Are you supposed to build a character in the order presented in the book?

[Klorox]

Weird question, I know. I ask for the following reason:

I always pick my background first when picking my skills (unless I get a set racial skill, then that goes first). The background skills "happened first" in the characters life, so that makes sense to me.

But I was looking at the book yesterday, and I was wondering if I had been doing it wrong.

Are you supposed to create a character in the order presented in the book?

For example, can I create a dwarf cleric and choose religion and insight as my skills, and then add the acolyte background? Since you can't duplicate skills, you can choose two new ones.

I'm just trying to figure out a way to get the incredibly useful perception skill on a class that doesn't have access to the skill (and I'm sick of playing sailors LOL).

[BurgerBeast]

I think you have the rules on your side, here.

I've seen this same trick used by myself and others. I've considered house-ruling that if your background provides you with proficiencies that you already have, then you can choose proficiencies from your class to replace them.

[Gastronomie]

First of all, perception is something not all the characters need, unless your DM rules that adventurers can't warn their partymates about hiding enemies before combat starts (though having half or more of the party have it is certainly useful).
Second, original backgrounds are permitted by RAW, so you don't need to be a sailor all the time even if you want Perception.

Third, those are just "guidelines for beginners". They work smooth, but I actually have never created a character while looking at them.

[Ninja_Prawn]

those are just "guidelines"

Don't listen to Gastronomie, he's a no-good pirate. If you don't follow the order in the book to the letter, WotC will send their goons to beat you raw.

You have been warned.

[Klorox]

First of all, perception is something not all the characters need, unless your DM rules that adventurers can't warn their partymates about hiding enemies before combat starts (though having half or more of the party have it is certainly useful).
Second, original backgrounds are permitted by RAW, so you don't need to be a sailor all the time even if you want Perception.

Third, those are just "guidelines for beginners". They work smooth, but I actually have never created a character while looking at them.

It's strange, but I feel a little dirty creating my own background. I know I probably shouldn't.

As for perception, we make a lot of rolls, I like having a good chance at succeeding most of the time.

That being said, I'm playing a cleric in the new game that starts in a week. It's point buy, and I have a 16 WIS. I kinda want to take advantage of that.

[Gastronomie]

Don't listen to Gastronomie, he's a no-good pirate. If you don't follow the order in the book to the letter, WotC will send their goons to beat you raw.

You have been warned.Wait, is that why I'm being constantly chased around by these men in black? God, if only I had followed the PHB... I wouldn't have lost my family... my hometown... everything that the world meant for me...
It's strange, but I feel a little dirty creating my own background. I know I probably shouldn't.

As for perception, we make a lot of rolls, I like having a good chance at succeeding most of the time.

That being said, I'm playing a cleric in the new game that starts in a week. It's point buy, and I have a 16 WIS. I kinda want to take advantage of that.If you want Perception but don't want to be a former sailor/pirate, you can always be an Elf or Half-Elf. Wood and Half can increase your WIS as well.

[rollingForInit]

It seems reasonable that you'd choose Race->Class->background since that's how they are presented in the book. But I don't think it actually says so anywhere? The background section implies it, since otherwise there'd be no way to get skills before chosing a background. In fact, the background section even explicitly states that players should be encouraged to piece together their own backgrounds with proficiencies and skills.

We've always done it that way. You get skills from your race, then from your class, then pick whatever you want for background. Certainly makes for more interesting characters if you aren't stuck with the backgrounds combinations that are written in the book.

[Spore]

I consider this part of the book the "tutorial" section. Aimed towards newer players who possibly know which character they want (ie. Dwarven Cleric) but not how to implement them into a story. The second part is for the DM anyhow, and the character setup is meant to be done quickly in order to get playing right away.

We people just pour a lot more effort, time and thought into our characters. That is why we screw about with ordering :)

[ad_hoc]

As for perception, we make a lot of rolls, I like having a good chance at succeeding most of the time.


That is something I would bring up in the session 0.

Perception shouldn't feel mandatory. It also shouldn't feel like it is much more important than the other skills.

If you feel that every single character you play must have it, then there is something wrong either with the game or your perception of the game.

[ATHATH]

It's strange, but I feel a little dirty creating my own background. I know I probably shouldn't.

As for perception, we make a lot of rolls, I like having a good chance at succeeding most of the time.

That being said, I'm playing a cleric in the new game that starts in a week. It's point buy, and I have a 16 WIS. I kinda want to take advantage of that.
Don't feel bad, it's actually listed as an option/rule in the background section.

I recommend mixing and matching- take the skill proficiencies from Sailor, the special ability of the Acolyte, etc.

[WickerNipple]

For example, can I create a dwarf cleric and choose religion and insight as my skills, and then add the acolyte background? Since you can't duplicate skills, you can choose two new ones.

Yes. This is exactly how it works.


(and I'm sick of playing sailors LOL)

And this is why.

[SarcasticDom]

Everytime I've played D&D 5e, its always gone Race -> Background -> Class, partially to allow more freedom of choice with skills, but also because it makes more sense to us (my friends and I) since that your background is such a major aspectof your character and often gives the reason why you are the class you are.

[Mandragola]

It explicitly says you're allowed to pick any two skills you want for your background. The backgrounds it suggests are intended as kind of a jumping off point. It would obviously be impossible to produce a book that listed any possible background a character might have.

If it helps, there are more backgrounds in the SCAG. At least a couple of them come with perception. I'm considering a wood elf cleric with the far-traveller background, which comes with perception. I'd therefore be able to "trade it in" for stealth, so as to be able to sneak around.

I'd kind of prefer it if they'd given each background a suggested list of skills, as they have with classes. The same logic applies really. Lots of fighters will be proficient with athletics, but not all would be. I don't really see why all heroes of the people would be proficient with animal handling, or all hermits would be trained to use herbalist's tools.

[Klorox]

That is something I would bring up in the session 0.

Perception shouldn't feel mandatory. It also shouldn't feel like it is much more important than the other skills.

If you feel that every single character you play must have it, then there is something wrong either with the game or your perception of the game.

I disagree, solely based upon reading just about any of the class guides across multiple websites. Just about everybody across the board says perception is the most widely used skill.

Why wouldn't a character starting with the highest possible WIS want this skill?

I like making my perception checks. I played a barbarian with an 8 WIS and without the skill. That was fun too, because he'd miss stuff and shrug off the damage.

[Tanarii]

I tell players to do it in so far as picking Race then Class before rolling for stats, then picking background. But for skills, I do it in reverse order: They get the background and racial first, see if there's an overlap for duplicates, and pick alternates if so. Then they pick from class skills, but can't select a duplicate.

I like the way keeping possible skills available for the class & background limited to the normal options keeps the archetypes strong.

I also don't allow players to make up custom backgrounds. They have to use the ones in the PHB.

(Note: I consider these to be house-rules though.)

[R.Shackleford]

Weird question, I know. I ask for the following reason:

I always pick my background first when picking my skills (unless I get a set racial skill, then that goes first). The background skills "happened first" in the characters life, so that makes sense to me.

But I was looking at the book yesterday, and I was wondering if I had been doing it wrong.

Are you supposed to create a character in the order presented in the book?

For example, can I create a dwarf cleric and choose religion and insight as my skills, and then add the acolyte background? Since you can't duplicate skills, you can choose two new ones.

I'm just trying to figure out a way to get the incredibly useful perception skill on a class that doesn't have access to the skill (and I'm sick of playing sailors LOL).

You can do it however you like...

I go with how a character would be created within that world...

Race (birth)
Background + Ability Scores (growing up)
Class (Job)


Though recently I've been making specific builds and not specific characters so I go backwards.

What do I want to do? (Class)
How do I want to do it? (Ability Scores)
What background makes sense or is fun? (Background)
What race works and makes for the most fun? (Race)

[Christian]

It's done that way for a very good reason: to make it advantageous rather than disadvantageous for your character's background to match his class.

Eg., the 'quick build' suggestion for a cleric is to take the acolyte background. Makes sense, most clerics probably would come from that background, right? But if you pick your background first, you've got Insight and Religion as your trained skills from your background, leaving you to pick your two trained cleric class skills from the remaining three skills on the cleric skill list--History, Medicine, and Persuasion. Choosing Acolyte rather than some really non-clericy background seems to have drastically limited your skill training options. "But I don't want any of those skills! I want Perception and Athletics! Man, I should have been a sailor."

But actually, it's the other way around. If Insight and Religion are the only skills you like from the cleric list--good, take them! "But I already have them from acolyte!" No, you already decided on the acolyte background; but in the character generation sequence, that comes later. And so, per the rules in the backgrounds chapter, you can replace those two skills (which you already have from your class) with any two skills you'd like! Say, Perception and Athletics. :smallsmile: Or Deception and Sleight of Hand, just to mess with people's assumptions about clerics. "What? Of course not. I'm a servant of the gods, we don't do things like that. You might want to check out that halfling in the leather armor over there, he looks pretty suspicious to me."

That doesn't mean you have to follow that order when you're making the character in actual fact, of course. But it's very handy to keep in mind that it is the canonical order of operations for that process. In fact, in many ways, it's better to choose your background first, because it makes it easier to make sure that both background skills are duplicated by racial or class skills, to make those slots available for completely free choices.

[Tanarii]

It's done that way for a very good reason: to make it advantageous rather than disadvantageous for your character's background to match his class.That's a really good point I hadn't previously considered.

I may need to reconsider my policy on skill selection order.

[ad_hoc]

I disagree, solely based upon reading just about any of the class guides across multiple websites. Just about everybody across the board says perception is the most widely used skill.

Why wouldn't a character starting with the highest possible WIS want this skill?

I like making my perception checks. I played a barbarian with an 8 WIS and without the skill. That was fun too, because he'd miss stuff and shrug off the damage.

I said:

If you feel that every single character you play must have it,

then there is something wrong either with the game or your perception of the game.


You played a character without the skill. So you don't feel that every single character you play must have the skill. So there may not be any problem with your game or your perception of the game.

I am not sure what you aren't agreeing with.

Also, guides can, and often are, wrong. They are usually written with the assumption of a 1 person party. Actual optimization relies on the entire party.

[Theodoxus]

If you're stuck with a Tanarii like DM - SCAG has a few more backgrounds that offer up Perception.

For a while, I was on a 'have as many skills as possible' kick. Even so far as the stereotypical Rogue1->bard 2->Knowledge cleric build on a half-elf.

After playing (and even more, after DMing) where everyone has the same skills and one person wants to roll so EVERYONE wants to roll, I've gone for more esoteric skills most people don't take - Animal Handling, Nature, History, Sleight of Hand... Sure, half the party can make an arcane check to figure out the outer planar being we're being attacked by. Everyone will spot the rabid moose a mile away... but who wafts through the bar snatching up the tips all while expounding on the subtle differences between cave bears and cave lions? This guy!

What's really sad is when more than 1 person (in one game I'm playing, it's 3) that wants and has built their character, to be the face. My cute halfling routine is running thin on the half-elf sorcerer who has a Trump like personality... The third guy is basically just relegated to cutting barbs.

Had I to do it all over again, i'd of gone AT and boosted INT instead of CHA and gone the 'Mr Knowitall' route... Definitely need to ask before the game starts how many facemen we potentially have. Its fun, it gets you noticed, it keeps you interested in the game and plot... but man, it sucks when everyone talks over each other...

Umm... so, yeah. Backgrounds. Too much emphasis on RAW from the book. I see the list in the PHB as examples. Pick and choose traits, muddy the waters. Talk to your DM about alternate special features. Sailors should have more options outside of conscripted rowers and pirates. Nobles should have more options than just retinue and lands... (and it would have been nice - at some point - to get actual advice on how to play the Charlatan's flaws... "I always run a different con?" Like, how? There's like 4 cons.

[R.Shackleford]

In all honesty, in the world of magic and BBEGs that terrorize the populace a lot... I find it weird that more people aren't trained in Perception or Investigation as a must have as you are growing up.

I mean, I know that click bait is a very popular thing. I have, without knowing it, trained myself to spot click bait and not fall for it (investigation). People who are older than me, and didn't grow up with the internet, wouldn't have that same natural training.

So with magic illusions and other stuff, even if the use of them are rare, I see training in Investigation or Perception to be something that everyone would just have...

I might start giving out Investigation or Perception as a bonus skill. Of course I may also just use my FF 5e Hack skill system for 5e games too.

[Tanarii]

If you're stuck with a Tanarii like DM - SCAG has a few more backgrounds that offer up Perception.

&

Umm... so, yeah. Backgrounds. Too much emphasis on RAW from the book. I see the list in the PHB as examples. Pick and choose traits, muddy the waters. Talk to your DM about alternate special features. Sailors should have more options outside of conscripted rowers and pirates. Nobles should have more options than just retinue and lands... (and it would have been nice - at some point - to get actual advice on how to play the Charlatan's flaws... "I always run a different con?" Like, how? There's like 4 cons.Actually, I agree. I was going for a specific flavor for the campaign. More grognardian D&D, with very strong, but more limited/less flexible, archetypes. I also don't use Multiclassing or Feats for similar reasons.

I hadn't considered that the downside of pushing players into off-background choices for optimization purposes. I don't feel like it happens that often, but possibly I haven't really sat down and analyzed the player's class/background choices thoroughly enough. (I do know, for example, that my no-MC and Feats policy has resulted in Fighter PCs being almost exclusively EKs so far. Because it's a blatant affect.)

[sky red hunter]

I disagree, solely based upon reading just about any of the class guides across multiple websites. Just about everybody across the board says perception is the most widely used skill.

Why wouldn't a character starting with the highest possible WIS want this skill?

I like making my perception checks. I played a barbarian with an 8 WIS and without the skill. That was fun too, because he'd miss stuff and shrug off the damage.

Think this might be uncreative dming, or naive dming at fault a bit here, and its easier to just ask the players to 'look' for example: characters is looking for firewood, most dm's would ask for a perception check to find wood instead of survival which makes more sense. example: somethings not right with 'insert character' give me a perception check to see whats wrong instead of a medicine check or an insight check. Example: do i recognise that person? gimme a perception check instead of a history check. example: has anyone passed through this forest recently? gimme a perception check instead of a survival or nature check. its very easy to just jump to perception as the go-to check but i try to utilise as many ofon the other skills as i can as it helps to flesh out what each character is good at and not make it a party all shielding their eyes from the sun and looking hard at each problem or task willing an answer to pop out thanks to their aggressive eye contact. but thats just me.

also the phb says on page 125 "if a character would gain the same proficiency from two different sources, he or she can choose a different proficiency of the same kind ( skill or tool ) instead.

seems fairly clean cut to me...

[DragonSorcererX]

I do like this:

Class
Race, to pick the most optimal race or Dragonborn for awesomness...
Ability Scores, to Point Buy the most optimal Ability Scores...
Background, to get the most optimal skills or tools...
Skills from Class
Skills from Background, to say that I already got those skills from my class so that I can pick any skill I want...
Spells

And this is not Power Gaming, Power Gaming is Fighter 2/Warlock 2/Sorcerer 16.

[GlenSmash!]

I feel like the PHB absolutely encourages you to customize or create backgrounds. I rarely do so because I am lazy and because Outlander Barbarians just always seem to call to me. but if you're not playing in AL you should feel free to pick whatever skill proficiencies fit your concept. Let go of your Guilt. Pelor forgives you.

Also, I often use the Variant Human skill proficiency for Perception (or Stealth on a Barbarian) the Feat gets a lot of publicity, but that extra Skill is nice too.

[Nonah_Me]

Think this might be uncreative dming, or naive dming at fault a bit here, and its easier to just ask the players to 'look' for example: characters is looking for firewood, most dm's would ask for a perception check to find wood instead of survival which makes more sense. example: somethings not right with 'insert character' give me a perception check to see whats wrong instead of a medicine check or an insight check. Example: do i recognise that person? gimme a perception check instead of a history check. example: has anyone passed through this forest recently? gimme a perception check instead of a survival or nature check. its very easy to just jump to perception as the go-to check but i try to utilise as many ofon the other skills as i can as it helps to flesh out what each character is good at and not make it a party all shielding their eyes from the sun and looking hard at each problem or task willing an answer to pop out thanks to their aggressive eye contact. but thats just me.

also the phb says on page 125 "if a character would gain the same proficiency from two different sources, he or she can choose a different proficiency of the same kind ( skill or tool ) instead.

seems fairly clean cut to me...

I always thought that is the wrong way to go about asking for checks, and seems to be a holdover from 3.5/3.P/4E ways of thinking.

How I think the procedure goes:
PC: Do I recognize that person?
DM: Give me a Wisdom check.
PC: [Is proficient in History]: Does my knowledge of history apply? Is he a well known guy, etc?
PC: [Is proficient in Perception]: Do I remember anything interesting about this guy? Tatoos, etc?
PC: [Is not proficient in either]: Right-o.

DM: This man is coughing and bent over; there's a nasty smell coming from around him.
PC: Ew. I bet he's sick. Is he sick?
DM: Give me an Wisdom check.
PC: I know a bit about Medicine, can I apply my prof?
DM: Sure.

PC: Has anyone passed through this forest recently?
DM: Let's see! Give me a Wisdom or Intelligence check.
PC1: Ooh, I bet my Survival prof would apply.
PC2: Does Nature knowledge apply?
DM: PC1 yep, PC2, yeah, but you'll get different kinds of information from PC1.

Etc.