How are you judging the quality of a background? What makes courtier the worst? It seems a perfectly serviceable background for any character with a courtier-like origin to me. Not sure what I’m missing...
I'm tempted to say Acolyte just because it's the only background available for free and I think it's just not a particularly interesting background in general.
Courtiers are the worst because, for one, they only start with a set of fine clothes and 5gp. For two, their ability is not particularly useful unless you are playing an intrigue game that involves dealing with royal courts.
I am currently playing a Bard with an entertainer background. It doesn't add much to the bard although it looks like a natural fit. I think I could get more utility out of another background.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
I think Far Traveler is kind of stupid because what happens to the background if the game actually goes back to where you are from? It's so dependent on your being a foreigner, but that's so setting dependent.
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 have gotten a lot of use out of the Acolyte background -- free healing and shelter, plus free communications (Sending) to coordinate the group moving between temples, and free Commune and other spells. It can be campaign- and DM-dependent, though, how far you can stretch it.
I think the backgrounds that are heavily tied to their setting, like the Izzet Engineer, would be more useful if they also had a 'plain' version. Some of them are harder to strip for parts than others.
Back grounds should only really be compared by two factors and when doing so, to the campaign you’re playing.
proficiencies can be freely traded for w/e you want.
the feature: usually a small but sometimes effective boost that the player and DM can use as story points. Pretty much the big factor of a background. can be something like known ally’s, the ability to flawlessly find food if there is any, or even a follower in the case of the noble/Knight variant.
the items/gold it gives: some backgrounds give quite a bit of stuff and money while others don’t. These can be useful even if you don’t want the items, as you can potentially sell/trade them for what you do want.
my favorite one is the guild artisan. It starts with decent gold, and you never know when you’re going to need a craftsman or a lawyer. They’ll even bury you properly if your body is available. It’s nice to have insurance.
as far as backgrounds with the spells attached, I’ve never actually played a game with those.
I would imagine the outlander background might be less useful in a big city campaign, but it could also be a way to remake crocodile Dundee... and he did pretty well in the big city.
I would say backgrounds like Smuggler or Fisher. Smuggler has two proficiencies (Athletics+Deception) and only 1 tool proficiency (water vehicles) with no languages or 2nd tool. Fisher has the same problem - it gets two proficiencies (History+Survival) and 1 language - but no tool or 2nd language.
So not only are they very limited in their proficiencies for skills - but the total proficiencies is 3 whereas most backgrounds give 4. There are probably others that do that too but those are the only ones I knew off the top of my head.
I know it's possible to circumvent them with the Custom Background - but still.
However, both smuggler and fisher have useful abilities and decent starting equipment. While the fisher's ability is not very useful unless you are playing a waterborne or coastal campaign, while it is in the right location, it is better than the courtier's ability, even if the courtier is in the right location.
I think the Anthropologist background is mostly useless as the workaround for language is pretty easy in a lot of ways. If you do not have a caster in the party that can get Comprehend Languages or the like it could be worth it....but you have to spend a full day with them to just communicate basically which I think most DMs would allow you to do much sooner than a full day.
Overall its just mostly useless in a lot of situations but could be very good in one specific situation....so I typically see it as "Bad" as in less than useful or quickly make useless.
I think Far Traveler is kind of stupid because what happens to the background if the game actually goes back to where you are from? It's so dependent on your being a foreigner, but that's so setting dependent.
What happens if a sailor stays on land for the entire campaign? What happens if a soldier doesn't run into any other soldiers? Whta happens if the scholar doesn't get a chance to research stuff? Pretty much every background feature is setting dependant.
Besides, a good DM can easily incorporate the far traveler background feature in the traveler's place of origins. "Oh look, it's Bob returning from their journeys! Tell us Bob of the faraway lands youäve visited. Oh my, what is that peculiar way of talking you have now? Is that from you time in the land far away?"
Anthropologist seems pretty bad. A mediocre 10 gp start, the skills (insight and religion) are also mediocre at best. The 2 languages conflict with the Feature, as that means 2 less opportunities to use your feature. I would rather have 2 tools and more chance at using the Feature.
Speaking of the Feature, it seems marginal at best. It requires a very specific circumstance for it to come up at all, and even if it does it likely won't amount to more than a bit of flavor. It just seems bad.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Some backgrounds are really great. Some are kind of meh. But what is the worst?
I think Courtier from SCAG is the worst.
How are you judging the quality of a background? What makes courtier the worst? It seems a perfectly serviceable background for any character with a courtier-like origin to me. Not sure what I’m missing...
I'm tempted to say Acolyte just because it's the only background available for free and I think it's just not a particularly interesting background in general.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
Courtiers are the worst because, for one, they only start with a set of fine clothes and 5gp. For two, their ability is not particularly useful unless you are playing an intrigue game that involves dealing with royal courts.
Entirely depends on the campaign, backstory, and build.
I am currently playing a Bard with an entertainer background. It doesn't add much to the bard although it looks like a natural fit. I think I could get more utility out of another background.
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
I think Far Traveler is kind of stupid because what happens to the background if the game actually goes back to where you are from? It's so dependent on your being a foreigner, but that's so setting dependent.
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 have gotten a lot of use out of the Acolyte background -- free healing and shelter, plus free communications (Sending) to coordinate the group moving between temples, and free Commune and other spells. It can be campaign- and DM-dependent, though, how far you can stretch it.
I think the backgrounds that are heavily tied to their setting, like the Izzet Engineer, would be more useful if they also had a 'plain' version. Some of them are harder to strip for parts than others.
Birgit | Shifter | Sorcerer | Dragonlords
Shayone | Hobgoblin | Sorcerer | Netherdeep
Back grounds should only really be compared by two factors and when doing so, to the campaign you’re playing.
proficiencies can be freely traded for w/e you want.
the feature: usually a small but sometimes effective boost that the player and DM can use as story points. Pretty much the big factor of a background. can be something like known ally’s, the ability to flawlessly find food if there is any, or even a follower in the case of the noble/Knight variant.
the items/gold it gives: some backgrounds give quite a bit of stuff and money while others don’t. These can be useful even if you don’t want the items, as you can potentially sell/trade them for what you do want.
my favorite one is the guild artisan. It starts with decent gold, and you never know when you’re going to need a craftsman or a lawyer. They’ll even bury you properly if your body is available. It’s nice to have insurance.
as far as backgrounds with the spells attached, I’ve never actually played a game with those.
I would imagine the outlander background might be less useful in a big city campaign, but it could also be a way to remake crocodile Dundee... and he did pretty well in the big city.
I would say backgrounds like Smuggler or Fisher. Smuggler has two proficiencies (Athletics+Deception) and only 1 tool proficiency (water vehicles) with no languages or 2nd tool. Fisher has the same problem - it gets two proficiencies (History+Survival) and 1 language - but no tool or 2nd language.
So not only are they very limited in their proficiencies for skills - but the total proficiencies is 3 whereas most backgrounds give 4. There are probably others that do that too but those are the only ones I knew off the top of my head.
I know it's possible to circumvent them with the Custom Background - but still.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
However, both smuggler and fisher have useful abilities and decent starting equipment. While the fisher's ability is not very useful unless you are playing a waterborne or coastal campaign, while it is in the right location, it is better than the courtier's ability, even if the courtier is in the right location.
I think the Anthropologist background is mostly useless as the workaround for language is pretty easy in a lot of ways. If you do not have a caster in the party that can get Comprehend Languages or the like it could be worth it....but you have to spend a full day with them to just communicate basically which I think most DMs would allow you to do much sooner than a full day.
Overall its just mostly useless in a lot of situations but could be very good in one specific situation....so I typically see it as "Bad" as in less than useful or quickly make useless.
What happens if a sailor stays on land for the entire campaign? What happens if a soldier doesn't run into any other soldiers? Whta happens if the scholar doesn't get a chance to research stuff? Pretty much every background feature is setting dependant.
Besides, a good DM can easily incorporate the far traveler background feature in the traveler's place of origins. "Oh look, it's Bob returning from their journeys! Tell us Bob of the faraway lands youäve visited. Oh my, what is that peculiar way of talking you have now? Is that from you time in the land far away?"
Inheritor, because it's "Make your DM do a ton more paperwork: The
FlamethrowerBackground".Anthropologist seems pretty bad. A mediocre 10 gp start, the skills (insight and religion) are also mediocre at best. The 2 languages conflict with the Feature, as that means 2 less opportunities to use your feature. I would rather have 2 tools and more chance at using the Feature.
Speaking of the Feature, it seems marginal at best. It requires a very specific circumstance for it to come up at all, and even if it does it likely won't amount to more than a bit of flavor. It just seems bad.