounds to each player not 10%.
And the thing is this isn't even making it easier on new players if anything its making it harder. Experienced players are more open to playing off builds, for the challenge or just because everything else is old hat at this point. New players are going to freeze up trying to juggle 7 bad options. Full custom would have been far easier on new players than this, just create some personality/history archetypes to spur some ideas on their characters history and ways to role play them.
I think, after giving this more thought, that I personally like the given feats to be tied to the specific backgrounds. It gives them a weight, and I will admit to missing the "feature" as well, even if they were a bit of a mess, they added to the inherent narrative of the backgrounds.
Beyond that, stats should be able to placed any which way you like, and I would have preferred proficiency to be handled one hard-coded, and one optional. With the tool vs language dependent on the background in question.
A good fix for the "people want as much customization as possible" would be this:
This is such a simple and easy to implement fix it's very puzzling why they wouldn't use it.
*Don't @ me, these are just off the top of my head examples. I didn't really give it a hard think about which specific abilities get initial ASIs for each class!
While slightly better than those complaining that not all backgrounds grant all ASI bs, and while keeping the races to basically be skins rather than materially different, at least tying the ASIs to Classes DOES make some amount of sense. I suppose, becuase of how much they hate multi classing, it would have to be specified that like Save Throw bonuses you only get the ASI from the main/first class.
As for the other changes, I'd agree.
Sill seems VERY bland and basic to me. I would have preferred to keep the ASIs tied to race or even have some in race and some in background if that scratches the itch, but how many, maybe adding negatives, different number of skills learned in backgrounds, even number of feats....variety it up...it would have been way more interesting. Yes, sure there would be some primo combo in the mix, ok....but who cares? In a game where some players are making their wishes come true, toss the conceit of "balance" and go for fun and interesting. Power gamers like me will find a way, and odd balls will too, encourage it, dont run from it.
"Elves "HAVE" to have grace, and Dwarves "HAVE" to be strong"
Is the kind of Gygaxian bioessentialism that ignores the fact every being is an individual.
The problem with what's been done is not everyone is trained the same or responds as well to training.
So there is no magic solution that pleases everyone, and it's foolish to pretend otherwise.
I'll cop to not thinking about multiclassing when I came up with the fix. I'm not a fan in general, and lean heavily away from optimization/min-maxing.
Maybe allow for a single +1 ASI when a character takes on a level in a new class? I dunno. I was going for simple, easy, and allowing for as much customization as possible while still retaining some kind of logic or meaning to initial ASIs.
Who said anything about implications? I’m talking mechanics. I’m fine with moving them. I’m fine if ASIs were tied to nothing and you selected when you rolled, point buy, or Array your ability scores. My only point is it went from restricted, some people chose race to fit the class, to unrestricted with Tasha’s and UA, back to restricted some choosing background to fit class.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Unless I am misunderstanding you, the software allows you to customize your background.
This idea is absolutely bizarre, it was NOT in the playtest, and I don't understand how anyone could have thought it was a good idea to take away custom background which was in the 2014 PHB and move it to the 2024 DMG. Some of the problems include:
Some people here are saying the fixed backgrounds are good because "restrictions are great and lead to creativity," which is a false dichotomy. If you really want to do that, then you can still take those sub-optimal choices in a system which doesn't have these strict restrictions. Removing the restriction doesn't hurt anyone's fun or ability to choose.
A sampling of my character concepts which don't fit the backgrounds as presented:
And yes, I can work with the DM to get custom backgrounds, but if the whole point of making this new Background/Origin system was to balance things, why do I have to play "Mother May I...?" instead of being able to select from dropdown menus of "ASI +1, ASI +2", "Skill Proficency 1, Skill Proficency 2," and "Origin Feat"?
Well at that point you might as well get rid of origin ASIs completely. As stated earlier, if you make choosing your starting ASIs the default, there is no reason to have them at all. Just incorporate the stat boosts into the standard array or point buy system. Then, you can simply add them back for rolled stats only, as that's the only place where it would make sense.
I disagree that it removes the value of ASI at all, it allows you to use the point buy system as is, and distribute either a (+1, +1, +1) or (+2, +1), which caps out starting stats at three 16's max, or one 17, and one 16 when using point buy or array. It also simplifies that you only have to input whatever you literally rolled, and then the math is input per a codified and consistent set of rules. In the old system when using array or point buy, with variant human you could reliable start with 18 in your preferred stat. This adds more options, while limiting the max starting stats. I never considered this a real problem, but I don't see it as a big problem to limit it either.
That's more or less what I did with my hombrew when I created my own version of this: Every race had a choice of +1 to 2 stats of their choice and a feat ala variant human, or +2 to two stats and no feat. I added other goodies to variant human. I think this works fine, in my long running campaign "playtests".
This implementation is slightly different, and I miss the background features. I also like the feats being tied to specific backgrounds.
It's a weird hybrid system here, with a LOT of locked in choices. Interestingly, if you pick a background that isn't in the new PHB, it does in fact just let you pick the stat distribution. When I finish up one of my campaigns, and we decide to move as a group to the new PHB, that's probably what I will have them do, while still tying the "free" starter feat with the associated background. It gives a slight bonus to Rewarded and Ruined backgrounds, but sometimes life be that way. It still leaves the other feat granting backgrounds as interesting choices in opportunity costs, and puts back in the background features.
Yes, but its with DM approval. The reason people are complaining for the most part wont be for their tables, as most people here will just go custom. But for whatever the living campaign thing is called you will follow their rules, for new DMs who aren't sure what to do they may stick with the backgrounds etc.
for me I'm the DM. I kind of agree with the restrictions breed creativity idea. So I like the idea of a backgrounds that have some things that are not perfect for you. But I feel this is so hit or miss like if you are a wizard your background options rock, which I guess I understand as Wizards clearly are the weakest class and needed the boost. And for the classes that feel like a miss, lots of times you feel pushed into 1 or 2 options which is too restrictive. But I am not a fan of full custom as I don't really think perfection is good, you should have some flaws. And sometimes people need to be nudged into that. And if they had just added a bit of flexibility into it new DMs would be able to use this with no issues.
That might be the fundamental dividing line there. Whereas I want to have the option to experiment without many downsides (in a hobby that's specifically about having fun and escapism), you're more on the side of forcing a few more tradeoffs.
It occurs to me that I probably started the thread because I feel like I've already made quite a few tradeoffs when I choose class, species, weapons, skill proficiencies, etc. Then once we get to the feats and ability score increases, I got a chance to make those choices very freely for a little while--after being frustrated for years by that step. (Not pissed off; just irritated.) And now that irritation is back and it feels unnecessary. It's just preference/taste.
it all breaks down to "I cant make a perfectly min maxed character based on these rules."
No, it doesn't. I'm not an optimizer nor a min/maxer. I put a large emphasis on role-playing, which is best when the player can create the character they want - I also happen to want my character to be strong in their primary ability score and at least one other.
Simply decoupling origin feats from backgrounds goes a long way to fix this. Moving ASIs to classes fixes most of the rest.
Please, enlighten us with your ASIs by class.
Then explain how ASIs by class don't affect a lot of subclasses which turn classes such as Rogues into even more Multi-Attribute Dependent(MAD) setups if they weren't already.
Because again, the more you try and nail down, the more nails pop out of the wood.
Mechanics were not the only reason they made the change
Active characters:
Green Hill Sunrise, jaded tabaxi mercenary trapped in the Dark Domains (Battle Master fighter)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
As long as you pick the right background, otherwise every character you make that doesn't have a backstory built for the class will be broken right from creation.
So, the best option is to stop using DnD Beyond? That's fantastic. Money wasted and lesson learned.