Rule-of-Three: 07/03/2012

PinkRose · Jul 4, 2012

If themes are optional, then why are you trying to make 16 different versions of a fighter?
You can't have everything be optional and then complain that there aren't enough options.
Maybe the fighter has to pick a theme to represent their fighting style and then all other themes are optional.

GX.Sigma · Jul 4, 2012

PinkRose said:
If themes are optional, then why are you trying to make 16 different versions of a fighter?
You can't have everything be optional and then complain that there aren't enough options.

All I'm saying is, if the fighter has a bonus theme, there should be an option for the people who don't want to use themes.

PinkRose · Jul 4, 2012

And what I'm say9ing is Themes or builds or weapon preference are all just themes with different names.
So playing "without themes" would be playing without TWF.

By making them themes, it allows the added bonus of letting a druid or wizard choose TWF as well.

Mustrum_Ridcully · Jul 5, 2012

I am reminded of some thing that came up in 4e "role" discussions. Instead of just having combat roles, we could also have non-combat roles.

Maybe themes could facilitate that.

You get a "combat" theme, that describes something about your fighting or magic style in combat. And a "non-combat" theme.

Of course, for some that amy not be enough, they may split up the non-combat themes in multiple aspects.

Social Themes (how you interact with people, what's your place in society?)
Exploration Themes (Trapfinding, Wilderness Survival, Stealth?)
Lore Themes (What kind of stuff do you know about, how to you gain information?)

Healer could actually be a group of themes:

Social: You're someone that knows how to talk with people and calm them down and endure through pain and suffering. People respect you for your talents in healing.
Exploration: You know how to find useful herbs and animals (survival), and may be able to deal with poisons and injures (survival and trapfinding). Stealth isn't your domain.
Lore: You know about biology and can identify and classify injures. You learn from other teachers and books, but you may also be able to read people.
Combat: You sooth injuries.

But that still raises the question what you do when you play themeless? An extra theme cannot be a good fighter feature if you can choose to not have themes at all. YOu certainly wouldn't want the fighter to be the only one with a theme, a rule you may have purposefully not taken because it complicated things in a way you didn't enjoy?

Ratskinner · Jul 6, 2012

Mustrum_Ridcully said:
I am reminded of some thing that came up in 4e "role" discussions. Instead of just having combat roles, we could also have non-combat roles.

<snippage>

erm...I thought that's what Backgrounds were.

If you drop themes and backgrounds for a more old-school feel, then you're just either a) running a fairly straightforward dungeon crawl and social stuff will be handwaved or b) running it freeform by letting the DM assign bonuses and penalties based on whatever you happen to have written as a character history.

I think.

pemerton · Jul 7, 2012

tuxgeo said:
not all Themes are fighting style. For one example, look at the human cleric of Pelor in the playtest: that character's Theme is "Healer,"

Kamikaze Midget said:
The Playtest Pelor Cleric would like to have some words with you about what Themes might do in D&D5.

KidSnide said:
Ok, we're just disagreeing on the meaning of "combat shtick." I think the Healer theme is an example of a combat shtick. Healing (even between combats) is primarily about combat effectiveness

I strongly agree with KidSnide here. Healer is a combat schtick - it's about undoing the effects of combat. (The fact that it happens after combat goes to questions of pacing and the dynamics of combat play, but not to the overall content of the fiction.)

It might be different if the game had many other mechanics -for infection, injury, sore muscles from long days of marching, etc - in respect of which a healer might have something to do. But I don't see much evidence that this will be the case.

Cadfan · Jul 7, 2012

Mustrum_Ridcully said:
Of course, for some that amy not be enough, they may split up the non-combat themes in multiple aspects.

Social Themes (how you interact with people, what's your place in society?)

Exploration Themes (Trapfinding, Wilderness Survival, Stealth?)

Lore Themes (What kind of stuff do you know about, how to you gain information?)

Healer could actually be a group of themes:

Social: You're someone that knows how to talk with people and calm them down and endure through pain and suffering. People respect you for your talents in healing.

Exploration: You know how to find useful herbs and animals (survival), and may be able to deal with poisons and injures (survival and trapfinding). Stealth isn't your domain.

Lore: You know about biology and can identify and classify injures. You learn from other teachers and books, but you may also be able to read people.

Combat: You sooth injuries.

Careful, someone might notice that this looks an awful lot like a classless roleplaying system. That's when the screaming starts.

ZombieRoboNinja · Jul 7, 2012

PinkRose said:
What if TWF and Sword and board were themes AND the fighter got 2 themes?

Then you aren't giving anything up if you want to be a Sage Fighter or Healer Fighter AND you could be a cleric that takes TWF.

Problem solved?

I'm actually starting to think this might be the way to go, with one caveat: TWF should be a reasonable option without any feats/themes, just like sword and board already is. (Maybe -3/-3?) You'll notice you don't need the Guardian theme to use a sword and shield; it just makes that style more effective.

PinkRose · Jul 7, 2012

Not a bad idea Actually.

Tallifer · Jul 7, 2012

Neonchameleon said:
Two weapon fighting is a historical anomaly - the only major users that come to mind were the rapier-and-dagger wielders (who were at least in part worried about people stepping past the rapier's point) and Musashi who was, I believe, inspired by Portugese rapier and dagger fencers. I hope it's rare rather than the best combat style going (as in 2e) and making it rare means either making it a choice of weapons using one at a time (as happened historically) or giving the character penalties to attack with both weapons at once.

Forsooth. Bring back severe penalties for trying to attack with two weapons at once. It should take several feats to become skilled at such a difficult and obscure combat style.