Blog: Background and Themes a closer look.

[Li Shenron]

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?

My concern would be what appears to be the death of the skill monkey. If you only get a few skills based on your background, then feats with your "theme"...Not sure how I feel about that. I do love playing a good skillmonkey

I think that the number of skill (points) you get will still come from the class.

Maybe the background just adds to your list of class skills (which cover stuff that basically every member of your class normally has), so that every Rogue already get e.g. 8 class skills + 4 background skills, while Fighters might get 2 class skills + 4 background skills. It would make a lot of sense to me!

 

[Steely_Dan]

I hope Skills are completely separated from Class (how many you get, which ones you can choose).

 

[Blackwarder]

I think that the number of skill (points) you get will still come from the class.

Maybe the background just adds to your list of class skills (which cover stuff that basically every member of your class normally has), so that every Rogue already get e.g. 8 class skills + 4 background skills, while Fighters might get 2 class skills + 4 background skills. It would make a lot of sense to me!

I think that the rogue will get several of his iconic skills as default plus whatever background he choose.

I don't think that any other class should get class skills, personally, I like the idea of divorcing skills from classes.

Warder

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I hope the number of skills increase as you level up. In 4e I really don´t like, that you don´t get additional skills later in your career if you don´t multiclass (or spend a feat on skill training) or you are lucky and a paragon path gives you a new skill...

I really could imagine, that background gives you skills at beginning. And your class may add skills at some points later. Maybe a wizard will add arcana at level 1 and more skills every 5 levels. Maybe the fighter will not gain a skill at level 1, but every third level he may add another skill.

 

[Somebloke]

Okay- my own two cents:

* Love the idea. But it will be extremely important to make sure that the various themes gel with the classes. As was raised before, how on earth do you make the Lurker a viable theme for the cleric? Or paladin? Especially when they've both taken 'gladiator' as their background? Especially when you account class, race, background and theme- that's four different variables to consider. I don't really see WOtC managing to check them all for gamebreakers/sub-parity.

* A lot of the themes sound like 'diet coke' class options. Not sure if this is a bad thing or not- it does raise interesting questions about multiclassing. Does my fighter really need to take ranger levels, or can he just ivest in woodsman background and archer theme? For that matter, if ranger and woodsman are both options, what's the ranger's 'hat'? Or the rogue's (thief, lurker)? It would seem that the less broad archetypes (ranger, paladin, etc) can be relatively easily reproduced using themes. Is the overlap deliberate? I'm guessing that actual class abilities will be very specific and somewhat limited.

* Lastly, it would be extremely dissapointing if there wasn't some sort of 'generic' option at higher levels- WOtC talks about specialisation for advanced themes, but what if I want to play a generic, good-at-everything fighter or master-of-all magics wizard? This is a pretty minor issue, but there needs to be a baseline option at all 'tiers' of play for specialisation to deviate from. There's no evidence that this isn't going to be an issue, mind, but I feel it's worth mentioning as a possible.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

You become good at all, if you take all basic themes.

@ ranger: right now I imagine the non magical ranger as a fighter with woodsman background and twf/archer theme.

If you take the ranger class, you maybe have a mix of spell progression as a druid, and some fighter abilities and some favourite enemy and an animal companion.

 

[GX.Sigma]

* Love the idea. But it will be extremely important to make sure that the various themes gel with the classes. As was raised before, how on earth do you make the Lurker a viable theme for the cleric? Or paladin? Especially when they've both taken 'gladiator' as their background? Especially when you account class, race, background and theme- that's four different variables to consider. I don't really see WOtC managing to check them all for gamebreakers/sub-parity.

A "lurker" Cleric is a Cleric who hides and attacks from the shadows. A "lurker" Paladin is a Paladin who hides and attacks from the shadows. I don't see why they have to "gel" beyond that. I think it's a great idea for skills to not be bound to class.

A lot of the themes sound like 'diet coke' class options. Not sure if this is a bad thing or not- it does raise interesting questions about multiclassing. Does my fighter really need to take ranger levels, or can he just ivest in woodsman background and archer theme? For that matter, if ranger and woodsman are both options, what's the ranger's 'hat'? Or the rogue's (thief, lurker)? It would seem that the less broad archetypes (ranger, paladin, etc) can be relatively easily reproduced using themes. Is the overlap deliberate? I'm guessing that actual class abilities will be very specific and somewhat limited.

I kind of agree--it may be difficult to justify the existence of (e.g.) the Ranger if there's a Woodsman background and a Hunter theme. They just have to separate what goes in themes and what goes in classes. It's hard to tell what themes will include (because a feat can literally be anything), but your spell list and combat maneuvers will definitely come from your class. What's the Ranger's mechanical identity? Survival/tracking skills, minor priest magic, favored enemy, slightly exotic martial combatant...? How does that deserve to be a separate class if you can have a Woodsman/Hunter Fighter? If this were a different game, they might experiment with removing these classes and seeing if they can just do it with themes, but I doubt they'll do it in D&D Next because the Ranger class is kind of iconic.

Lastly, it would be extremely dissapointing if there wasn't some sort of 'generic' option at higher levels- WOtC talks about specialisation for advanced themes, but what if I want to play a generic, good-at-everything fighter or master-of-all magics wizard? This is a pretty minor issue, but there needs to be a baseline option at all 'tiers' of play for specialisation to deviate from. There's no evidence that this isn't going to be an issue, mind, but I feel it's worth mentioning as a possible.

They mentioned somewhere that each class will have a suggested background and theme for those who want "just a fighter" or "just a thief." Fighter (Soldier background, Slayer theme), Rogue (Thief background, Lurker theme), etc.

 

[Somebloke]

A "lurker" Cleric is a Cleric who hides and attacks from the shadows. A "lurker" Paladin is a Paladin who hides and attacks from the shadows. I don't see why they have to "gel" beyond that. I think it's a great idea for skills to not be bound to class.

I kind of agree--it may be difficult to justify the existence of (e.g.) the Ranger if there's a Woodsman background and a Hunter theme. They just have to separate what goes in themes and what goes in classes. It's hard to tell what themes will include (because a feat can literally be anything), but your spell list and combat maneuvers will definitely come from your class. What's the Ranger's mechanical identity? Survival/tracking skills, minor priest magic, favored enemy, slightly exotic martial combatant...? How does that deserve to be a separate class if you can have a Woodsman/Hunter Fighter? If this were a different game, they might experiment with removing these classes and seeing if they can just do it with themes, but I doubt they'll do it in D&D Next because the Ranger class is kind of iconic.

They mentioned somewhere that each class will have a suggested background and theme for those who want "just a fighter" or "just a thief." Fighter (Soldier background, Slayer theme), Rogue (Thief background, Lurker theme), etc.

For the first issue, it was more I was concerned that certain class features (i.e. heavy armour) would need to be dropped or ignored by the player in order to make the lurker theme viable. Of course, it's entirely possible that they will find a way to compensate characters for this loss somehow.

As for the third issue- generic themes- I was more concerned with advanced themes, which seemed to be more specific and focussed. But both of these 'issues' are idle speculation on my part.

 

[Andor]

I do see one thing which I think is a mistake.

And, as with backgrounds, a DM might decide he or she doesn’t want to mess with feats and prefers something very old school. If so, the fights might be a touch harder, but you can play the game just fine without them.

The 'all options off' option should NOT be a 0-level baseline from which everything builds, and is therefore strictly weaker than every other way to play. It should have static bonuses that bring it in line with the rest of the modes of play without having situational modifiers.

Heck a simple "If not using themes add 1 to every number on your character sheet" would suffice. But they gotta have something.

Other than that, great article.

 

[Minigiant]

For the first issue, it was more I was concerned that certain class features (i.e. heavy armour) would need to be dropped or ignored by the player in order to make the lurker theme viable. Of course, it's entirely possible that they will find a way to compensate characters for this loss somehow.

I don't know if they will. Themes might be heavily suggestive of playstyle. If your theme is Lurker, your preferred style is to sneak and strike. You ignore your heavy armor and boost DEX for stealth (or use invisibility/fog spells).

A lurker doesn't "need" heavy armor like a Slayer or Guardian does. But if you find so stealth boosting heavy armor later, bonus to you.

As for the third issue- generic themes- I was more concerned with advanced themes, which seemed to be more specific and focussed. But both of these 'issues' are idle speculation on my part.

Well Rob mentioned the ability to take level 1 themes at level 6. So you can grab all the wider 1st level themes rather than the focused high level themes. So rogue (lurker, sharpshooter) instead of rogue(lurker, shadowdancer)?