PhoenixPhyre
2019-06-20, 03:12 PM
I'm slowly working through some thoughts involving making the Backgrounds (which I love, by the way) more suited to my particular setting and play style) One thing that came up was social status. Not current status as an adventurer (because that's messy and campaign dependent), but the kind of social status a character had growing up. I don't intent to mechanize this idea--I'm presenting it as a way to help both DMs and players get more out of their characters backgrounds.
---------------
Consider a few different PHB backgrounds.
The Noble obviously spent his formative time in a very different society than the Hermit, the Criminal, or the Folk Hero did. And the other ones all differ in material respects. This should have an effect on the habits, mannerisms, cultural biases, and general attitudes of the character. But I find it doesn't, at least not much. And when it does, it only goes one way.
When a player character is interacting with people of different social standings, the reaction should depend, at least partially, on the relative match (or mismatch) between the cultural expectations of the two characters. Someone who was "literally raised by animals" should get quite different reactions from a high-society matron and a woodsy hermit.
So my idea is to add for information only, a default social status rank (or two) to backgrounds. This would be a numbered label from the following set (names subject to change):
0: Outsider [1]
1: Outcast [1]
2: Commoner
3: Middle-class/Burgher
4: High society
When creating NPCs (or villages, etc), the DM can assign them a general label as well. When the two interact, the NPCs would be more likely to approach/trust/respect/understand a PC with a matching (or near-matching) social rank relative to their own, independent of Charisma. A down-to-earth Folk Hero would have more success asking for information in a rural village than a hoity-toity Noble. In a feudal military encampment, a High Society Noble/Soldier might fit better with the officers than with the common soldiers, while the Commoner Soldier/etc. might do better with the reverse. It's less about having explicit social rank than about understanding at an instinctive level the basic values, habits, mannerisms, etc. of that social class.
Some of this is built into the Background Features, but only sporadically. My intent is to pull that out of the feature and make it a basic part of the background itself. I'd usually give some choice (and a player with an unusual case could ask for a variance but might have to give more explanation), and the choices would depend on the setting[2].
Thoughts?
[1] The difference between ranks 0 and 1 is that an Outcast knows the culture but has been rejected from it or has excluded themselves. An Outlander doesn't even know it at all and so is even more limited/strange.
[2] For example, I have a culture that has no nobility at all--it's run by Guilds. So a Guild Merchant/Artisan would have a much higher standing there than in their neighboring culture, which considers merchants to be decidedly of a lower caste than the nobles. In that first society, guards/soldiers are low-class, while in a 3rd society the military is the high-status group. Etc.
Acolyte: Strongly varying, depending on which god whose shrine they served and the general culture.
Charlatan: Outcast or High Society, depending on how they worked.
Criminal: Outcast generally. Spy would probably be able to be any rank.
Entertainer: Commoner or High Society, but generally Commoner.
Folk Hero: Archetypal Commoner.
Gladiator: Outcast or Commoner, possibly High Society depending on setting (but that would be strange IMO)
Guild Artisan/Guild Merchant: Archetypal Burgher
Hermit: Outcast or Outsider
Noble/Knight: Archetypal High Society.
Outlander: Archetypal Outsider.
Sage: Middle-class. The seriously cloistered type might be an Outsider because they're that clueless.
Sailor: Commoner. Outcast for Pirate variant.
Soldier: Commoner, unless an officer which might get Middle-class or High Society.
Urchin: Commoner or Outcast.
---------------
Consider a few different PHB backgrounds.
The Noble obviously spent his formative time in a very different society than the Hermit, the Criminal, or the Folk Hero did. And the other ones all differ in material respects. This should have an effect on the habits, mannerisms, cultural biases, and general attitudes of the character. But I find it doesn't, at least not much. And when it does, it only goes one way.
When a player character is interacting with people of different social standings, the reaction should depend, at least partially, on the relative match (or mismatch) between the cultural expectations of the two characters. Someone who was "literally raised by animals" should get quite different reactions from a high-society matron and a woodsy hermit.
So my idea is to add for information only, a default social status rank (or two) to backgrounds. This would be a numbered label from the following set (names subject to change):
0: Outsider [1]
1: Outcast [1]
2: Commoner
3: Middle-class/Burgher
4: High society
When creating NPCs (or villages, etc), the DM can assign them a general label as well. When the two interact, the NPCs would be more likely to approach/trust/respect/understand a PC with a matching (or near-matching) social rank relative to their own, independent of Charisma. A down-to-earth Folk Hero would have more success asking for information in a rural village than a hoity-toity Noble. In a feudal military encampment, a High Society Noble/Soldier might fit better with the officers than with the common soldiers, while the Commoner Soldier/etc. might do better with the reverse. It's less about having explicit social rank than about understanding at an instinctive level the basic values, habits, mannerisms, etc. of that social class.
Some of this is built into the Background Features, but only sporadically. My intent is to pull that out of the feature and make it a basic part of the background itself. I'd usually give some choice (and a player with an unusual case could ask for a variance but might have to give more explanation), and the choices would depend on the setting[2].
Thoughts?
[1] The difference between ranks 0 and 1 is that an Outcast knows the culture but has been rejected from it or has excluded themselves. An Outlander doesn't even know it at all and so is even more limited/strange.
[2] For example, I have a culture that has no nobility at all--it's run by Guilds. So a Guild Merchant/Artisan would have a much higher standing there than in their neighboring culture, which considers merchants to be decidedly of a lower caste than the nobles. In that first society, guards/soldiers are low-class, while in a 3rd society the military is the high-status group. Etc.
Acolyte: Strongly varying, depending on which god whose shrine they served and the general culture.
Charlatan: Outcast or High Society, depending on how they worked.
Criminal: Outcast generally. Spy would probably be able to be any rank.
Entertainer: Commoner or High Society, but generally Commoner.
Folk Hero: Archetypal Commoner.
Gladiator: Outcast or Commoner, possibly High Society depending on setting (but that would be strange IMO)
Guild Artisan/Guild Merchant: Archetypal Burgher
Hermit: Outcast or Outsider
Noble/Knight: Archetypal High Society.
Outlander: Archetypal Outsider.
Sage: Middle-class. The seriously cloistered type might be an Outsider because they're that clueless.
Sailor: Commoner. Outcast for Pirate variant.
Soldier: Commoner, unless an officer which might get Middle-class or High Society.
Urchin: Commoner or Outcast.