PC Creation in 2024 5E and Greyhawk’s Regions! (MD 205)

[@servantb36]

Fascinating discussion, gentlemen-thanks for sharing! Question: Is your dissatisfaction with alignment more about its impact on gameplay and mechanics, or its simplistic portrayal of morality and character complexity? Should a fantasy game’s alignment system reflect real-life nuances, or is it sufficient for it to use broad archetypes as a starting point for character development? Does this stem from D&D's 'all things to all people' generic fantasy approach to RPG design (as opposed to other games' more opinionated takes? Thinking of 13th Age/MCDM/other's explicitly heroic RPGs). I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on the better ways to describe characters apart from alignment. Here are my (relatively new to the hobby, non-game-designer) thoughts: The 2024 alignment system in D&D is indeed simplistic and doesn’t capture the full complexity of morality. However, it remains crucial for gameplay. Alignment provides a clear moral framework that supports core mechanics, especially in defining antagonists and justifying combat encounters. While modern perspectives acknowledge that morality isn’t solely about appearance, alignment rules simplify these concepts for a more manageable and engaging experience. They offer a clear starting point for character development and potential energy for varied and interesting story paths. I actually appreciate the updated Personality Traits section but wish the Ideals, Bonds, and Flaws had been similarly simplified and updated rather than removed. Simplified versions could be a great resource for new roleplayers, similar to the new personality traits. Games like 13th Age with their Icon alignments show that nuanced systems can offer both narrative and mechanical benefits. It seems D&D opted for a familiar approach for the 50th anniversary edition. Perhaps future editions will explore more complex alignment systems? One can hope!

[@masteringdungeons]

Excellent question and thoughts! We will tackle it on the show. One thing Teos has said in the past is that in 5E organized play, if you ask people to flip over their character sheet and then ask them what alignment their character is... they probably won't know. In 3E and earlier, the players would always know. Play has moved away from alignment as a center or impetus for how the character is played.

[@servantb36]

​@@masteringdungeons Interesting! I feel like the same question could be asked about a character's Proficiency Bonus in 5e. My (also newish) players often forget about it! Like many, I discovered D&D during the pandemic through Critical Role, and a standout moment for me was watching Exandria Unlimited in 2021. Aabria Iyengar blew me away when she asked about the players' alignments and had them experience physical effects-like nausea-just by being near a Vestige of Divergence tied to a chaotic evil entity (Lolth). Even more striking was how their alignments shifted based on their in-game choices. It was a watershed moment for me as a DM, and I realized how powerful and flexible this game can be, with real consequences for actions. Alignment might seem mundane/vestigial for some, but with the right DM presenting tough moral dilemmas, I believe it can become a fascinating source of character growth and conflict.

[@davec1]

Class vs. Species first, I see it this way: How much your species will impact your play experience depends a lot on whether your table decides to make the campaign about the relationship between different species. Mechanically, their influence isn't very strong, even though you can now get teleporting species at level one, flying species at level 3 and many get cantrips and spells simply for being of the species that they are (being able to cast spells based on your species weirdly isn't considered as "problematic" as saying that a species, on average, might be slightly more robust, or more agile etc.). On the other hand, your class will most definitely have a profound impact on your game, except in the rarest of cases (say, if you somehow chose to play a game that is all about social encounters without involving skills and spells, not exactly D&D's forte). So for new players, it makes a lot of sense to have them first think about what they'd like to be DOING most of the time in the game, i.e. to pick their class. For players familiar with the game, the order in which the PHB presents things doesn't matter much, because I suspect most of us will not think about our new character in a linear step-by-step fashion anyway, but will consider multiple dimensions (e.g. species and class, or background and class) simultaneously. Where they missed the mark imho is with the new backgrounds: While I still prefer 5e14's backgrounds, I think they had the right idea in the playtest, explicitly making the provided minimalist backgrounds mere examples of the freely customizable default. I do not understand what made them abandon that approach explicitly, while implicitly still making it clear they were aware people would want to customize. What is the benefit of doing it in this convoluted way? However, the most mind-boggling choice of all is that they didn't simplify determining your stats into a single step of character creation and instead chose to tie it to backgrounds. There are no real upsides to that, but plenty of downsides. "People wanted backgrounds to matter more, so we will cripple characters that don't choose the most stereotypical background for their class, et voila, backgrounds matter now!" would be a terrible line of reasoning to stick with that needless bit of clunkiness, but I can't think of anything else that drove them to do that. It certainly doesn't provide any narrative added value, it takes very little imagination to find cases where the designated attributes are NOT a good fit and needlessly restrictive. And it certainly doesn't make any sense from the perspective of a game where you're supposed to be able to create unique, perhaps unusual characters (imho the better reason to decouple ASIs from race/species).

[@masteringdungeons]

Agreed. It really feels that they could have separated ability scores and feats from everything, freeing up the background to be a story choice.

[@dhavaram8064]

​@@masteringdungeonsI absolutely agree with this, and that is how I'll do it at my table.

[@GBlucher]

I’m usually not logged on such that I can comment, but I have to make an exception in this. I really enjoy listening to your thoughts on the Greyhawk Gazetteer realm write ups. I rarely hear such thoughtful and knowledgeable discussions about Greyhawk at all, much less on KZbin. Reminds me a bit of some of the old listservs I subscribed to back in the 90s! You have really great channel here. Both of you are great!

[@masteringdungeons]

Wow, thank you, from the bottom of our rec.games.frp.hearts!

[@danddjacko]

I've always chosen class first, race second

[@masteringdungeons]

Yeah, interesting how different players have different approaches. For 2014, it means you have made your choice before starting the "official" process.

[@silentverdict]

I have such a hard time judging your overall take from your individual breakdowns so I'm glad you include it at the end! I would not have taken "this is pretty good, this is pretty good...This part is bad, this part makes me so angry I'm speaking in third person, this part is a missed oppurtunity" and guessed the result is "I'm pretty pleased with it!" Then again I've only watched 10 or so episodes. I'll learn to figure it out eventually I'm sure!

[@masteringdungeons]

That's great to hear! Thank you for this. We have started doing this recently because we realized folks may draw a conclusion based on individual points we mention. Our intention had been that you could decide, but we think folks really want to hear our overall take.

[@HowtoRPG]

Thanks for the discussion.

[@masteringdungeons]

You are welcome!

[@Hyodorio]

Still watching but regarding the order, it's true that on videogames and other games race comes first, but what I like about class first is that it helps players to think about their role. What is my character doing, how it helps the group, and then what do they look like. And at the end of the day, usually my groups first think about class when making characters ("oh I'll be a warlock" "I'll be a cleric" "then maybe I'll be a fighter!"). Narrative takes a hit obviously and I think like you personally Teos when I create characters, but in my experience thinking class first helps when you jump into session 0. Also I'm glad they didn't get rid of alignment and I like the little things they added to how it can help build your character. I think of alignment as optional, since how badly it's implemente by some, but being in love with Planescape I just don't want to let it go.

[@masteringdungeons]

Alignment would have been really cool in 5E's Planescape as a major component. We want WotC to sell us on alignment. Otherwise, there isn't much point if it just fades into the background.

[@matthewsnow-zj1cu]

Really enjoyed this conversation. Tales of the Valiant handles things in a way which is similar, but avoids the pitfalls of the Background issue with ability scores bonuses, culture and alignment Step 1. Choose a character Concept. Perhaps a little nebulous, but provides a narrative framework. Step 2. Choose a Class. Yup still front and center mechanically, but also a quick table in that chapter that helps summarize where each class excels and what it’s key abilities are. Step 3. Determine Ability scores. 3 methods. If you roll, you can assign +2, +1 to whichever you want. Standard array and point buy have the +2 and +1 built in. Step 4. Choose Lineage (Species) your biological traits (speed, vision, magic/natural abilities). Step 5. Choose Heritage. Here’s the cultural and upbringing component, a highlight of the system. It offers suggestions for playing Common Heritages by Lineage, but you can mix and match however you like. Want to play an Orc raised in a Dwarven smithy? Pick the Orc Lineage and the Fireforge Heritage. My players had a lot of fun with this. Also a good place for the DM to explore worldbuilding if you want to assign certain types of heritages to certain regions or peoples. Step 6. Choose a Background. More limited choices than DnD, but less impact to ability scores and personality. Offers you a choice of 3 different Talents (their Feats) suggested by your previous life. Pretty easy to open that up to allow customization. Not a lot of backstory implications, accept adventuring motivation tables or certain backgrounds like Criminal (which offers you a secrets table), but possibly enough to help new players. Step 7. Determine equipment. You can take the default class and background equipment combined or buy your own. Step 8. Fill in the blanks. Check a character sheet diagram with numbered entries to help fill in proficiency bonus, ac, etc. they provide a Final Checklist and those diagrams. This is where my players struggled. Had to help quite a bit during our two sessions of session 0.5. Overall, this character creation system is why I prefer ToV. Pretty easy with Class, Lineage, Heritage and Background to make an interesting character.

[@masteringdungeons]

It would be interesting to film two people. One of them, you have them use this or the 2024 process. The second, you ask them to start with lineage/heritage/species, then background, then class. Would there be difference in how well the players understand their character and have exciting ideas for roleplay? Or is is the same outcome?

[@matthewsnow-zj1cu]

@@masteringdungeons Good question. Does the order of operation necessarily result in more creative outcomes or is it the elements themselves that influence it? I’d be curious to see those results as well.

[@Flyonaweb]

Alignment just like the whole game is abstract representation. I have my players choose it. It a role playing tool and the few times it important in a mechanic. I have chosen to be good and follow laws. Then we have a conversion of what that means. Take the abstract we decide together what that looks like for that character using the choice as a reference. It doesn't mean you can't do evil or chaotic. It tells me as a DM as a guideline what kind of choices a player will probably make.

[@masteringdungeons]

Do you find most of your players are sticking to that? We tend to see players forget what their alignment is and end up motivated via other parts of their personality/backstory.

[@Flyonaweb]

@@masteringdungeonsI think alignment is one pillar in who a character is. They pull in many different areas to build their character personality. I also have short backstory from each person and 25 questions that they have to answer as well. Backstory does not need to touch on the questions. Even if the questions are answered simply we both have an idea of who they playing. Like you said today I have to bring in outside tools as well because by itself it not a good tool. Do they forget the alignment? No. Neutral characters pick that to forget or feel they are not bound by any morality or rules. I found if they pick good or evil they play it. Once we agreed what law and chaos means to them in relation to good and evil they stick to it. They often answer the questions with the alignment in mind and that helps them decide which to pick. It a tool like any other. It one page in the book at most. I personally like having it. Is it useful. I made it useful for me and my group. Are there games where it exactly as you describe; absolutely. I have played in them. I like throwing the players in situations where morality is not cut and dry. If I had a bunch of players who were going to just forget it then I be running a different D&D game where I deemphasize alignment and backstory because it would not be important to this group.

[@bareawareness]

It makes for a more thought-provoking episode when you disagree with each other. I thought both of you made compelling points about the presentation of origins. I’m still pondering it. You guys ought to argue more often!

[@masteringdungeons]

We will argue as often as we can!!! :-)

[@Parmandur]

They can't get rid of the ability scores, they are part and parcel of the random generation method. They won't ever get rid of thst fully, like Alignment.

[@deProfundisAdAstra]

I don't even *want* them to get rid of it. I'm not sure why everyone does.

[@Parmandur]

@@deProfundisAdAstra I don't think most anyone does, really.

[@clawlesslawless]

​@@Parmandur theyre useless, thats the point. 16 is useless, +3 is important.

[@masteringdungeons]

You could random generate and the result is forgotten once you look at the table. We roll random encounters, but if you get a 15, that information is discarded as soon as you see the result is 2d4 bandits.

[@Parmandur]

@masteringdungeons You *could*, but at this point it is too baked into the IP: brand name D&D has ability scores that look like they do, and Alignment. It is culturally inescapable at this point.

[@donkeyfly43]

I don’t know a single person who believes that species is more important than class.

[@masteringdungeons]

We haven't even pondered that question!

[@michaeljpastor]

I think you glossed over one of the more egregious design flaws in the new character creation process - the way the background themselves are constructed. They're such a kludge of disparate mechanical benefits and merely trade the bio-essentialist racism from 2014 into the new societal conformity of classism in 2024. While the DMG presumably will have rules for creating custom backgrounds (and it's not difficult to figure out how to do it), they wouldn't be necessary if the three (and a half) parts of the background were simply taken apart altogether and treated as separate smaller steps. I'm really surprised that you didn't mention Origin Feats at all, given your past criticism as Feats as the 'mandatory option' that they were in the past. The ASIs belong with the character class choice step (either use the ASIs to boost your chosen class attributes, or to shore up non-primary stats). Skill and tool proficiencies are their own step that can either supplement or complement the skills you get from class. And Origin Feats (far too few to choose from by the way) are something unique to each character - as feats are 'codified exceptions to the rules' Yes there would be 'more steps' if they were teased apart, but they'd be smaller, more digestible steps. And they'd make a helluva lot more narrative sense than what they presented in the book.

[@masteringdungeons]

Agreed! We would prefer backgrounds be less weighty in terms of benefits so players could feel free to take the background that fits their story.