Characters of War up at Wizards

[pemerton]

"making weapons and armor" has no mechanical benefit over "buying weapons and armor", with the exception that it actually takes longer to make them than to buy them. You still have to be somewhere with a forge, and somewhere that you can buy the raw materials.

That, incidentally, is why the DM should not be stingy about letting PCs just create their own non-magical items in this manner regardless of any background: They gain no real benefit from doing so, except the ability to roleplay. The fact that it's now codified into a mechanic that some characters may not have is just one of the many ill-thought out rules that prevents roleplaying in an article supposedly created to support it.

I don't understand the second paragraph here: nothing in the backgrounds confines the ability to craft to non-magical weapons and armour. It seems to me that the function of the background is to give a character without Arcana or Religion limited access to the Enchant Item ritual, with a slightly different time requirement for crafting.

 

[keterys]

Wrong. The fighter is gaining the same mechanical benefit when +3 to Intimidate is gained from a background as when +3 to Intimidate is gained from a feat because since you can only have one background, it doesn't need a 'type' to prevent it from stacking with another background benefit. Because you can have more than one feat, you need to have a 'feat' limitation on the bonus to keep it from stacking with the benefits of other feats.

I hate to be confrontational, especially since you responded to someone else with this... but you're wrong. You're gaining a +3 that wasn't available before. A +3 that isn't accounted for in skill challenges and that helps you to get closer to the magic numbers for making opponents surrender.

It's a +3 that stacks with anything and it doesn't matter if it's called background or frooflaven, the important part is that it stacks with all available sources.

Which makes it powerful. And is an unnecessary change that is not helpful for the system.

There doesn't need to be the possibility of a character with a +17 Intimidate at level 1 (+4 Cha, +2 race, +3 focus, +3 background, +5 trained). That's not suddenly adding cool roleplaying benefits to your character for having a cool background.

 

[jasonbostwick]

I'm starting a campaign soon with a small number of players (likely 2-3) and have been considering allowing some variation of these backgrounds or the FRPG Regional backgrounds. I want to give the characters opportunities to have a slightly broader skill set so that the small party can deal with more situations, without breaking the math of the system.


Although I doubt any of my players would try and achieve the maxed out +17 Intimidate score suggested, I am a bit leery of the untyped bonuses stretching the limits of the system. Would making all of the bonuses feat bonuses remove the dangers of the stacking?


FWIW, I'm primarily using Stalker0's Obsidian System for my skill challenges, though I might try out a few of DMG style challenges again to mix it up.

 

[Saben]

Although I doubt any of my players would try and achieve the maxed out +17 Intimidate score suggested, I am a bit leery of the untyped bonuses stretching the limits of the system. Would making all of the bonuses feat bonuses remove the dangers of the stacking?

Either a Racial bonus or a Feat bonus works well. If you are still concerned, make them cost a first level feat or have your players write the background and you choose the bonus to associate with their backgrounds.

Of course, the skill rerolls are arguably better than the +3 anyway, and there is no way to stop them from stacking, unless you work a penalty into the reroll "may reroll Nature checks, but with a -2 penalty and must take the second result".

 

[keterys]

Rerolls don't raise the upper limit of possibility, auto succeed at tasks, and they have a built in stacking limitation (more rerolls only help so much)... so they're a little more acceptable.

But, yeah, I'd just call them a feat bonus and move on.

 

[MyISPHatesENWorld]

I hate to be confrontational, especially since you responded to someone else with this... but you're wrong. You're gaining a +3 that wasn't available before. A +3 that isn't accounted for in skill challenges and that helps you to get closer to the magic numbers for making opponents surrender.

I'm not wrong. Look at the conversation within which that response is made. He specifically claimed earlier that +3 to Intimidate from the background rather than taking the feat was too powerful. Then he said that the bonus was more powerful because it stacks with everything else - which the feat bonus does as well. +3 that stacks with anything but itself because you can only select one of it's type = +3 that stacks with anything not of it's own type.

It's a +3 that stacks with anything and it doesn't matter if it's called background or frooflaven, the important part is that it stacks with all available sources.

It doesn't stack with all available sources - it doesn't stack with other backgrounds because you can take only one. Paragon paths, which also grant untyped bonuses stack with everything else, when you're determining the baklance of DCs are you including the possibilty of a bonus from a paragon path being included in calculating skill DCs?

Which makes it powerful. And is an unnecessary change that is not helpful for the system.

It is a change you don't like, that doesn't mean it is any more unnecessary than anything added to the game and certainly doesn't make it not helpful. The benefits of allowing players more diversity in how they can make their character match their concept make is helpful.

There doesn't need to be the possibility of a character with a +17 Intimidate at level 1 (+4 Cha, +2 race, +3 focus, +3 background, +5 trained). That's not suddenly adding cool roleplaying benefits to your character for having a cool background.

But, without a benfit from background, a character with+14 Intimidate (+4 Cha, +2 race, +3 focus, +5 trained) is OK? Then a character with +13 Intimidate (+2 race, +3 focus, +3 background, +5 trained) should also be OK.

If +17 breaks the system, but +14 is OK, fix getting to +17, don't limit how you can get to +14. It isn't an insurmountable problem.

Just making them a feat bonus is a lazy way out.

 

[Bagpuss]

All the skill related ones are definite power creep.

Not one of them is a feat bonus they are all unnamed. Hence will stack with Skill Focus.

This goes against How Feats Work (PHB page 192) that circumstantial bonus are unnamed, but constant ones are feat bonus.

Compare say Sure Climber, or Escape Artist to any of the add skill to class list and gain +3 bonus feats.

+3 isn't a small background thing, if they wanted to make it a small background thing then making it a class skill is enough. The player could then decided if he wanted to be trained in it at 1st level or not.

 

[Bagpuss]

If +17 breaks the system, but +14 is OK, fix getting to +17, don't limit how you can get to +14. It isn't an insurmountable problem.

Just making them a feat bonus is a lazy way out.

It wouldn't be lazy it would be using the existing rules. He's created the problem by breaking those rules in the first place.

 

[James McMurray]

This goes against How Feats Work (PHB page 192) that circumstantial bonus are unnamed, but constant ones are feat bonus.

Why would a section called "how feats work" have any bearing on something that isn't a feat?

 

[keterys]

Why would a section called "how feats work" have any bearing on something that isn't a feat?

Well, that is one reason I wanted to make the bonuses worth a feat in value, so that it _could_ be a feat.

The math for the system is actually fairly good at the moment, but if backgrounds just add, and maybe 'Blessings' add, and 'Adventuring Company' adds, and 'Reputation' adds, and any other random system that someone develops just add, you rapidly break the math.

I also object to things like Wrath of the Gods being untyped too, though. I think I'd be happiest if almost everything in the system was, say, an inherent (race, feat, path, destiny), power (temporary bonuses from activated powers), or item bonus. But maybe I'm just too burnt from 3e and don't want to see 4e follow that path.

Heck I'd be okay if you didn't get skill bonuses from items passively, too. Use occasionally to get one, or only in certain circumstances? Sure. One game has +6 to a skill all the time and the other doesn't, and boy doesn't that completely change your chance at skill challenges and other generic checks? Meh. Ability score differences and feats/race make enough of a baseline difference for me without needing to worry about all that other stuff.

And yeah, I've already heard there will be rules for getting bonuses from adventuring companies, so I'm not exactly exaggerating.