D&D 5e: Making a Character

For the first time in a long time (almost a decade!), I'm going to be playing as a character in a D&D campaign. For the first time ever, I'll get to play as a character in a 5e campaign.

As one might expect, this definitely gives me a new perspective on the player's side of the table. I thought perhaps sharing the thoughts of a DM-turned-player on the character creation process might be useful to some.

Backgrounds Matter

As a DM, I try to ensure that players' backgrounds fulfill their primary functions: that is, that they are fun to roleplay and that they help build the character into the campaign that I'm running by giving the character some essential, useful connection to the adventure.

As a player, backgrounds seem both overwhelming and weighty. I started by looking into playing a Bard, and thought (perhaps in error!) that the Sage background would be an easy fit. That is, until I started looking at the mechanical benefits awarded based on backgrounds.

All of a sudden, choosing a Sage seemed less useful! If I play a Bard with the Criminal background, I would be proficient with thieves' tools. A Noble's background would give me access to high society. A Hermit's "secret" is supremely tantalizing! And who could pass up being an Entertainer or Charlatan?

Still, I figured I'd press ahead with the Sage and be a Researcher. Now, I'm reconsidering; the Entertainer, while not as useful in terms of game mechanics, sounds a lot more fun to play!

Party Balance

Looking at party balance from a player's perspective, I was happy to see that I didn't feel like I had to play a particular role just because the group didn't have it covered. Part of that might just be because I'm looking to play a Bard who is (at level two, literally) a jack of all trades, but more than that is just that 5e seems to be somewhat forgiving in the realm of "you need X to do Y, and if you don't have X you're done for."

Backgrounds cover a multitude of skill and story deficiencies, allowing even the most combat-oriented fighter to be the party spokesman, or the most uninvolved Rogue to feel connected to the game world. Race attributes and class archetypes contribute their own brand of variety, allowing players to cover a variety of traditional "roles." Even the most straight-forward of classes in our budding party (the Cleric) is going to be played in a less-than-conventional way, taking domains and backgrounds that will individuate the character right from the get go in ways that would simply not have been possible in previous editions.

In the end, my Bard is (loosely) filling the role of party "Wizard," but that doesn't really do it justice. My role in combat will be (primarily) control: I have the best (and maybe only) AoE spells available to our party. However, that doesn't take away from my role as secondary healer. If the Cleric goes down, I'm it! In exploration situations, I plan to take on the role of investigator and trap disarmer, but I am leaving the sneaking and perceiving to our Monk. In social interactions, I hope my character will really shine: a high charisma and loads of proficiencies in various knowledge skills should make my Bard a worthy negotiator, spokesman, and diplomat.

Spells

As expected, choosing spells was the most time consuming aspect of character creation. Clerics (and classes that cast spells like Clerics) can re-choose spells each morning. Wizards, if they choose poorly, can always hope to find spell scrolls with more useful spells. Bards (and those that learn spells like Bards) are bound by their choices. Needing to eke out the greatest possible variety from my few spells-per-day means being very selective about which spells my Bard learns. In the end, as a first level Bard, I chose Sleep (to fulfill my role of "Controller" on the battlefield), Cure Wounds (because I can't justify passing up the strongest healing spell available at first level) Dissonant Whispers (a single target damage spell that is almost exclusive to Bards), and Detect Magic (one utility spell to round out the bunch). Almost as difficult to choose were my two cantrips: Vicious Mockery (again, a Bard-only spell which has the potential to impose disadvantage on an enemy attack roll) and Light (though I'm playing a class with Darkvision, our party has at least one human member).

Race

In days gone by, choosing a race imposed a serious set of benefits and penalties, and you chose a race almost before you chose a class, since the race would determine what classes you'd be suited for. The Player's Handbook still seems to think in these terms: race is chosen before class. I'm not sure that's how most players think; it's certainly not how I think. When I'm thinking of a character, I think about what kind of things I want to be able to do, and then I impose the "who-is-doing-those-things" onto that.

The big difference for me, this time around, was that sub-races seemed to make a much larger difference than I expected they would. I made the decision to play a Dwarf Bard, but choosing between Hill Dwarf and Mountain Dwarf was more difficult than I expected. The benefits offered by both, and the story implications of each, were exciting to consider. I thoroughly enjoy that the new edition uses races to impose benefits rather than penalties. You may miss out on something by choosing one thing over another, but the choice itself is never penalizing. In the end, I chose a Hill Dwarf for my character's race, but I imagine I'll always wonder if I'd have more fun playing a Mountain Dwarf.