Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Xamnam" data-source="post: 9469862" data-attributes="member: 7037765">I see two outcomes that make it an actively positive decision, completely divorced from the homogenization of power:<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Mechanically, it takes away a potentially complicated choice at the point most likely to have someone overwhelmed with choice, or unsure of the impact of what they are doing, and let's them get to play in a simpler and more direct fashion.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Narratively, it allows for a player to try out their character, and see what direction actual play is driving the character in / what discoveries they are experiencing, which might readily have an impact on what choice they would make for a Patron. Similarly, it reduces the chance of someone making a choice at level one that they realize they actually regret/doesn't fit the character. (If the cleric in one of my campaigns had been able to wait until level 3 to make their choice, they absolutely would have picked Nature over Life. I've offered them the chance to change, no cost, and they like the idea, but are stressed about having to re-learn their character mechanically.)</li>
</ul>These benefits do stand in conflict with a character who has a strongly defined backstory and inciting characterization based around their subclass choice, and so I totally understand why some people might not like it overall. But, I personally would say it is completely possible to still play out that story exactly the same even if the specific mechanical &quot;choice&quot; and associated powers don't technically come until level 3, and I would argue it's much easier to do that than the reverse, playing a neophyte with an unsure or open backstory but still having to make a definitional choice at the first level.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Xamnam, post: 9469862, member: 7037765"] I see two outcomes that make it an actively positive decision, completely divorced from the homogenization of power: [LIST] [*]Mechanically, it takes away a potentially complicated choice at the point most likely to have someone overwhelmed with choice, or unsure of the impact of what they are doing, and let's them get to play in a simpler and more direct fashion. [*]Narratively, it allows for a player to try out their character, and see what direction actual play is driving the character in / what discoveries they are experiencing, which might readily have an impact on what choice they would make for a Patron. Similarly, it reduces the chance of someone making a choice at level one that they realize they actually regret/doesn't fit the character. (If the cleric in one of my campaigns had been able to wait until level 3 to make their choice, they absolutely would have picked Nature over Life. I've offered them the chance to change, no cost, and they like the idea, but are stressed about having to re-learn their character mechanically.) [/LIST] These benefits do stand in conflict with a character who has a strongly defined backstory and inciting characterization based around their subclass choice, and so I totally understand why some people might not like it overall. But, I personally would say it is completely possible to still play out that story exactly the same even if the specific mechanical "choice" and associated powers don't technically come until level 3, and I would argue it's much easier to do that than the reverse, playing a neophyte with an unsure or open backstory but still having to make a definitional choice at the first level. [/QUOTE]

Verification