Blog: Background and Themes a closer look.

[Astrosicebear]

Backgrounds and Themes: A Closer Look



Discuss!

 

[Astrosicebear]

Personally, this blog is one of the most exciting pieces on 5E that I have yet encountered. Everything contained therein is gold in my book.

Multiple themes- Check
Pure player choice skill set - check
Customizable themes/advanced themes - check

 

[CasvalRemDeikun]

FINALLY. Something to be excited about! Seriously, most everything revealed in the past month has been a depressing trek of "Slay the Bastard Child that is 4E!". I am really liking how Backgrounds and Themes are shaping up.

Seriously, this one post changed me from a Probable Buy on the Never Buy-Probable Not Buy-Undecided-Probable Buy-Definite Buy spectrum.

 

[CM]

Very interesting. I like the combination of background+theme. The advanced themes gained at 6th level sound more like 4e themes or paragon paths than 3e prestige classes however.

I wonder if people who choose not to take an advanced theme will be on equal footing with those who do? This is one of the criticisms of paragon paths and epic destinies by some: that they were mandatory. I suppose that if you don't find a theme you like, just build one.

 

[Raith5]

FINALLY. Something to be excited about! Seriously, most everything revealed in the past month has been a depressing trek of "Slay the Bastard Child that is 4E!". I am really liking how Backgrounds and Themes are shaping up.

Seriously, this one post changed me from a Probable Buy on the Never Buy-Probable Not Buy-Undecided-Probable Buy-Definite Buy spectrum.

Agree. Wow. I am pretty impressed by this. This is an interesting framework for various forms of customisation. I like the way backgrounds could be used in different ways and class could interact with various - multiple themes. This is also probably the most detailed bits of information released.

 

[am181d]

My only concern is that it does sound like everybody ganged up on the rogue, shived him, and took his stuff.

If there's no one class that's skill-heavy, maybe there's a theme for that?

Really, I just want to play a fat lazy merchant in 5e...

 

[Jack Daniel]

Okay, this is interesting. If themes and backgrounds can be ignored by groups that don't want them, casually left as-is by groups that do, and broken down into their constituent bits'n'pieces by twin*cough*that is, uh, munc*hack*ahem*sorry, I mean, er, "optimizers", well, that's something very good.

It's a true complexity dial, it spans all of the things that D&D should do, and -- most unusually -- that middle point between bare-bones old-school and in-depth customization, that bit where you just take a theme and a background, is something that D&D has never actually done well, because nobody's ever tried to build that into the system. (2e kits come closest, but everyone knows they were a clunky kludge.)

Up until this article, I was still fairly leery. Now I'm starting to think they might be moving in the right direction. Now we'll just have to wait and see what they plan on doing with spells and combat mechanics.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Fills me with lots of cautious optimism. I see lots of promise of good things here, leavened with the twin but relatively minor risks of some serious flaw that weaves throught the implementation or failure of nerve in design that leaves it a bit unfulfilled. (Think skill challenges, version 1.0, for an example of that last one.)

 

[Minigiant]

Okay. So Backgrounds and Themes are close to what I thought. So I probably will be happy.

Although I probably wont play with DM #1 outside if a convention.

 

[Mattachine]

I love the idea that specialty mages grow out of character development: you start by studying as a wizard, and you . . . become a necromancy or illusionist, or whatever.

Also, I like the description of how different DMs might handle these things in a campaign--turning the "dials", if you will.