Anyone else tired of game mechanic freebies?

[JoeGKushner]

Well:
We'll eventually get them for all pcs, whether they're in a Dark Sun campaign or not.

In the GenCon podcasts they even mentioned a new supplement by name that will include loads of new themes for everyone. IIRC, it was the 'Player's Handbook: Champions of the Heroic Tier' coming next year.

That was my understanding as well. It seems that WoTC is bound and determined that only game mechanics or crunch will sell new products and that even with a near flat out reset of core power assumptions via the Essentials, that they will continue to 'snake' the system in as many directions as they can.

I'll be very curious to see how/if any considerations are made for Essentials characters versus standard characters when the themes hit with mroe publications.

 

[Herschel]

I have no problem with them. Instead of starting at level 3, you get a theme. The only "issue" I have is from a character development standpoint, I'd rather themes be added later, but mechanically that doesn't work.

 

[Herschel]

As an example, I have no problems in general with backgrounds. +2 to a skill, or an extra class skill, is not a big deal PLUS every character has access to it. Sure, +2 Diplomacy may or may not be more important than +2 Athletics depending on a given campaign, but even then the difference is small. However, allowing your primary ability to determine starting HP is a huge difference compared to a simple +2 to a skill. This can make as much as a 10 point difference in starting HP and makes it easier for a player to min/max as Con is no longer nearly as important (particularly if you already need Str). Granted, every character still has access to this particular background, but it seems clearly superior to others.

I have an issue with people complaining about these backgrounds like they're a bad thing. They aren't really any more powerful, they're options to let you build a viable character.

1. Without them, you make Dwarf/Goliath/etc. even more optimal for melee characters.

2. Without them, far fewer builds for characters are "worth" playing. Assault Swordmage, Brawler Fighter, Tempest Fighter, Thaneborn barbarian, etc. all become much weaker choices compared to their brethren.

3. It makes melee characters rely on more ability mods than non-melee. As some would put it, it makes them M.A.D.

4. It still doesn't make up for fewer surges (which is more HP), it just gives a bit of a HP bump at early levels. Why should non-con melee combatants be the earlier edition wizards of 4E when it means they can't do their job?

5. Classes/builds that use Con still get that nifty background bonus to a skill/whatever non-cons don't get.

They're not that powerful but they give you options. Themes are about the same power-wise but with more flavor attached.

So unless you want a table full of Dwarf/Goliath Fighters/Rageblood Barbarians every time, the backgrounds are a good thing. I'd find that pretty dull myself. Then again there is teh internet "cycle" of new that people come to at different times.

1. New concept introduced.

2. Immediate screams of "it sucks".

3. Some people perceive (often imagined) loopholes to exploit the concept and suddenly the cries change to "it's broken!"

4. They realize it really was not a game-changing monstrosity and move on to the next new item.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled program.

 

[Scribble]

I have no problem with them. Instead of starting at level 3, you get a theme. The only "issue" I have is from a character development standpoint, I'd rather themes be added later, but mechanically that doesn't work.

Well... they kind of are.

I mean yeah you get one thing just for picking it at the start, but he rest of the stuff is swap in and out, and paragon paths and such.


I like them how they are because they do kind of fill in a gap. Like backgrounds are your distant/semi distant past.

Themes are what you are doing right as the curtain opens so to speak.

PPs are what you become when you take up the life of the adventurer. Sometimes this means growing away from what you started as (moving away from your theme) sometimes it means moving up in the ranks (taking more theme powers, or PPs...)

Epic Destinies are how the story ends.


Like Luke Skywalker would be:

Dark Prophecy background or something...

Jedi Knight class

Farmhand theme (Starts the game with like a power like Luvable Innocent or something...) Later he trades one of his Jedi powers for the Womprat Targeting power...)

Last of the Jedi PP

Bringer of Light Epic Destiny (Brings the light side of the force back into sway...)

 

[Riastlin]

Personally, I would disagree that the primary ability to determine HPs is the same as Dwarf/Goliath, or that it without that particular background, those would be the only races and/or only certain builds chosen. My experience has been quite the opposite, but of course, opinions and experiences vary.

To me, the minor action second wind is far more valuable to the dwarf than the +2 Con. Keep in mind that choosing dwarf or goliath for your race will give you +2 HPs and +1 surge whereas the background will likely give you at least +8 HPs and +4 surge while rendering Con pretty much a dump stat. To me, the combination of the automatic 18+class in HPs plus the ability to make Con almost always a dump stat (armor/weap feats not counting) is far more valuable than say a +2 to a skill. But again, that is my opinion and to each their own.

You are right though that there tends to be a general feeling of anything new must be bad. This, quite frankly, is at the heart of the edition wars. Its not so much that one edition is better or worse than another, its just that they are different. Some people like balancing by making wizards extremely fragile at low levels but extremely powerful at high levels. Others prefer to keep things on an evil keel throughout. Neither side is right or wrong though. In the end, the right way to play is the way that gives you and your group the most fun.

 

[knifie_sp00nie]

Is it really power creep? The primary resource in 4e is actions.

It's already been established that the damage and riders of the theme powers are nothing special, especially for an encounter power.

If you have a finite number of actions in a given combat it doesn't matter how many options you have available to spend that action on, you're still only going to let off a limited number.

What's so terrible about someone spamming an at-will power one time fewer?

 

[Theroc]

I'm crazy. I like more options. I don't care if it's powercreep, because monsters can always be made tougher. As long as it's creep for everyone, creep is good.

 

[MrMyth]

To copy my thoughts on the matter from the same thread on a different forum...

For myself, I think Backgrounds and Themes are brilliant mechanics that are a great help to roleplaying.

I think it would have been nice if they were there from the start, yes. But I wouldn't want WotC to avoid them as options simply because they weren't there in the core design. The game evolves and the designers learn they can do more with it. That isn't a bad thing.

Especially since they are basically optional. There is no power imbalance - a DM will choose to allow themes or not. If a DM not running Dark Sun right now wants to use themes, then yes, he'll need to do some work to come up with his own themes or convert the Dark Sun ones. Or wait for the upcoming book that will almost certainly have a more diverse range of them.

If a group has some PCs with Themes and Backgrounds and others without, then yes, that's a problem.

As for Backgrounds, I think the current approach to them is decent - they are a way to flesh out a character and to help fit them into concepts that aren't as easy to build. I do wish the more powerful ones floating around from early on were gone because I think you do have a point there - some players will always veer towards the background which provides a few extra hp, rather than the one that might be more appropriate for them.

Still, the boosts provided by them are small. I don't think they are harming the game by their existence, or breaking the balance of characters in any way. I think it will be nice when we have a rule-set where they are fully codified it as part of it, rather than loosely floating about here and there, but I'd much rather have them exist in scattered places as they are now, rather than not exist at all.

If you don't like them, don't use them. But please, please don't tell WotC that innovation is bad and something to be avoided!

 

[DracoSuave]

If having more options and decision points are inherently bad for the game then by logical extension, having less options and decision points is inherently good for the game.

By that logic, the best game ever would have one stat called 'Stat' that would have a value of 10. You would be granted no at-will powers, and you'd have your choice of a weapon... so long as it was a short sword.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

For me, the idea of themes are redundant. We've already got background feats and paragon classes and epic classes. This is going to be another venue where WoTC is going to start mining words to make up some stupid sounding crap I fear.

Themes don't interfere with paragon or epic classes. (Indeed, in a few cases they build on them in Dark Sun; you need theme X to take paragon class Y.)

I do not even know what a background feat is. I'm intending to just run core 4e (PH1, MM1, DMG1) and Dark Sun. Maybe Essentials Fighter, but I will probably limit what's available from it. (And frankly, probably limit some Dark Sun options too.) If you want to use loads and loads of product though, all these options could break your brain, or your game.

Not surprisingly, it appears that this thread has now branched into a number of sub-topics. I'll try to address each as best I can (in no particular order).

1. Are themes evidence of power creep? -- I can't say for certain since I am not familiar with them, but I think its safe to say that they do add at least a little bit of power to a 1st level character. Take the above mentioned 1[W] + 5 power. In and of itself, not much of a power creep, though still a tad more powerful than a standard at-will.

Power creep, yes, but a theme is an encounter power. +5 damage for an encounter power is not broken at all, given that many core encounter powers give you +1[W] (typically +1d4 to +1d10 or +2d6 damage).