Character Building (from DDXP info)

[Rhenny]

So basically, it sounds like pick a starter option (class). Then pick templates to add on top (race, theme, whatever).

I like it. (not much different than before).

 

[ferratus]

I love my 4e themes. I fell in love with one when I made up a new assassin in 4e and saw the "Seer" theme. Making a gypsy assassin with clairavoyance could have been done with multiclassing, but I didn't want to take levels in wizard simply to represent innate gifts of foresight, or sacrifice his ability to be an effective assassin for flavour text.

Themes seem to offer a lot of options and multiclassing flavour without the crude commitments and compromises which forced you to take on a lot of baggage you simply didn't need to make your character concept work.

I've often said that 4e's powers system was 3e's substitution levels taken to their logical conclusion. This can be seen perhaps as an alternate path they could have gone, or perhaps 4e's multiclass feats taken to their logical conclusion.

I especially like that a lot of flavourful but marginal options can be integrated. In fact a lot of these options can be done better. Devas are reborn as members of any race now, with an angelic soul. Vampires, werebeasts and revenants don't have to be their own race, but a reskinning of any race to represent their monstrous nature. Characters can be nobles or paupers, planetouched or pubcrawlers, warlords or runecarvers and everything in between.

And the true genius of all these themes is that you can still have the rules support for the most popular options, but have a little bit extra. If you want to play a runepriest now, you can also share in all the rules support for clerics or priests. The fact that you use runes adds spice.

Marvelous.

 

[pemerton]

This is, at the same time, interesting and worrying. It's cool because looks like I will be able to create aasimars, durzagons, etc. with just human race and themes.
On the other side, if I can only choose one theme, I won't be able to make an aasimar noble, because I must choose between either one, as both are themes.

Besides the house rule option, I would think that a theme is primarily a bundle of mechanical benefits based on a story element. I don't think a theme is meant to be treated as a prerequisite for a story element.

So I would think that you could be a noble aasimar, while taking just the aasimar theme. But you wouldn't get any mechanical benefits from being a noble. That would merely be part of your story

 

[am181d]

What I'm hoping for is Class Ability Trees or Alternate Class Abilities as in late 3.5 and whatever that thing Pathfinder does that's like that.

Themes sounds sort of like that and sort of not. Will see what develops.

 

[Ed_Laprade]

So basically, it sounds like pick a starter option (class). Then pick templates to add on top (race, theme, whatever).

I like it. (not much different than before).

IIRC it will be Race, Class and Theme.

 

[Incenjucar]

I like where this is going. Quite a bit. Hurrah for the legacy of 4E Dark Sun.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Besides the house rule option, I would think that a theme is primarily a bundle of mechanical benefits based on a story element. I don't think a theme is meant to be treated as a prerequisite for a story element.

So I would think that you could be a noble aasimar, while taking just the aasimar theme. But you wouldn't get any mechanical benefits from being a noble. That would merely be part of your story

A Theme could also be a list of feats, powers, skills that are linked by the theme. So you could be Noble Aasimar if you pick a feat from the Aasimiar list and a feat from the Noble list. That would essentially be a "customized" theme then.