What do you lose if some players don't take Perception proficiency?

[Strill]

So every guide out there recommends Perception proficiency for every character ever. And for good reason. But I'm curious if there are really any consequences if one or two players in the group don't take it. For example, say one player, the squishy Wizard, dumped Perception in favor of Acrobatics to avoid being grappled, would that really impact the group's perception chances? Would it make any difference to the game at all?

[PhantomSoul]

If the party as a whole consistently makes the checks, the impact is (number_of_people_without_proficiency * proficiency_bonus)/(number_of_people_in_party) to the average. The larger the party (or group for the given check), the less of an effect it'll have. Of course, there's a random component anyway (each person is rolling a d20, the range being larger than the effect of proficiency vs. no proficiency) and with enough players you tend to have regression to the mean so everyone's rolls are increasingly likely to offset each other. Having perception also only really makes a difference if you were close to the DC, since if you pass without the proficiency bonus or fail with the proficiency bonus then the proficiency bonus didn't or wouldn't do anything for you (but that's true of all proficiency). I'd say it's good to have, but it isn't the end of the world and the party might benefit more from a player matching their character's abilities, depending on the skill.

EDIT/tl;dr: Note that this means having proficiency is likely more important for a given character if they tend to have to make checks alone, but less if the DM does group rolls. Either way, though, swapping proficiency for something that will give you notable advantages is probably quite reasonable no matter what (ex. acrobatics, which could be used in and out of battle effectively).

[krunchyfrogg]

I've almost always seen at least one character with insane perception skills in almost any party.

It's gotten to the point where I don't worry about having the skill, and the game goes on just fine.

Heck, in another edition, think it was still called Spot, I had a paladin with a 7 wisdom who didn't notice anything. It was fine.

[mgshamster]

Heck, I've got characters who dump wisdom. It ain't that bad, and my characters are better elsewhere.

The guides ain't the end-all-be-all of character creation.

[DanyBallon]

So every guide out there recommends Perception proficiency for every character ever. And for good reason. But I'm curious if there are really any consequences if one or two players in the group don't take it. For example, say one player, the squishy Wizard, dumped Perception in favor of Acrobatics to avoid being grappled, would that really impact the group's perception chances? Would it make any difference to the game at all?

The only consequence would be that you'll fail to percieve that the guides are not an end to all, that they are just a personal view of their authors and that they tend to focus on soloing a cooperative game :smallwink:

[Strill]

If the party as a whole consistently makes the checks, the impact is (number_of_people_without_proficiency * proficiency_bonus)/(number_of_people_in_party) to the average. The larger the party (or group for the given check), the less of an effect it'll have. Of course, there's a random component anyway (each person is rolling a d20, the range being larger than the effect of proficiency vs. no proficiency) and with enough players you tend to have regression to the mean so everyone's rolls are increasingly likely to offset each other. Having perception also only really makes a difference if you were close to the DC, since if you pass without the proficiency bonus or fail with the proficiency bonus then the proficiency bonus didn't or wouldn't do anything for you (but that's true of all proficiency). I'd say it's good to have, but it isn't the end of the world and the party might benefit more from a player matching their character's abilities, depending on the skill.

EDIT/tl;dr: Note that this means having proficiency is likely more important for a given character if they tend to have to make checks alone, but less if the DM does group rolls. Either way, though, swapping proficiency for something that will give you notable advantages is probably quite reasonable no matter what (ex. acrobatics, which could be used in and out of battle effectively).

So you're assuming that the DM is having every player roll perception? In that case, you're almost guaranteed to succeed, proficiency or not, just by sheer number of chances to get a good roll. I was under the impression that the DM is meant to roll once for the enemy and use passive perception for the players, in order to mitigate this problem.

[PhantomSoul]

So you're assuming that the DM is rolling perception for every player? In that case, you're almost guaranteed to succeed, proficiency or not, just by sheer number of chances to get a good roll. I was under the impression that the DM is meant to roll once for the enemy and use passive perception for the players, in order to mitigate this problem.

Oh, I interpreted the question as being the players rolling (not that who rolls matters in theory), but all at once, so there's a DC for the party. Like I said, if only one person rolls, the proficiency makes a bigger difference. But note I was answering for regular perception (that's what I understood of the OP), not passive perception.

[Ninja_Prawn]

I agree that it isn't necessary for everyone to have proficiency in Perception. If the whole party is rolling, there's only a marginal benefit - and if you need to designate a scout, you only need one person to have a big modifier.

Obviously the unperceptive character will have some problems if they go off on their own or the designated scouts are incapacitated for some reason, but you can still succeed on rolls without proficiency (to a point, made more likely because a fair few Perception checks are opposed, so the DC is variable). And what's the worst that could happen? You stumble into a trap or a surprise ambush? You miss an optional clue or bonus treasure? Not ideal, but probably not the end of the world (I mean, if you get ambushed while alone you're probably hosed, surprise or no). And perhaps whatever other skill you picked makes up for the failed perception check anyway.

Edit due to entirely-predictable ninjas: if you're rolling active stealth against passive perception (there's a time an place for both approaches, in my opinion), it's even less important for multiple PCs to have the proficiency. It's only the highest one you're counting anyway, assuming the PCs are actually working together and not trying to get each other killed.

[Strill]

Oh, I interpreted the question as being the players rolling (not that who rolls matters in theory), but all at once, so there's a DC for the party. Like I said, if only one person rolls, the proficiency makes a bigger difference. But note I was answering for regular perception (that's what I understood of the OP), not passive perception.

Right, that's what I meant. So you weren't referring to the Group Skill Check rules either. Just every player having a separate chance to pass the skill check, and if any of them pass, they all pass.

[PhantomSoul]

Right, that's what I meant. So you weren't referring to the Group Skill Check rules either. Just every player having a separate chance to pass the skill check, and if any of them pass, they all pass.

I did mean group skill checks, otherwise the influence of a single player is even less than the one I gave, since they aren't affecting an average roll (or total roll; it's the same).

EDIT: Just looked up the rules, it seems our group doesn't follow the official Group Skill Check, but we've called it that. For us there's a DC for the party (ex. 75 for a party of 5 to be a bit like a DC of 15) and our rolls are added up. It's not a half of the party passes vs. fails.

[Corsair14]

Guides are made by min-maxers trying to eeek every advantage out of a class/race. Not sure why people do that since we are not playing a competitive game. I actually had one of my players bitching about us doing a PF game when I said it only takes like 20 minutes to make character and he complained it took far longer as you have to plan the character out over the long term and so on. Dude, the average campaign only lasts 5-7 levels from start, what long term are you talking about and since when is anyone concerned over who is out damaging who?

Yes perception is a useful skill, but lets face it, in 5e everyone can do everything. The skill set(which I am very vocally against) allows anyone to roll perception whether they are proficient or not, usually its only a minor modifier. Its why I have gotten to the point of making DCs higher for non-proficient characters but I am sure most people don't do that.

So what will a party lose if everyone doesn't take it? Not a whole lot. Someone will take it and there's your scout. Not taking it means the character is simply better at something else maybe that no one else took.

[Pex]

Nothing.

Your character is not hopeless doomed to die if it doesn't have proficiency in Perception. Not everything in the world will have a Stealth DC of No.

[RickAllison]

The main downsides for not having Perception are a weakness to ambushes and traps. Traps only matter if you are stuck alone, while ambushes at worst stick you with surprise. You won't be a very good scout. But that is about it.

[Tanarii]

You lose the ability to avoid surprise. Or rather increase the chance you will be surprised, in an ambush situation. Because surprise is determined on a per character basis.

As long as you're not front rank, you don't necessarily lose much else. Since front (and occasionally very back) rank characters are the most likely to be in a position where they need to use Perception to notice threats. Per the PHB chapter on adventuring and DM judgement on the situation.

[NNescio]

The main downsides for not having Perception are a weakness to ambushes and traps. Traps only matter if you are stuck alone, while ambushes at worst stick you with surprise. You won't be a very good scout. But that is about it.

Could be very deadly for low-AC Wizards who are denied Shield (can't use reactions when surprised) though, especially if the attackers count as hidden and/or unseen. Even Bladesingers can be caught without their Bladesong up.

Then again, Wizards do get to mitigate this by using an Owl or Bat familiar (unless the DM is the sort who forbid spamming actions), and there's always the Alert feat (which works for any class, like the poor unfairly-denied-a-familiar Sorcerer).

[SharkForce]

it is also important to note that hiding will be on a per-PC basis. the group as a whole may notice an ambush, but until the wizard sees the enemy boss (say, an orc warlord), the wizard cannot cast, say.... hold person on that target.

which seems like it will come into play at least occasionally.

massive crippling drawback that you can't recover from? no. but it will have some consequences.

[Tanarii]

Honestly, I've found the importance of avoiding surprise varies from campaign to campaign.

Some DMs will do a 'one Perception check to rule them all' before making the surprise check, to see if the other side is detected at longer range, either against stealth or against a fixed DC. After which the side that detects the other can attempt an ambush the other. I personally consider this to be doubling up on Perception checks, but a DM can call for whatever checks she likes so it's still RAW to do it. Which I had to be convinced of the first time I saw a post suggesting it was RAW. YMMV. But in this case Perception is only important for one or two characters.

When I first started 5e, I had plenty of DMs that just declare surprise checks based on if they feel the situation warrants two sides bumbling into one another, which makes Perception way more valuable. It's also valuable if you're playing with DMs that have static 'scenes' that don't activate until PCs enter the picture, and therefore creatures can be laying in ambush for the PCs eternally until the suddenly 'trigger' the ambush. Effectively, traps that are actually creatures, but use the surprise rules instead of the detecting a threat rules, meaning individual perception matters more.

However, I've also played with other DMs that only have surprise situations if one side was going to be intentionally trying an ambush situation against someone they had already scouted out, which made Perception (individually) far LESS valuable for PCs, and insanely more valuable for monsters. Because PCs are typically the ones scouting and invading the monsters home territory. It's still valuable for the front-rank PCs to detect traps, because those are by definition eternally static 'scenes' that don't trigger until a party enters the picture.

[Tetrasodium]

It depends on your class. Anything that might be doing scout type duty at some point should probably have it in order to... well... see anything while scouting. For other stuff, it still depends on the class. A paladin using their ability to sense undead & stuff might do better at actually seeing the undead & stuff. A fighter/barbarian might see the goblins (or whatever) sneaking up to stab their squishy friend. For a wizard/warlock/sorcerer/ranger/etc built around attacking from range, it could be the difference between laying down the hurt & asking questions like "where is it? what are you guys shooting at?"

Guides usually try to present an example of "optimal" with guidance for how to shade it differently & avoid mistakes. If you look at a guide & decide that the reasons it suggests perception are irrelevant to how you plan to play the character within your group, you will probably be fine; but it would be disingenuous to make a guide that doesn't mention its importance if there is any reason at all that it might be important to the roles the guide helps to to prepare the reader for.

Guides are just guides, someone had an idea/blundered across something, did some testing, maybe learned some stuff, & scrawled it out for others to learn from and/or improve upon.

[Vogonjeltz]

So every guide out there recommends Perception proficiency for every character ever. And for good reason. But I'm curious if there are really any consequences if one or two players in the group don't take it. For example, say one player, the squishy Wizard, dumped Perception in favor of Acrobatics to avoid being grappled, would that really impact the group's perception chances? Would it make any difference to the game at all?

Wizards have neither Perception nor Acrobatics as skill options. So, nothing would change there :p

That being said, if the party Fighter took Acrobatics instead of Perception? Well, they'd be missing out on approximately 2-6 times they'd have noticed something for every 20 opportunities. i.e. 10% to 30% fewer successes. This is all the worse in that circumstance as Athletics (also available to the Fighter) covers basically all the same scenarios as Acrobatics already.

Is that bad? Yes, potentially.
Of note the only classes that even have the Acrobatics or Perception? choice are: Bard, Fighter, Rogue

Also bearing in mind, only half of all classes even have Perception as an option.

[Tetrasodium]

Wizards have neither Perception nor Acrobatics as skill options. So, nothing would change there :p

That being said, if the party Fighter took Acrobatics instead of Perception? Well, they'd be missing out on approximately 2-6 times they'd have noticed something for every 20 opportunities. i.e. 10% to 30% fewer successes. This is all the worse in that circumstance as Athletics (also available to the Fighter) covers basically all the same scenarios as Acrobatics already.

Is that bad? Yes, potentially.
Of note the only classes that even have the Acrobatics or Perception? choice are: Bard, Fighter, Rogue

Also bearing in mind, only half of all classes even have Perception as an option.

A lot of backgrounds have the skills you mention & that's before you start picking one with a skill you have to take any other skill or making changes to a background. Pretty much any class can start with just about any skill in place of/in addition to some other "class skill" if they want.

[RickAllison]

A lot of backgrounds have the skills you mention & that's before you start picking one with a skill you have to take any other skill or making changes to a background. Pretty much any class can start with just about any skill in place of/in addition to some other "class skill" if they want.

Not just that, any background can be customized without permission from the DM to have whatever skills you need. Lots of customization on backgrounds, with the only limitations being you can't create new options (the DM can, and if he does then you can use those for customization) and you can't take the poisoner's kit unless the DM creates a background that has that kit as a proficiency bonus as it is the one tool in the books that isn't in the backgrounds.

So really, a character has their class and racial skills and then two free skill choices. So you could pick Athletics/Acrobatics and Perception, but then you only have your class skills as options, and skills are the thing that are brutal to pick up.

[Vogonjeltz]

A lot of backgrounds have the skills you mention & that's before you start picking one with a skill you have to take any other skill or making changes to a background. Pretty much any class can start with just about any skill in place of/in addition to some other "class skill" if they want.

How many backgrounds carry perception? Oh right 1 out of 13.

5 race options allow for it, and 4 of those are elves (high, wood, dark, and half) and variant humans, so technically that's just 4 out of 15 PHB racial options.

So yeah, as long as you're comfortable being a sailor Wizard (lol about as common as Drizzts right?) or getting locked out of over 100 race/prof combos, sure.

Basically what you said wasn't true, but it's important to demonstrate exactly how ridiculous it was.

[mgshamster]

How many backgrounds carry perception? Oh right 1 out of 13.

5 race options allow for it, and 4 of those are elves (high, wood, dark, and half) and variant humans, so technically that's just 4 out of 15 PHB racial options.

So yeah, as long as you're comfortable being a sailor Wizard (lol about as common as Drizzts right?) or getting locked out of over 100 race/prof combos, sure.

Basically what you said wasn't true, but it's important to demonstrate exactly how ridiculous it was.

Heh. You got ninja'd by the counter to this argument.

Background customization is part of the base rules and does not require gm permission. Amy background can give any two skills and any two of [tools or languages].

[Tetrasodium]

How many backgrounds carry perception? Oh right 1 out of 13.

5 race options allow for it, and 4 of those are elves (high, wood, dark, and half) and variant humans, so technically that's just 4 out of 15 PHB racial options.

So yeah, as long as you're comfortable being a sailor Wizard (lol about as common as Drizzts right?) or getting locked out of over 100 race/prof combos, sure.

Basically what you said wasn't true, but it's important to demonstrate exactly how ridiculous it was.

Wizards get "Choose two from Arcana, History, Insight, Investigation, Medicine, and Religion" for class skills. Any background with one or both of the skills you choose from there (possibly even the ones you don't depending on reading) lets you choose any other skill in place of that background's skill that you already had. There are a lot of backgrounds with at least one of those six skills.
C u s t o m i z i n g a
B a c k g r o u n d
You might want to tweak
som e of the features of a
background so it better
fits your character
or the campaign
setting. To custom ize
a background, you can
replace one feature
with any other one,
choose any two
skills, and choose
a total of two tool
proficiencies or
languages from the
sample backgrounds.
You can either use
the equipment
package from your
background or spend
coin on gear as
described in chapter
5. (If you spend
coin, you can’t also
take the equipment
package suggested
for your class.)
Finally, choose
two personality
and to be honest, looking at that, I think my summary of it was probably a lot more strict than it actually is.

[Tanarii]

Not just that, any background can be customized without permission from the DM to have whatever skills you need.


Heh. You got ninja'd by the counter to this argument.

Background customization is part of the base rules and does not require gm permission. Amy background can give any two skills and any two of [tools or languages].
DMG disagrees and puts background customization in the hands of the DM.

[Tetrasodium]

DMG disagrees and puts background customization in the hands of the DM.

page 126 of the phb talks about "customizing" a background. page 26 of the dmg talks about "creating" backgrounds. They are entirely different things with different rules. The phb on was posted a few posts up in a spoiler, the dmg section on creating them allows much more freedom. dmg264 talks about the dm using backgrounds as proficiencies, but that's a wildly different thing

You don't appear to be citing anything specific in the dmg, & the phb section with page number was already quoted quite a bit before you even posted.... I'm just gonna say that you are probably wrongly interpreting something from memory & expecting to see wording that does not exist somewhere. Till you can start citing anything a tiny bit more specfic than "the DMG", I'll leave it at that.

[mgshamster]

DMG disagrees and puts background customization in the hands of the DM.

Not really. It just gives guidelines for how to create a new background, including a new background feature.

That doesn't invalidate the customization options for backgrounds in the PHB, where it explicitly states that you can mix and match your background feature, proficiencies, and personality stuff.

It doesn't say that it replaces the customization options in the PHB nor that a player shouldn't be allowed to change it up following PHB guidelines.

It's an addition to, not a replacement thereof.

[RickAllison]

DMG disagrees and puts background customization in the hands of the DM.

DMG does not disagree. DMG gives rules on creating backgrounds which I addressed already. The DM gets to create whatever features and use whatever tool proficiencies they want while players are restricted to what is possible among the backgrounds that already exist. But we already have a thread for this. RAW, you are wrong; RAI, you are wrong; you can be fine in houserules, because only you know what will improve the quality of play at your table. I can say without doubt that your statement is wrong in terms of actual rules, I just can't say that your rule isn't better.

Heck, I could believe that your rule improves play because you have to make the skills actually fit the background, but that doesn't make it correct in terms of the general rules for games.

[Coidzor]

10% or more from their individual Perception checks. I don't recall the math to determine how much having proficiency on more characters increases the overall chance of success.

When it comes to Passive Perception, only the character with the highest Wisdom and/or Observant feat needs to have proficiency and then either they take care of it, or it's a challenge above the capabilities of the PCs.

[Vogonjeltz]

Wizards get "Choose two from Arcana, History, Insight, Investigation, Medicine, and Religion" for class skills. Any background with one or both of the skills you choose from there (possibly even the ones you don't depending on reading) lets you choose any other skill in place of that background's skill that you already had. There are a lot of backgrounds with at least one of those six skills.
C u s t o m i z i n g a
B a c k g r o u n d
You might want to tweak
som e of the features of a
background so it better
fits your character
or the campaign
setting. To custom ize
a background, you can
replace one feature
with any other one,
choose any two
skills, and choose
a total of two tool
proficiencies or
languages from the
sample backgrounds.
You can either use
the equipment
package from your
background or spend
coin on gear as
described in chapter
5. (If you spend
coin, you can’t also
take the equipment
package suggested
for your class.)
Finally, choose
two personality
and to be honest, looking at that, I think my summary of it was probably a lot more strict than it actually is.

There are actually only 5 (less than half) that have one of those skills. So still contrary to your claim of "a lot". It also pigeonholes the Wizard into whatever skill is being duplicated.

[TrinculoLives]

One of my players just discovered the Observant feat and thinks that it is the best thing since sliced goblins.

His character notices far more than the rest of the party now, but I think that is partially due to my DMing style. I often, for example, compare the stealth of a sneaking monster to the passive Perception of everyone in the party, rather than only comparing the stealth roll to the PC in the back of the party as they travel through a dungeon, or the ones that are not busy doing something else.

[Deleted]

So every guide out there recommends Perception proficiency for every character ever. And for good reason. But I'm curious if there are really any consequences if one or two players in the group don't take it. For example, say one player, the squishy Wizard, dumped Perception in favor of Acrobatics to avoid being grappled, would that really impact the group's perception chances? Would it make any difference to the game at all?

More and more groups I've played with grant the Perception or Investigation skill for free to each character. Rational being that there is no way you get to level 1 in this world without some decent "what the crap was that!" ability.

[RickAllison]

One of my players just discovered the Observant feat and thinks that it is the best thing since sliced goblins.

His character notices far more than the rest of the party now, but I think that is partially due to my DMing style. I often, for example, compare the stealth of a sneaking monster to the passive Perception of everyone in the party, rather than only comparing the stealth roll to the PC in the back of the party as they travel through a dungeon, or the ones that are not busy doing something else.

Oh gosh, I have a PC with Observant and the shield that includes advantage on Perception, so his passive is at a ridiculous 28 without Expertise. I make it a point to tell the DM exactly when my PC is away from the rest of the party or is occupied so that he can spring any Perception-based surprises then.

[ShikomeKidoMi]

Obviously the unperceptive character will have some problems if they go off on their own or the designated scouts are incapacitated for some reason, but you can still succeed on rolls without proficiency (to a point, made more likely because a fair few Perception checks are opposed, so the DC is variable). And what's the worst that could happen? You stumble into a trap or a surprise ambush? You miss an optional clue or bonus treasure? Not ideal, but probably not the end of the world (I mean, if you get ambushed while alone you're probably hosed, surprise or no). And perhaps whatever other skill you picked makes up for the failed perception check anyway.

When you decide to not take Perception or to dump stat wisdom (or both) that's a good time to take alert. You won't have any more problems wandering off alone than any other character who's foolishly split the party.

[Knaight]

Honestly, I've found the importance of avoiding surprise varies from campaign to campaign.

Some DMs will do a 'one Perception check to rule them all' before making the surprise check, to see if the other side is detected at longer range, either against stealth or against a fixed DC. After which the side that detects the other can attempt an ambush the other. I personally consider this to be doubling up on Perception checks, but a DM can call for whatever checks she likes so it's still RAW to do it. Which I had to be convinced of the first time I saw a post suggesting it was RAW. YMMV. But in this case Perception is only important for one or two characters.

There's also the matter of what sort of encounters show up in a campaign. If a DM heavily favors ambushes, night attacks, enemies doing recon, etc. then Perception is particularly important to avoid getting ambushed, notice enemy scouts and pick them off, pick up on spies in social situations, so on and so forth. If encounters are more likely to be inadvertent meetings that get bloody, it's not worth as much.

[Tanarii]

Not really. It just gives guidelines for how to create a new background, including a new background feature.

That doesn't invalidate the customization options for backgrounds in the PHB, where it explicitly states that you can mix and match your background feature, proficiencies, and personality stuff.

It doesn't say that it replaces the customization options in the PHB nor that a player shouldn't be allowed to change it up following PHB guidelines.

It's an addition to, not a replacement thereof.


DMG does not disagree. DMG gives rules on creating backgrounds which I addressed already. The DM gets to create whatever features and use whatever tool proficiencies they want while players are restricted to what is possible among the backgrounds that already exist. But we already have a thread for this. RAW, you are wrong; RAI, you are wrong; you can be fine in houserules, because only you know what will improve the quality of play at your table. I can say without doubt that your statement is wrong in terms of actual rules, I just can't say that your rule isn't better.there is no significant different between 'customize' and 'create' in this case. The PHB, as interpreted by people on this forum, tells you to pick any two skills, any two tools/languages, and a class feature. The DMG rules are invalid and pointless if the players can customize to anything they want. Ergo, the DMG puts the power to create (ie customize) backgrounds in the hands of the DM.

In terms of the actual rules, the PHB and the DMG contradict each other. So claiming a player can customize backgrounds without DM approval is not correct by RAW. Or more accurately, it is 1/2 of contradictory RAW.

[Tetrasodium]

there is no significant different between 'customize' and 'create' in this case. The PHB, as interpreted by people on this forum, tells you to pick any two skills, any two tools/languages, and a class feature. The DMG rules are invalid and pointless if the players can customize to anything they want. Ergo, the DMG puts the power to create (ie customize) backgrounds in the hands of the DM.

In terms of the actual rules, the PHB and the DMG contradict each other. So claiming a player can customize backgrounds without DM approval is not correct by RAW. Or more accurately, it is 1/2 of contradictory RAW.


I'm kind of noticing a trend... Have you even read the dmg rules you are referencing?.... Since the answer appears obvious & you don't seem to be referencing any specific section to support your claim... here:




CREATING A BACKGROUND
A well-crafted background can help a player create a
character that feels like an exciting addition to your
campaign. It helps define the character's place in the
world, rather than what a character is in terms of game
mechanics.
Instead of focusing on a generic character
background, such as merchant or wanderer, think
about the factions, organizations, and cultures of
your campaign and how they might be leveraged to
create flavorful backgrounds for player characters. For
example, you could create an acolyte of Candlekeep
background that is functionally similar to a sage
background, but which ties a character more closely to a
place and organization in your world.
A character with the acolyte of Candlekeep
background probably has friends among the
Avowed-the monks who maintain the great library
at Candlekeep. The character can enter the library
and consult its lore freely, while others must donate
a rare or valuable tome of knowledge before they are
allowed entry. Candlekeep's enemies are the character's
enemies, and its allies, the character's friends. Acolytes
of Candlekeep are generally regarded as learned sages
and protectors of knowledge. It's possible to envision
many interesting interactions as NPCs discover the
character's background and approach the character in
search of assistance.
To create your own background, follow these steps.
STEP 1. ROOT lT IN YOUR WORLD
To ground a new background in your campaign's
setting, determine what element of your campaign the
background is tied to: a faction. an organization, a trade,
a person, an event, or a location.

STEP 2. SUGGEST P ERSO NA L CHARACTERISTICS
Create tables of suggested characteristics-personality
traits, ideals, bonds, and flaws-that fit the background,
or plunder entries from the tables presented in the
Player's Handbook. Even if your players don't use
the tables, this step helps you paint a picture of the
background's place in your world. The tables need not
be extensive; two or three entries per table are enough.
STEP 3. ASSIGN PROFICIENCIES OR LANGUAGES
Choose two skill proficiencies and two tool proficiencies
for the background. You can replace tool proficiencies
with languages on a one-for-one basis.
STEP 4'. INCLUDE STARTING EQUIPMENT
Make sure your background offers a package of starting
equipment. In addition to a small amount of money that
a character can use to buy adventuring gear, the starting
equipment should include items that a character would
have acquired prior to becoming an adventurer, as well
as one or two items unique to the background.
For example, starting equipment for a character with
the acolyte of Candlekeep background might include a
set of traveler's clothes, a scholar's robe, five candles,
a tinderbox, an empty scroll case engraved with the
symbol of Candlekeep, and a belt pouch containing 10
gp. The scroll case might be a gift given to an acolyte of
Candlekeep who embarks on a life of adventure. At your
discretion, it might also contain a useful map.
STEP 5. SETTLE ON A BACKGROUND FEATURE
Choose an existing background feature or create a new
one, as you prefer. If you choose an existing feature, add
or tweak a few details to make it unique.
For example, the acolyte of Candlekeep background
might have the Researcher feature of the sage (as
presented in the Player's Handbook), with the additional
benefit that the character is allowed to enter Candlekeep
without paying the normal cost.
A background feature should avoid strict game
benefits, such as a bonus to an ability check or an attack
roll. Instead, the feature should open up new options for
roleplaying, exploring, and otherwise interacting with
the world.
For example, the sage's Researcher feature is
designed to send the character on adventures. It doesn't
provide information or an automatic success for a check.
Instead, if a character with the sage background fails
to recall information, he or she instead knows where to
learn it. This might be a pointer to another sage or to a
library long lost within an ancient tomb.
The best background features give characters
a reason to strike out on quests, to make contact
with NPCs, and to develop bonds to the setting
you've devised.



Perhaps you can point out which part of that and this are contradictory:



C u s t o m i z i n g a
B a c k g r o u n d
You might want to tweak
som e of the features of a
background so it better
fits your character
or the campaign
setting. To custom ize
a background, you can
replace one feature
with any other one,
choose any two
skills, and choose
a total of two tool
proficiencies or
languages from the
sample backgrounds.
You can either use
the equipment
package from your
background or spend
coin on gear as
described in chapter
5. (If you spend
coin, you can’t also
take the equipment
package suggested
for your class.)
Finally, choose
two personality

[RickAllison]

there is no significant different between 'customize' and 'create' in this case. The PHB, as interpreted by people on this forum, tells you to pick any two skills, any two tools/languages, and a class feature. The DMG rules are invalid and pointless if the players can customize to anything they want. Ergo, the DMG puts the power to create (ie customize) backgrounds in the hands of the DM.

In terms of the actual rules, the PHB and the DMG contradict each other. So claiming a player can customize backgrounds without DM approval is not correct by RAW. Or more accurately, it is 1/2 of contradictory RAW.

No, there is a significant difference between customize and create. You can only customize using the skills, proficiencies, and features that already exist. Any tool that isn't in the books or the poisoner's kit? You can't customize to get those as no background gets them (barring said tool being an artisan's tool or instrument as those are covered), but the DMG lets a DM create one that does. Any feature that doesn't already exist? Can't take those either. Want a set of thieves' tools to go with your proficiency? Nope, no background's equipment gets them, but the DMG lets a DM create one that does. Want a feature that isn't one of the existing options? You have no ability to create one, but the oh-so-convenient section in the DMG for creating backgrounds lets the DM have the option if he wishes. Oh, and also you are restricted to standard languages for learning like Elvish without the DM giving permission, but I have yet to see a DM who denied them.

It's plain English. The PC gets to have free reign to customize their background according to the existing options, while the DM gets to create new ones. That is why they are in sections about customization and creation, because the words are different. They mean different things. Customization is modifying existing material, while creation is making something that didn't exist before. There is no contradiction. There is no interaction between the two. They are two independent rules that co-exist perfectly by RAW and RAI.

[mgshamster]

there is no significant different between 'customize' and 'create' in this case. The PHB, as interpreted by people on this forum, tells you to pick any two skills, any two tools/languages, and a class feature. The DMG rules are invalid and pointless if the players can customize to anything they want. Ergo, the DMG puts the power to create (ie customize) backgrounds in the hands of the DM.

In terms of the actual rules, the PHB and the DMG contradict each other. So claiming a player can customize backgrounds without DM approval is not correct by RAW. Or more accurately, it is 1/2 of contradictory RAW.

Mix & Match != Create Your Own

PHB describes how to take what is already written in the book and mix it up to customize a background. Explicitly states that you need to talk with your GM if you want to create something new.

DMG describes how to create something new.

[Corsair14]

Any DM can simply say the only backgrounds available are the ones in the book and ones he or she creates or specify specific backgrounds for his or her campaign. DM fiat trumps any rulebook.

[Tetrasodium]

Any DM can simply say the only backgrounds available are the ones in the book and ones he or she creates or specify specific backgrounds for his or her campaign. DM fiat trumps any rulebook.

They can yes; but does it really matter if a pirate barbarian says "I wasn't the one navigating the ship, that was the captain... I was the one who knew which bits of our ill gotten booty was magic & learned arcana from that wizard we captured".... If a sage wizard says "I was never the best with arcana, but my natural skill in acrobatics really helped me escape those pirates".. or a wizard guild merchant saying "I was always great with arcana sure, I needed that given the merchandise I sold; but my knack for perceptively seeing the little details saved my hide more than once when I was able to catch thieves trying to pull one over on me"

[mgshamster]

Any DM can simply say the only backgrounds available are the ones in the book and ones he or she creates or specify specific backgrounds for his or her campaign. DM fiat trumps any rulebook.

True; that's always a given.

But "only the backgrounds in the PHB" still includes customizing the PHB backgrounds by switching a skill around. Since that's part of the backgrounds in the PHB.

Unless a DM specifically states, "You cannot customize these backgrounds," then customizing is an option.

However, this discussion arose because people are arguing that gaining perception via background is rare. Only one background gives it. If we're invalidating the customization rules to make that argument true, then we can just as easily invalidate the rarity argument by claiming a DM can just make up some new backgrounds with perception in it.

Once you add in DM Fiat, then all rules-based arguments go away.

[Tanarii]

Unless a DM specifically states, "You cannot customize these backgrounds," then customizing is an option.DMG disagrees. No matter how much you try to claim otherwise.

[mgshamster]

DMG disagrees. No matter how much you try to claim otherwise.

I'm not sure it does. Can you site a specific line?

[Tanarii]

I'm not sure it does. Can you site a specific line?
There is no "specific line". The section tells the DM how to create Backgrounds. If players can customize backgrounds freely, it's a pointless section. The very fact that it exists is the proof.

[DanyBallon]

DMG disagrees. No matter how much you try to claim otherwise.

How? DM as final say on houserules.

If a DM houserule (which is what mgshamster described in his post) that you can't modify existing backgrounds, then you can't. Same as if a DM says that this will be a goblin campaign and no other races are available for character creation.

Players always have right to disagree with houserules, but if the DM sticks to it, then the only option left for the player is accept or leave. (Btw, you never want to get in such a situation. No fun will come out of it)

[Tanarii]

How? DM as final say on houserules.That is, in fact, exactly my point. The DMG makes customizing backgrounds a houserule, by putting it in the hands of the DM. Contradicting the PHB.

[Strill]

There is no "specific line". The section tells the DM how to create Backgrounds. If players can customize backgrounds freely, it's a pointless section. The very fact that it exists is the proof.

Dude. Reading comprehension. People have quoted the sections in question, and explained multiple times, the difference between the two sections. If you're going to flat-out refuse to listen, and spout bull**** from willfull ignorance, you should just leave.

[mgshamster]

That is, in fact, exactly my point. The DMG makes customizing backgrounds a houserule, by putting it in the hands of the DM. Contradicting the PHB.

Ya know, I can't find the word "custom" or any derivative thereof in the background section of the DMG. It only talks about creating backgrounds. Not customizing them.

Conversely, the PHB talks about customizing backgrounds, and specifically states that if you want to create a background, you have to talk with your DM.

I think you may be unintentionally conflating terms.

[Spellbreaker26]

That is, in fact, exactly my point. The DMG makes customizing backgrounds a houserule, by putting it in the hands of the DM. Contradicting the PHB.

It's not really customizing backgrounds. It's if you have a skill that overlaps from both class and background you can take any other skill. You still have to have both the skills from backgrounds.

[Tanarii]

I think you may be unintentionally conflating terms.
I am not unintentionally conflating them. I am intentionally conflating them, because they effectively mean the same thing in this case. The only place they differ mechanically is in terms of Background Feature. But trying to claim that is significant enough difference to warrant them having completely different purpose is conceptual parsing. The words may be different, but what is actually being done is the same.

[Biggstick]

I am not unintentionally conflating them. I am intentionally conflating them, because they effectively mean the same thing in this case. The only place they differ mechanically is in terms of Background Feature. But trying to claim that is significant enough difference to warrant them having completely different purpose is conceptual parsing. The words may be different, but what is actually being done is the same.

From reading through this thread, every person here seems to agree that the RAI and the RAW of creating your own background is completely legal and doesn't require DM approval.

I remember reading through the previous thread in which this was discussed, and I can't seem to recall more then 1 (or 2) person(s) agreeing with your interpretation on this particular part of the rules.

Adventure League agrees that creating your own background is completely legal.

You don't want to seem to listen to any other interpretation other then your own. I think the people of this thread should probably stop trying to convince you otherwise, because you seem pretty dead set on your view of PC backgrounds despite evidence offered.

[Tanarii]

You don't want to seem to listen to any other interpretation other then your own.Actually, I have changed my original position that customizing backgrounds is not RAW by the PHB. Sure. It is. The DMG just indicates that it's a DM thing. In other words, I am trying to get people that don't want to listen to any other interpretation then their own, in claiming that the PHB is the only thing that matters, and the power is purely in the hands of the players, to see that in fact there is something else somewhere that contradicts this. Then they justify their position by claiming by parsing the difference between 'create' and 'customize'. But since no one else seems to want to listen to any other interpretation other then their own, apparently including me, I'll drop it now and in the future.

Edit: If anyone wants to continue bashing their head against the wall with me on this, feel free to PM me. (I don't like the 'last word' feeling this comment just gave me, so feel free to put in your last words on the issue to me directly. :smallwink: )

[Strill]

Actually, I have changed my original position that customizing backgrounds is not RAW by the PHB. Sure. It is. The DMG just indicates that it's a DM thing. In other words, I am trying to get people that don't want to listen to any other interpretation then their own, in claiming that the PHB is the only thing that matters, and the power is purely in the hands of the players, to see that in fact there is something else somewhere that contradicts this. Then they justify their position by claiming by parsing the difference between 'create' and 'customize'. But since no one else seems to want to listen to any other interpretation other then their own, apparently including me, I'll drop it now and in the future.

Edit: If anyone wants to continue bashing their head against the wall with me on this, feel free to PM me. (I don't like the 'last word' feeling this comment just gave me, so feel free to put in your last words on the issue to me directly. :smallwink: )
The PHB gives rules for mixing and matching background features. The DMG gives rules for creating background features entirely. They're two different things.

The fact that you're so damn lazy that you couldn't be bothered to read the sections when they were quoted to you is shameful.

[mgshamster]

I am not unintentionally conflating them. I am intentionally conflating them, because they effectively mean the same thing in this case. The only place they differ mechanically is in terms of Background Feature. But trying to claim that is significant enough difference to warrant them having completely different purpose is conceptual parsing. The words may be different, but what is actually being done is the same.

I disagree. I think the differences are meaningful enough to have an impactful difference.

One is about switching around some traits that have little-to-no negative impact on the game. The other is about create from while cloth new mechanics to put into the game - mechanics which, if done poorly, can have a significant negative impact on the game.

Remember, the Background Feature isn't a minor thing. It's a significant addition of narrative power to a PC, one that allows them to change the narrative of a story. This is especially important for classes who don't have their own in-built way to change the narrative, like classes without spells.

It's what allows a character to be well rounded when a class may be lacking in one of the pillars of the game.

See my Guide to Designing Background Features (in my signature) for more detailed information on this.

[Tetrasodium]

Actually, I have changed my original position that customizing backgrounds is not RAW by the PHB. Sure. It is. The DMG just indicates that it's a DM thing. In other words, I am trying to get people that don't want to listen to any other interpretation then their own, in claiming that the PHB is the only thing that matters, and the power is purely in the hands of the players, to see that in fact there is something else somewhere that contradicts this. Then they justify their position by claiming by parsing the difference between 'create' and 'customize'. But since no one else seems to want to listen to any other interpretation other then their own, apparently including me, I'll drop it now and in the future.

Edit: If anyone wants to continue bashing their head against the wall with me on this, feel free to PM me. (I don't like the 'last word' feeling this comment just gave me, so feel free to put in your last words on the issue to me directly. :smallwink: )

I think this is the third time I've asked this, which part of the dmg says it's "a DM thing"? Because it's certainly not this one that actually exists in the dmg. Please quote the section or page/section/paragraph number at least. Your desire to avoid admitting that you are entirely wrong by taking it to pm's can go take a leap at a rolling donut.





CREATING A BACKGROUND
A well-crafted background can help a player create a
character that feels like an exciting addition to your
campaign. It helps define the character's place in the
world, rather than what a character is in terms of game
mechanics.
Instead of focusing on a generic character
background, such as merchant or wanderer, think
about the factions, organizations, and cultures of
your campaign and how they might be leveraged to
create flavorful backgrounds for player characters. For
example, you could create an acolyte of Candlekeep
background that is functionally similar to a sage
background, but which ties a character more closely to a
place and organization in your world.
A character with the acolyte of Candlekeep
background probably has friends among the
Avowed-the monks who maintain the great library
at Candlekeep. The character can enter the library
and consult its lore freely, while others must donate
a rare or valuable tome of knowledge before they are
allowed entry. Candlekeep's enemies are the character's
enemies, and its allies, the character's friends. Acolytes
of Candlekeep are generally regarded as learned sages
and protectors of knowledge. It's possible to envision
many interesting interactions as NPCs discover the
character's background and approach the character in
search of assistance.
To create your own background, follow these steps.
STEP 1. ROOT lT IN YOUR WORLD
To ground a new background in your campaign's
setting, determine what element of your campaign the
background is tied to: a faction. an organization, a trade,
a person, an event, or a location.

STEP 2. SUGGEST P ERSO NA L CHARACTERISTICS
Create tables of suggested characteristics-personality
traits, ideals, bonds, and flaws-that fit the background,
or plunder entries from the tables presented in the
Player's Handbook. Even if your players don't use
the tables, this step helps you paint a picture of the
background's place in your world. The tables need not
be extensive; two or three entries per table are enough.
STEP 3. ASSIGN PROFICIENCIES OR LANGUAGES
Choose two skill proficiencies and two tool proficiencies
for the background. You can replace tool proficiencies
with languages on a one-for-one basis.
STEP 4'. INCLUDE STARTING EQUIPMENT
Make sure your background offers a package of starting
equipment. In addition to a small amount of money that
a character can use to buy adventuring gear, the starting
equipment should include items that a character would
have acquired prior to becoming an adventurer, as well
as one or two items unique to the background.
For example, starting equipment for a character with
the acolyte of Candlekeep background might include a
set of traveler's clothes, a scholar's robe, five candles,
a tinderbox, an empty scroll case engraved with the
symbol of Candlekeep, and a belt pouch containing 10
gp. The scroll case might be a gift given to an acolyte of
Candlekeep who embarks on a life of adventure. At your
discretion, it might also contain a useful map.
STEP 5. SETTLE ON A BACKGROUND FEATURE
Choose an existing background feature or create a new
one, as you prefer. If you choose an existing feature, add
or tweak a few details to make it unique.
For example, the acolyte of Candlekeep background
might have the Researcher feature of the sage (as
presented in the Player's Handbook), with the additional
benefit that the character is allowed to enter Candlekeep
without paying the normal cost.
A background feature should avoid strict game
benefits, such as a bonus to an ability check or an attack
roll. Instead, the feature should open up new options for
roleplaying, exploring, and otherwise interacting with
the world.
For example, the sage's Researcher feature is
designed to send the character on adventures. It doesn't
provide information or an automatic success for a check.
Instead, if a character with the sage background fails
to recall information, he or she instead knows where to
learn it. This might be a pointer to another sage or to a
library long lost within an ancient tomb.
The best background features give characters
a reason to strike out on quests, to make contact
with NPCs, and to develop bonds to the setting
you've devised.


and there's nothing that contradicts this



C u s t o m i z i n g a
B a c k g r o u n d
You might want to tweak
som e of the features of a
background so it better
fits your character
or the campaign
setting. To custom ize
a background, you can
replace one feature
with any other one,
choose any two
skills, and choose
a total of two tool
proficiencies or
languages from the
sample backgrounds.
You can either use
the equipment
package from your
background or spend
coin on gear as
described in chapter
5. (If you spend
coin, you can’t also
take the equipment
package suggested
for your class.)
Finally, choose
two personality

[Spellbreaker26]

Tanarii, I'm pretty sure you're wrong on this one. There is a clear differentiation between customising and creating.



The fact that you're so damn lazy that you couldn't be bothered to read the sections when they were quoted to you is shameful.


Your desire to avoid admitting that you are entirely wrong by taking it to pm's can go take a leap at a rolling donut.


C'mon guys, let's be civil.

[mgshamster]

C'mon guys, let's be civil.

I agree. Tanarii isn't some troll. This is just a difference of opinion. We can all get like this sometimes where you're the one fighting against everyone else trying to explain what you believe to be true.

Like when I try to argue the merits of the element monk. :smallsmile:

Regardless of what the rules may or may not say, for Tanarii's games, his argument will be true. For my games, my arguments will be true.

Back on the true topic, regardless of how your PC gets perception, having it or not having it isn't that big if a deal that it's a deal breaker of a group lacks proficiency in perception. It'll just be a small bonus that will increase your chances to see an ambush/trap/whatever by 10-30% depending on the level.

Note: I don't mean to imply that anyone here thinks he's a troll, just that we should remember that we're all people with feelings behind the screen, and we should try to be civil. Most of us like one another here. I had to be reminded of this last week by a moderator. :smallsmile:

[RickAllison]

I agree. Tanarii isn't some troll. This is just a difference of opinion. We can all get like this sometimes where you're the one fighting against everyone else trying to explain what you believe to be true.

Like when I try to argue the merits of the element monk. :smallsmile:

Regardless of what the rules may or may not say, for Tanarii's games, his argument will be true. For my games, my arguments will be true.

Back on the true topic, regardless of how your PC gets perception, having it or not having it isn't that big if a deal that it's a deal breaker of a group lacks proficiency in perception. It'll just be a small bonus that will increase your chances to see an ambush/trap/whatever by 10-30% depending on the level.

Note: I don't mean to imply that anyone here thinks he's a troll, just that we should remember that we're all people with feelings behind the screen, and we should try to be civil. Most of us like one another here. I had to be reminded of this last week by a moderator. :smallsmile:

Indeed. I think it is a testament to the community that true trolls are notoriously hard to get rid of on the forum because they are so rare and the practices that normally help find and get them banned are prohibited so that you can't just accuse legitimate posters of doing so. It is frustrating because you can't just brush them off like in most forums because here everyone is given the benefit of the doubt.

[War_lord]

Please don't go accusing others of posting in bad faith ("trolling"). Aside from being counterproductive, and quite frankly plain rude, it's impossible to prove. It's far more likely that someone legitimately disagrees with the majority position, rather then deliberately taking up an incorrect position for the sake of spiting someone. Everyone here has at some point been on the wrong side of the majority opinion, we all know it's a hard position to be in, there's no need to make it any harder by throwing accusations around.

Now, as for the matter of players "customizing" their Background. By RAW, players can take any existing Class Feature, any two skills. any two tool proficiencies or Languages and any existing Background equipment, call it a Background and technically they don't need to consult the DM for any of it. Would I personally allow that in my game? No, because in my opinion doing that invalidates the whole point of a background as a representation of what a character was doing before they took up murderhoboism, whether or not those skills and connections actually assist with the adventuring lifestyle. If a player legitimately feels that none of the PHB backgrounds, and none of the supplement backgrounds fit their backstory, or even that the one that does is very weak, they could come to me, and we'd work something out.

That's a house rule of mine. I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with a house rule, so long as there's a rational behind it. Some hold that all house rules are inherently wrong, and the PHB is an inerrant document. I disagree, and ultimately I'm not asking anyone who believes that to play at my table.

And on the matter of Perception, it's very important for Rogues, Rangers and Monks, because that's who usually gets called upon to scout ahead. It's a nice skill for anyone else to have, but it's not an "everyone must have this" skill.

[Knaight]

Indeed. I think it is a testament to the community that true trolls are notoriously hard to get rid of on the forum because they are so rare and the practices that normally help find and get them banned are prohibited so that you can't just accuse legitimate posters of doing so. It is frustrating because you can't just brush them off like in most forums because here everyone is given the benefit of the doubt.

I generally brush them off with the ignore function. It works beautifully.

[RickAllison]

I generally brush them off with the ignore function. It works beautifully.

I have a few that I have tried that with, but you run into threads where you simply have to listen to them because the contributions from actual posters are responding to said posts and it is best to establish context. Also that if I don't read the posts, then how will I spot the ones breaking forum rules so I can report them? Reporting is unpleasant, but a necessary evil to make sure the forum remains the idealistic bastion it sort of is.

[rigolgm]

Guides are made by min-maxers trying to eeek every advantage out of a class/race. Not sure why people do that since we are not playing a competitive game. I actually had one of my players bitching about us doing a PF game when I said it only takes like 20 minutes to make character and he complained it took far longer as you have to plan the character out over the long term and so on. Dude, the average campaign only lasts 5-7 levels from start, what long term are you talking about and since when is anyone concerned over who is out damaging who?

Yes perception is a useful skill, but lets face it, in 5e everyone can do everything. The skill set(which I am very vocally against) allows anyone to roll perception whether they are proficient or not, usually its only a minor modifier. Its why I have gotten to the point of making DCs higher for non-proficient characters but I am sure most people don't do that.

So what will a party lose if everyone doesn't take it? Not a whole lot. Someone will take it and there's your scout. Not taking it means the character is simply better at something else maybe that no one else took.

Well said. Agree with all of that. If people start obsessing about Perception checks etc, just DO something to keep things moving.