Let’s make a 2024 D&D character

I love blasphemy 🥰 –Ginny Di, 2024

★ Edited by Bia

Music from Epidemic Sound

► FIND ME ONLINE:

[GinnyDi]

...oops! I was wrong about lifespans! There is a note that I missed on the first page of the "origins" chapter that mentions that every species lives about 80 years unless otherwise noted. (My joke was still hilarious, though.)

[katewatson]

"I need to go use Baldur's Gate 3 as an expensive dollmaker" Ginny was so real with this one. I feel called out 😆

[TenebrousFilms]

"Why didn't you introduce yourself when you first gave me these powers?" the warlock asked.
The patron asnwered, "I just wanted to see what you'd do with them; I didn't expect to get invested."

[VivaLaDnDLogs]

Ginny: "I'm a filthy lil rule follower."
_six minutes later_
Ginny: "BREAKING DA LAW!"

[celas]

Her: "...I warned you that we were being self-indulgent."
Me: "It's a tiefling, isn't it?"
Her: "It's tiefling time."

Perfect lol

[ldamoff]

As for complexity, my youngest daughter started playing a 5e druid in first grade. When we created her character I warned her that druids were one of the hardest classes to play but she really wanted to be a "nature wizard", so I let her do it. At that point she still needed a fair bit of help with basic TTRPG mechanics (she still frequently had to be reminded which one was the d20). Even though it took some patience and a bit more coaching than her older siblings required (who were playing a Barbarian and Ranger) it was the character she wanted to play. And she loved it so much that in our next campaign she chose to play another druid.

All of which is to say, provided it fits with campaign and makes sense with the party, I'm all for letting your players play the characters they want to play.

[ThomasFitch]

Feats being "way more fun at lower levels when you can only do like three total things, and being able to do one more thing is very exciting" is _such a good way_ to put that! I've never been able to express my frustration with why the current system bothers me so much. I feel so seen.

[tanakathecowboy]

New Player Alert! I have never played a game in my entire life YET. I actually find cutting the backstories a bit very helpful. I think that the more I get into this game I will become more knowledgeable about what I can and cannot do. I will become more knowledgeable about races and culture. I will become more knowledgeable about stories and flaws of my future characters to truly up my game to a master level. But for now, I just really appreaciate that I get to start playing with a sort of DEMO version where I get to just pick whatever looks nicest on a picture and test this wondeful game for myself, without worrying about learning 100 hours of lore to play it right.

This video was so freaking helpful that right after this comment I am going to watch it again! Love your work!

[strawblina]

I read this as let's make a 2024 dnd calander and I still clicked lmao

[godofzombi]

Wizard: "You can't join the Caster Club. You don't know enough spells."
Warlock: "What did you say,
Wizard: " Ah. Welcome in the club!"

[RumpusImperator]

I really like what the Dungeon Scrawlers did with alignment: pick in one element a traditional alignment, and add an adjective. So you end up with alignments like "Chaotic Friendly", "Practical Good", or "Lawful Grumpy".

[sarahmacintosh]

I'm a very experienced player and DM, but I often use the "This is Your Life" section in Xanathar's as inspiration to flesh out a character. Sometimes just to read and get ideas, sometimes to roll. Usually I'll roll a couple of times until something feels right for that character. So I still have control, but I'm not starting from a completely blank page.

[dantamayo]

Ginny is out here doing the most comprehensive pieces. Where would we be without her?

[guamae]

I've been DMing for *DECADES*, and when I *finally* went to make a character as a *player*... I thought the Traits/Bonds/Flaws section really neat... and a great way to set a baseline for RP...

Sorry to see it's gone...

[lukamurphy]

Scores and modifiers remain? Good thing I know of a highly informative (and catchy) Schoolhouse Rock-type parody about Attributes which teaches folks whilst they learn!

[IcarusGames]

5e24's PHB is a much better reference guide but you're 100% correct about a lot of the character creation feeling like the flavor has been stripped out

Backgrounds feel anemic compared to 5e14, with the loss of descriptive flavor text, the tables, and the background feature which was usually a more roleplay focused thing rather than a combat mechanical element.

In terms of flavor, I don't think the species have ever felt more like a bunch of humans wearing different hats. Stripping out the bioessentialism was good, but I definitely think they went too far. Things like suggested names were a great help to a brand new player to make a character that felt like a different species, whereas now the biggest differences in the text are mechanical, and thanks to level 1 feats you can achieve a lot of the feel of difference species with feats (make a small human with the lucky feat and you're a good chunk of the way to being a mechanical halfling, for example).

[clellieirwin]

"Players can't rely on the book alone to teach them the game" THANK YOU. If a future civilization ever stumbles upon the complete 5e collection, no one will ever learn how to play because they won't have anyone there to explain the fiddly bits.

[Ravenovia]

I rarely stick strongly to alignment, EXCEPT if I’m playing a character with an inhuman morality system (like lizard morality, fey morality, or Cthulhu morality). In that case, I’ll make my own nine-square morality axis and place my character in one of the squares so that, while their actions are incredibly hard to predict to an outsider, I’m always able to track their next move.

Here’s an example.

When I run fey characters, I divide the grid into two axis points: Beautiful-Neutral-Corrupted and Truthful-Neutral-Deceitful. All characters loyal to the Seelie court are somewhere in the Beautiful category, all characters loyal to the Unseelie are somewhere in the Corrupted category, and Neutral folk are go-betweens. These are not necessarily to reflect their looks (many Corrupted or Neutral characters look attractive), but rather what they value—do they value things being surface-level pleasing, or do they prefer messy authenticity?

To illustrate the extremes, a Disney Princess would be Beautiful-Truthful, Morticia Addams would be Corrupted-Truthful, Regina George would be Beautiful-Deceitful, and a typical Hag would be Corrupted-Deceitful.

Here’s another example—a revised version of the first Alternate Morality Chart I ever made, which was for my GOOlock character who was raised by the cult of her eldritch horror patron.

The two axis points for this are Eternal-Neutral-Pandemos and Involved-Neutral-Uncaring. Eternal means that they’re unchanging, that they are the way they are forever, while Pandemos means that their alien mind is a burbling well of madness. Involved vs Uncaring is basically about whether or not they care what puny earthlings do.

My character’s patron would be Neutral-Involved, as they’re unknowably alien but also stable, and they care enough about what goes on for Earth that they engage with their cults. Meanwhile, my warlock would be True Neutral, as she has a firm-yet-mutable human brain, but only kind of cares about human affairs and feels alienated from the rest of her kind.

[pendragongameart]

you basically have to cosplay blasphemy now, we are bringing tiefling cosplay back

[uncah_bucchal]

Ginny, as a guy who got into D&D back when the red box came out I'm glad to see a young generation as passionate as us OG nerds were way back then. Carry on!