Kotath, I don't know why you keep saying the UA doesn't give guidance when it most certainly does:

How does your Background influence your current worldview?
Do you embrace or reject your Background?
Did you form any relationships during your Background that endure today?
Where did they spend most of their time?
What did they do for a living?
What capabilities and possessions did they acquire?
What language did they learn from their family, associates, or studies?
How did their past affect their ability scores?

I think you're not realizing that you're approaching it as if the individual Background is supposed to tell the player what kind of character they're playing, when it's exactly backwards of that. The player comes up with the character based on those guiding question and fills in the back story. You know ... character creation?

RP and world integration stuff is exactly where Backgrounds should be customizable rather than pre-set.

And yet, the example I provided previously was created using the rules from the Origins document.

So there is enough material there to work from.

Or, if you would like, I can create a new one using the same guidelines. Have you a concept in mind, or should I simply create one from whole cloth?

Quote from Kotath>>

Quote from Ophidimancer>>

Kotath, I don't know why you keep saying the UA doesn't give guidance when it most certainly does:

How does your Background influence your current worldview?
Do you embrace or reject your Background?
Did you form any relationships during your Background that endure today?
Where did they spend most of their time?
What did they do for a living?
What capabilities and possessions did they acquire?
What language did they learn from their family, associates, or studies?
How did their past affect their ability scores?

I think you're not realizing that you're approaching it as if the individual Background is supposed to tell the player what kind of character they're playing, when it's exactly backwards of that. The player comes up with the character based on those guiding question and fills in the back story. You know ... character creation?

RP and world integration stuff is exactly where Backgrounds should be customizable rather than pre-set.

Those questions speak to attitude more than anything practical learned.

And yet still there is guidance rather than none like you said. It is also more guidance than the 2014 Background section provides. 

It is also confusing transitioning from 'you' to 'they.' Because of 'they' it reads 'Where did your relationships spend most of their time,' which does not make a lot of sense.

This is an artifact of me having gotten these questions from two different sections of the UA. Also minutiae.

It gives no guidance on figuring out what possessions 'they' had. Assuming 'capabilities' is the skills and feat.

Actually it gives guidance in the form of that question, in contrast to the 2014 Backgrounds, which just assign possessions with literally no guidance.

It is not like the 2014 backgrounds assign anything to any given character against their will.

It literally does that, though? Where in the Backgrounds does it explain why an urchin has a mouse? Why a pet at all? Why a mouse specifically? No explanation, just a list of stuff. This is the definition of arbitrary.

It makes it clear that DM and Player can get together and work out changes or even something completely new. That freedom is there. 

In one throw away line that again doesn't actually give any guidance, it just gives the barest of permission. "You may make up something new" without any further comment is not guidance. As opposed to a whole system where creating your own Background is clearly the intended method and there is a system and questions to help one do it.

Quote from Kotath >>

Quote from AEDorsay >>

And yet, the example I provided previously was created using the rules from the Origins document.

So there is enough material there to work from.

Or, if you would like, I can create a new one using the same guidelines. Have you a concept in mind, or should I simply create one from whole cloth?

 

For experienced DM's, the section could be a blank piece of paper. As experienced DM's, that and something to write with are 'enough material.' 

Moving the goalposts again? Plus an NTS, lol.

You've not said "inexperienced DM's" (i could be wrong, but I don't recall it), you've just said DMs. I am a DM. It works fine for me. Better than a blank piece of paper, but I was dealing with this stuff before it became a game function (including a massive booklet of over 200 questions in one iteration), so to your point, yeah, my experience helps.

However, again, you just said DMs. You never qualified it, previously, so you don't get to do so now. 

I am a DM.

Quote from Kotath>>

Ok, I stand corrected. The UA origins do provide some questions to be answered or worked out, but nevertheless do not provide guidance in finding those answers. That is still a little more than the custom backgrounds section of the 2014 rules provides, though. But I still maintain that the much more detailed stock backgrounds (incl features) provide guidance, even if not overtly or in the custom backgrounds section.

Assigning things as a mostly preset package, like the 2014 Feature and equipment to name just a few, are not guidance. They are simply arbitrary decisions being made for the player. Is that what you think "guidance" means?

Since you were drawing the questions from different sections, though, what is the context for the 'they?'

Can you not look at the document yourself? Here, look at a fuller excerpt:

No matter which Background you choose, consider these questions from your character’s viewpoint:
• How does your Background influence your current worldview?
• Do you embrace or reject your Background?
• Did you form any relationships during your Background that endure today?

BUILD YOUR BACKGROUND
Using the rules here, you can build a Background from scratch or customize a premade Background, focusing on details related to the backstory you have in mind for your character. When you build a Background, your character gains the features in the “Background Features” section below. As you make choices for those features, think about your character’s past. Where did they spend most of their time? What did they do for a living? What capabilities and possessions did they acquire? What language did they learn from their family, associates, or studies? How did their past affect their ability scores? If you instead decide to customize a premade Background, you can choose any features in that Background and replace them with the features below of the same name. For example, if you want to change a Background’s Language feature, you can replace that feature with the Language feature below.

A player can say to a DM 'no mouse please' and can either have no pet or a different pet, based on their desires, subject to DM approval. But then anything they want in the UA rules is also subject to DM approval. The point is, that provision is there, in the rules, even if not repeated in each and every background individually.

This is Rule 0 and again using DM Fiat to wallpaper over an obvious shortcoming. By the rules the two options you have are either take the entire starting equipment package as is or take the starting gold and purchase your own stuff. And the second choice can't recreate the first, either. How much does a pet mouse cost, anyway?

"The barest of permission?" How much permission does it need? Some sort of Supreme Court case citation?  The section giving that permission comes before the stock backgrounds, so you read it first, before even considering seeing them, let alone being convinced of anything by them. 

Why is this the part that you choose to respond to? The crux of the sentence was that there is only permission and no guidance. Yet you choose to focus on my choice of the word "barest" when the level of permission had nothing to do with the conversation at hand. It really feels like you have no leg to stand on and are simply finding things to argue about.

Kotath, does a picture of the Mona Lisa provide "guidance" to a young artist trying to learn how to paint?

The 2014 backgrounds are finished products.  The book says absolutely bug**** nothing about how they GOT to those "finished products", what the rules underlying the finished products are, why some finished products are good and others are terrible, and how a player and/or DM should try and structure that finished product.  They merely say "make one that looks like one of these finished products" with no advice or instruction on how to do so.  

That is not 'guidance'.  It has never been 'guidance'.  The fact that experienced players like you or I know what a background is generally supposed to look like has no bearing on the fact that you're demanding the old backgrounds stay and the 2024 rules get scrapped in their entirety in order to "guide new players" while steadfastly, constantly refusing to acknowledge that the 2014 rules do not and never have offered GUIDANCE.  

The 2014 prepackaged packgrounds were not made according to a unified framework.  They were slapassed together haphazardly and according to game dev gut instinct, with no groundwork rules underlying any of them.  The Noble background you keep harping on gives players infinite access to any VIP they want and unfettered influence within their home nation and possibly abroad, while the Far Traveler background gives less than twenty gp worth of gear and a Plot Coupon that is actively designed to be more detrimental than not.  The fact that you think this one background does a better job of instructing a player on the particulars and peculiarites of this one narrowly-defined social status does not mean the entirety of the 2014 rules are superior and we should just burn the Origins document down the way you're looking for.

"Guidance" is an instructive step-by-step methodology for obtaining/creating a Thing, or actionable advice on the ways one might go about obtaining/creating the Thing.  The 2014 book has no "guidance" in it.  It has one, single, sentence saying "if you don't like these then make sopmething up I guess."  That is not sufficient.  It's never been sufficient.  And you are not permitted to argue that one single sentence is sufficient "guidance" while simultaneously saying the entire Origins document, written from the start to walk players through custom background creation, is somehow less sufficient than one pissant ******* sentence.

Quote from Kotath>>

The barest of permission is not the barest of guidance. Those are two different aspects.

And while the 2014 rules give the barest of permissions on how to create new custom Backgrounds it has even less guidance on how to do so. Namely none.

If you do not intend your words to have meaning, why use them?

It has meaning, but it wasn't the point of the sentence and you nitpicking on my use of that word really shows how little substance you actually have to your argument that you start to pick arguments that are so tangential.

That it is Rule 0 does not change the fact it is specifically repeated in this section. That is not something there at the start of, say, the spell lists. Or equipment section. Reinforcing it there, at that specific point, presumably has purpose, making it clear these are not intended to be anywhere as etched in stone as you and Yurei paint them. 

Notice that when I spoke about Rule 0 in this quote, I was talking about your "no mouse please" which is a very clear example of how the Background rules don't actually accomodate the player in their creativity. The options for a player who wants an Urchin with no mouse are 1) too bad, take the mouse, it's part of your starting equipment, 2) take your starting money and go buy equipment, want a cat instead? Sorry, no listed price for cats, guess we'll have to make it up, or 3) scrap the whole Background and build one from scratch. What is allowed and balanced? Who knows? Would you rather have a griffon than a mouse? Is that allowed? Let's look for guidance on how to create a new Background. Oh wait, there isn't any. We're given permission and only given permission.

Thank you for posting that excerpt and my apologies that I was a bit busy at the time. Interesting line in there: " If you instead decide to customize a premade Background, you can choose any features in that Background and replace them with the features below of the same name. For example, if you want to change a Background’s Language feature, you can replace that feature with the Language feature below."

Based on how strictly you two have been arguing the 2014 backgrounds, none of that 'work it out with the DM' bit we have been discussing would seem to apply at all, since the only 'features' that seem to be allowed are Ability Scores (+2 +1, which before was considered racial), two skills, one tool, language, feat and the same flat 50 gp for everyone (even if they can spend it differently). That is the only level of customization allowed under the 2024 rules. And a street urchin is as wealthy as a noble. There is no variance allowed there without invoking an unspecified Rule 0. 

Kotath ... we know. We all know. Everyone knows. This document has been out for like a whole year now. You think no one noticed that the mechanical parts of the character Background were standardized and thus made cleaner and more organized and easier to actually play? That's kind of been our argument for it being better the whole time. Look back at all my posts in this thread, here I'll help you by using the search function: All of Ophidimancer's posts in this thread

Notice how I've consistently said that the thing I like about this UA is that is separates the mechanical bits from the narrative bits? This is a feature not a bug. This makes it so that it is more clear where the RP/narrative/plot/DM world integration parts end and the concrete/mechanical/superpower parts begin. Unlike the 2014 Background Features which mix the two.

Ever argue against your own opinion? In a previous role, I asked each side of an opinion to switch to the other side. It is interesting what you learn from taking another perspective, even temporarily.

Quote from Kotath >>

Based on how strictly you two have been arguing the 2014 backgrounds, none of that 'work it out with the DM' bit we have been discussing would seem to apply at all, since the only 'features' that seem to be allowed are Ability Scores (+2 +1, which before was considered racial), two skills, one tool, language, feat and the same flat 50 gp for everyone (even if they can spend it differently). That is the only level of customization allowed under the 2024 rules. And a street urchin is as wealthy as a noble. There is no variance allowed there without invoking an unspecified Rule 0.

This is not the part that you work out with the DM to customize, by the way. That part is the back story part. All these mechanics are just the skeleton of the character. It's the backstory that gives it flesh and integrates it into the DM's world, and that's the part that you work out with the DM. All the mostly non-mechanical social connections and soft power and nuance that absolutely matter to a character and the game, but don't, and shouldn't, be represented in mechanical powers because they are subjective and nuanced and complicated and deserve to be in the realm of storytelling rather than mechanical buttons to press.

Honestly, how have you gotten this far into the conversation and not realized this?

There are no rules about that in the game.

However, in terms of simple common knowledge, a Background is a *part* of a Back Story. A portion, not a whole.

That is why I have three types of backgrounds -- to help flesh out the back story as a whole and give inspirational stuff for one.

Quote from Kotath >>

Is a backstory part of a background or not?

The fact that this question was even asked kinda explains the whole thing, really.  Yes, Kotath.  Backstory is part of your character's background.

The UA origins only use the word three times and there is no implication of it being anything more than a cool story, with no hint of significance outside of the specific enumerated background bits. It isn't even presented as part of the background but is mentioned as merely a way to differentiate characters who made the same mechanical choices. 

 
How is the 'Cool Story' not as integral to the character as the proficiencies and feat?  Without the story there's no character, just an MMO-style 'toon' the player is using as a skinsuit.  What the Origin rules do is put that cool story in the hands of the table, allowing players and DM to come up with their own Cool Stories rather than being force-fed Wizards' prepackaged crap or forced to work awkwardly around a "customization" system that doesn't actually exist.

Unlike the crappy 2014 rules, the Origin system doesn't assume your Cool Story needs to be nothing but a mechanical Plot Coupon button you push to force the DM to give you plot treats in certain situations withoput bothering to consult the rest of the game's Cool Story.  That's it.  It doesn't say the Cool Story is unnecessary or not useful.

Quote from Kotath>>

Is a backstory part of a background or not?

It's like you aren't even bothering to read the document we're all talking about here. Looking at the Origins document it actually looks like the way they're formatting it is that Race Species and Background are the two components of the backstory, with the Background containing both the Features, which are the mechanical bit, and the "story-oriented details that are meant inspire you."

The UA origins only use the word three times and there is no implication of it being anything more than a cool story, with no hint of significance outside of the specific enumerated background bits.

Please decouple significance from mechanical power if we're going to continue this conversation at all productively.

It isn't even presented as part of the background but is mentioned as merely a way to differentiate characters who made the same mechanical choices. 

Yes, and that differentiation is kind of all important. It's the difference between ... one character and another. It's what makes one Acolyte different from another Acolyte. It's literally what you're there to do, which is play a character that is unique and different from other characters. And that uniqueness deserves to be in the customizable, write-your-own, collaborative storytelling, portion of a character sheet rather than a mechanical widget that could never do justice to the infinite creativity that players bring to a game.

Quote from Kotath>>

But that is the thing, imperfect as they are, the 2014 features show that such things can be part of a backstory.

No they don't. Stop it right there. What the 2014 Background Features does is give one, singular, niche, mechanical superpower that only ever does one thing in one way and is narrowly evocative for that one intended Background. It literally could not care about the backstory you made up yourself, it is just meant to reinforce the backstory that the author thought would fit "Noble" or "Urchin." It actually disrespects your desire to make your own unique backstory and says, "Nope, this one power is the best and only way to represent this Background, take it or leave it."

A noble title can mean something above and beyond merely being persuasive and well educated. So can the street knowledge of being an urchin or the research skills of a sage, or contacts of any of the more contact based backgrounds.

All of those things are answered by asking the player the Background question in the Origins UA and all of those things simply become true once the player and DM work together to make them true as part of the integration with the DM's world. They do not require a super special extra mechanical superpower to be forced onto the character sheet. The Origins system does what you want and it does it better than the 2014 Backgrounds. You just are not seeing it.

Quote from ceramist >>

Ever argue against your own opinion? In a previous role, I asked each side of an opinion to switch to the other side. It is interesting what you learn from taking another perspective, even temporarily.

 "the playtest origins should be scrapped because i like the 2014 background-specific features better than the UA 1st level feats. feats are boring, features are great. these 2014 backgrounds are just like those example characters that come with the starter set. when i dm, i feel a little lost if someone goes off that well worn path. memorizing each 2014 background feature means everyone is better able to parse everyone else's role and capabilities. thinking outside the box is an illusion perpetrated by youtubers, rare and clumsy. my custom game world doesn't count because i worked really hard on it. anyway, most people are comfortable within the box i designate. you will be too."

...?

Let's go over the guiding questions from the Origins UA and see how they can help us completely replace most of the 2014 Background Features, shall we?

How does your Background influence your current worldview?

What information do you know about the world? How did you learn that information?
This establishes basically what kind of things you would know and possibly be able to recall using your various knowledge skills. Covers most of the Features for Backgrounds like Archaeologist, Investigator, Scholar, and Sage. Literally just makes them happen as a discussion with your DM rather than having to have a special superpower.

Do you embrace or reject your Background?

How connected are you still to the people, places, and things in your back story?
Important question, but more for internal things like Personality, Bonds, Ideals, and Flaws. Could maybe explain things like the Far Traveler, Celebrity Scion, or Haunted One features.

Did you form any relationships during your Background that endure today?

Who do you know and how well connected are you to those people and groups?
This replaces like half of all the 2014 Background Features all at once: Acolyte, Soldier, Noble, Guild Agent, Uthgardt Tribemember, Witchlight hand, etc, etc, etc.

Where did they spend most of their time?

Where did you grow up? This is like one of the more important questions to help integrate with the DM's world because it opens a conversation about what locales even exist in the DM's world. This could definitely replace things like Far Traveler, Hermit, or Outlander.

What did they do for a living?

Another important question to integrate with the DM's world because it established the truths of the economy of the setting. Can replaces all the job based Backgrounds:
Soldier, Charlatan, Investigator, Mercenary, Gladiator, Fisher, Entertainer

What capabilities and possessions did they acquire?

This one basically takes care of linking the backstory to ability scores, feats, and all equipment. Want a mouse? Here you go.

What language did they learn from their family, associates, or studies?

Self explanatory.

How did their past affect their ability scores?

Maybe a bit redundant, but I guess they thought it bore more direct reference.

The only Backgrounds this guide has trouble recreating are the newer ones, the ones which have a Feat as a default and hey ... that's been moved to be a default.

Quote from rumloverum >>

Quote from ceramist >>

Ever argue against your own opinion? In a previous role, I asked each side of an opinion to switch to the other side. It is interesting what you learn from taking another perspective, even temporarily.

 "the playtest origins should be scrapped because i like the 2014 background-specific features better than the UA 1st level feats. feats are boring, features are great. these 2014 backgrounds are just like those example characters that come with the starter set. when i dm, i feel a little lost if someone goes off that well worn path. memorizing each 2014 background feature means everyone is better able to parse everyone else's role and capabilities. thinking outside the box is an illusion perpetrated by youtubers, rare and clumsy. my custom game world doesn't count because i worked really hard on it. anyway, most people are comfortable within the box i designate. you will be too."

...?

 
*wipes tear*

*sniffles*

I feel so seen!

;p

Quote from Ophidimancer >>

 It's literally what you're there to do, which is play a character that is unique and different from other characters. And that uniqueness deserves to be in the customizable, write-your-own, collaborative storytelling, portion of a character sheet rather than a mechanical widget that could never do justice to the infinite creativity that players bring to a game.

 You've literally, always been able to do this. The 2014 rules gave you examples, you've always been able to do your own thing, and the fact that you need the validation from a book to do so says a lot about what it's like to DM for you is my guess.

Quote from Toke2 >>

Quote from Ophidimancer >>

 It's literally what you're there to do, which is play a character that is unique and different from other characters. And that uniqueness deserves to be in the customizable, write-your-own, collaborative storytelling, portion of a character sheet rather than a mechanical widget that could never do justice to the infinite creativity that players bring to a game.

 You've literally, always been able to do this. The 2014 rules gave you examples, you've always been able to do your own thing, and the fact that you need the validation from a book to do so says a lot about what it's like to DM for you is my guess.

Your reply to me makes very little sense in context of the conversation that was taking place. If you're going to enter a forum conversation it would behoove you to read back a ways so you actually understand and can make relevant comments. Your point has been made and addressed several pages back.

Quote from Ophidimancer >>

Quote from Toke2 >>

Quote from Ophidimancer >>

 It's literally what you're there to do, which is play a character that is unique and different from other characters. And that uniqueness deserves to be in the customizable, write-your-own, collaborative storytelling, portion of a character sheet rather than a mechanical widget that could never do justice to the infinite creativity that players bring to a game.

 You've literally, always been able to do this. The 2014 rules gave you examples, you've always been able to do your own thing, and the fact that you need the validation from a book to do so says a lot about what it's like to DM for you is my guess.

Your reply to me makes very little sense in context of the conversation that was taking place. If you're going to enter a forum conversation it would behoove you to read back a ways so you actually understand and can make relevant comments. Your point has been made and addressed several pages back.

 No, they're making perfect sense.

What you two both want are not mutually exclusive from one another. Those background features, which you call mechanical widgets, do afford some uniqueness among the players. It's one more feature they have which they might share or not with someone else. To say they don't allow for uniqueness is to say two players cannot be the same class. It's asinine.

Everyone's also allowed to write their character's backstory; including relationships with potential NPCs. That's never changed, either.

So, what's the problem?

Quote from Yurei1453 >>

Kotath, does a picture of the Mona Lisa provide "guidance" to a young artist trying to learn how to paint?

The 2014 backgrounds are finished products.  The book says absolutely bug**** nothing about how they GOT to those "finished products", what the rules underlying the finished products are, why some finished products are good and others are terrible, and how a player and/or DM should try and structure that finished product.  They merely say "make one that looks like one of these finished products" with no advice or instruction on how to do so.  

That is not 'guidance'.  It has never been 'guidance'.  The fact that experienced players like you or I know what a background is generally supposed to look like has no bearing on the fact that you're demanding the old backgrounds stay and the 2024 rules get scrapped in their entirety in order to "guide new players" while steadfastly, constantly refusing to acknowledge that the 2014 rules do not and never have offered GUIDANCE.  

The 2014 prepackaged packgrounds were not made according to a unified framework.  They were slapassed together haphazardly and according to game dev gut instinct, with no groundwork rules underlying any of them.  The Noble background you keep harping on gives players infinite access to any VIP they want and unfettered influence within their home nation and possibly abroad, while the Far Traveler background gives less than twenty gp worth of gear and a Plot Coupon that is actively designed to be more detrimental than not.  The fact that you think this one background does a better job of instructing a player on the particulars and peculiarites of this one narrowly-defined social status does not mean the entirety of the 2014 rules are superior and we should just burn the Origins document down the way you're looking for.

"Guidance" is an instructive step-by-step methodology for obtaining/creating a Thing, or actionable advice on the ways one might go about obtaining/creating the Thing.  The 2014 book has no "guidance" in it.  It has one, single, sentence saying "if you don't like these then make sopmething up I guess."  That is not sufficient.  It's never been sufficient.  And you are not permitted to argue that one single sentence is sufficient "guidance" while simultaneously saying the entire Origins document, written from the start to walk players through custom background creation, is somehow less sufficient than one pissant ******* sentence.

 What you're describing isn't guidance. It's a road map. It's an instruction manual. Actual guidance is present in the book. It tells players what they need, and it trusts they're smart enough to read and not be dumbasses about it.

You can't have this both ways. You can't stop your feet at not having your hand held and also praise the absolute freedom for players to make whatever the hell they want.

Stop insulting people's intelligence.

Quote from Jounichi1983>>

Quote from Ophidimancer>>

Quote from Toke2>>

Quote from Ophidimancer>>

 It's literally what you're there to do, which is play a character that is unique and different from other characters. And that uniqueness deserves to be in the customizable, write-your-own, collaborative storytelling, portion of a character sheet rather than a mechanical widget that could never do justice to the infinite creativity that players bring to a game.

 You've literally, always been able to do this. The 2014 rules gave you examples, you've always been able to do your own thing, and the fact that you need the validation from a book to do so says a lot about what it's like to DM for you is my guess.

Your reply to me makes very little sense in context of the conversation that was taking place. If you're going to enter a forum conversation it would behoove you to read back a ways so you actually understand and can make relevant comments. Your point has been made and addressed several pages back.

 No, they're making perfect sense.

Can you click on the little arrow next to my name in the quote that Toke clipped? Then read the whole post and maybe Kotath's post that I'm replying to? Kotath and I were at somewhere near QRST in the conversation and Toke brought up a point that was somewhere near EFG. It is literally a nonsensical reply to the comment that they clipped because it doesn't bear any relevance to the conversation that was happening.

What you two both want are not mutually exclusive from one another. Those background features, which you call mechanical widgets, do afford some uniqueness among the players. It's one more feature they have which they might share or not with someone else. To say they don't allow for uniqueness is to say two players cannot be the same class. It's asinine.

I see you are also taking your hand at replying while not following the thread of the conversation. What I was talking to Kotath about in the conversation that Toke quoted was about the write-your-own backstory section of the Origins UA and how it serves as the narrative function of a character, as distinct from the Background Features which in the UA includes only the mechanical parts of the Ability Scores, Skills, Tools, Languages, and Feat. Specifically how this separation of the narrative from the mechanical is a better way to do it than the 2014 style Background Features, which mix together aspects of both mechanics and narrative in arbitrary and wildly balanced ways, to the detriment of gameplay as well as contravening their very own intentions that the Background Feature was intended to be a mechanical and concrete benefit rather than a roleplaying suggestion.

Everyone's also allowed to write their character's backstory; including relationships with potential NPCs. That's never changed, either.

So, what's the problem?

Please start at THIS post to understand the thread of the conversation because you're not caught up on the conversation and you're not really making coherent sense. I literally don't know how to reply to this because I've never said or implied anywhere in this thread that either of the two systems disallowed the writing of back stories.