Pathfinder 2E Backgrounds coming to PF2

[Ancalagon]

Hello

So this is pretty interesting:

http://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lks3?Everyone-Has-a-Past

It seems that these background are quite similar to the 5e backgrounds. You get some skills, a partial backstory and some perks. Instead of having a background "perk" you get a feat, but close enough. As I think the 5e backgrounds are fantastic, this is good right? Welll....

There are two things I like *less* about this setup though.

1: The stat boosting. I find this concerning because ... now backgrounds can be a bit power gamy. In 5e your background pic is *really* about what kind of character you want your PC to be. Want a sneaky fighter? Pick urchin or criminal? A poet swordsman? Pick entertainer. A warrior-sage? etc etc. Now with stats increases, considerations like "well, I better take blacksmith so I can boost my strength and con" come in. I think this is a serious mistake.

2: The lore skills seem *very* specific. Pathfinder society lore? wow.

"Player 1: I do an undead lore check to see if I know any weaknesses against the vampire
GM: ahem. You have incorporeal undead lore, it doesn't apply here
Player 2: I have corporeal undead lore, can I do a check?
GM: No, your have animated undead lore, it doesn't apply to intelligent undead"

The more knowledge skills you have, the narrower each is (and thus less useful). I think 5e has too *few* of such skills, but this seems to be the reverse.

 

[Charlaquin]

Hello

So this is pretty interesting:

http://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lks3?Everyone-Has-a-Past

It seems that these background are quite similar to the 5e backgrounds. You get some skills, a partial backstory and some perks. Instead of having a background "perk" you get a feat, but close enough. As I think the 5e backgrounds are fantastic, this is good right? Welll....

There are two things I like *less* about this setup though.

1: The stat boosting. I find this concerning because ... now backgrounds can be a bit power gamy. In 5e your background pic is *really* about what kind of character you want your PC to be. Want a sneaky fighter? Pick urchin or criminal? A poet swordsman? Pick entertainer. A warrior-sage? etc etc. Now with stats increases, considerations like "well, I better take blacksmith so I can boost my strength and con" come in. I think this is a serious mistake.

I’d bet real money that every background gives one free Ability boost, and one choice between two Abilities to boost (possibly one physical and one mental), and that you can’t double them up. If this does turn out to be the case, I don’t see background choice becoming a char op decision. You’ll always be able to get a Boost in your primary abilility no matter what background you pick, and you’ll be able to boost your secondary ability with any background that has either of its two restricted boost options is either your primary or secondary. So, maybe you won’t see quite as many Clerics taking Street Urchin because they can’t boost both Charisma and Wisdom with it, I’m sure there will still be plenty who take it for roleplaying reasons or because they actually wanted a Dex boost anyway.

2: The lore skills seem *very* specific. Pathfinder society lore? wow.

"Player 1: I do an undead lore check to see if I know any weaknesses against the vampire
GM: ahem. You have incorporeal undead lore, it doesn't apply here
Player 2: I have corporeal undead lore, can I do a check?
GM: No, your have animated undead lore, it doesn't apply to intelligent undead"

The more knowledge skills you have, the narrower each is (and thus less useful). I think 5e has too *few* of such skills, but this seems to be the reverse.

My guess is, there won’t be a specific list of Lore skills in the playtest. You’ll be able to decide to take Lore skills as specific or general as you want, and the GM will be advised to go into more specific detail with what you can learn with a more specific Lore skill. For example, maybe the character with a more generalized “Undead Lore” to recognize a vampire and know that sunlight can kill it, where a character with a more specific “Vampire Lore” will know exactly what the vampire’s strengths and weaknesses are and might even know about this specific vampire and what he’s known for, that kind of thing.

5e did this in its playtest too. It didn’t make it to print, and it probably won’t here either. Game designers really seem to like that kind of “anything can be a skill, work with your GM to figure out the extent and limitations of skills you come up with” thing, and the majority players seem to prefer just having a list.

 

[D1Tremere]

The stat boost is due to removing the die rolling method as primary method for character building. Now your choices of race and background will determine your affinities, which is much more organic in my opinion.

 

[TwoSix]

5e did this in its playtest too. It didn’t make it to print, and it probably won’t here either. Game designers really seem to like that kind of “anything can be a skill, work with your GM to figure out the extent and limitations of skills you come up with” thing, and the majority players seem to prefer just having a list.

A lot of people have trouble with 13th Age's background skill system for precisely that reason.

 

[Parmandur]

I am somewhat intrigued by the life path system they are doing in the playtest: much better than point buy or an array, but less interesting than rolling.

I think, if anything, the Backgrounds could do with being somewhat more restrictive.

 

[Ancalagon]

blacksmith is awfully specific btw. What if you were a cobbler? Or a tinker, a cooper, a bowyer, a fletcher, a tanner? Wouldn't "craftman" be a better background?

 

[Charlaquin]

A lot of people have trouble with 13th Age's background skill system for precisely that reason.

Yep. I really like 13th Age’s system, but I get why fixed skill lists are more popular.

 

[Sunseeker]

I already use backgrounds for power-gaming in 5E. This isn't new.

Long story short: If any element of the game grants any mechanical bonus, it will be used power game.

 

[Yaarel]

The stat boost is due to removing the die rolling method as primary method for character building. Now your choices of race and background will determine your affinities, which is much more organic in my opinion.

I strongly prefer building characters this way.

 

[Yaarel]

The lengthy ‘skill list’ is one of those things that makes you think you *cannot* do something because there is an entry for it, and you didnt invest in it.

I would rather the skills be to pick four ‘favorite’ skills, and list these four by one that you are best at first, with the next two almost as good, and a fourth one with a bonus that is also notable. Then these four favorite skills strongly suggest the flavor of the character (athletic! stealthy! empathic! etcetera). Beyond these four favorites, make *all* other skills a decent attempt that relies on level and ability score.

It is easy to pick the four favorite skills − one from ancestry, one from class, and one from background, plus a wildcard of the players choice. The player decides which is the best of the four.

Similarly, a monster stat block lists the top four skills, informing the DM what this monster is about at a glance.