Excited About Race / Class / Theme

[MortalPlague]

From some of the seminars, it sounds like theme is being elevated in importance, to a point where it could define a character almost as much as class or race. So instead of having a Dwarf Fighter, you'll have a Dwarf Fighter Pubcrawler. Or a Dwarf Fighter Warlord. Perhaps an Elf Wizard Warlord instead? The theme, as many have written, gives a cue as to how the class meshes with the world, which is a very cool notion.

The potential to vary the class experience so wildly makes me pretty excited. How about you?

 

[TwinBahamut]

The Race/Class/Theme system has a lot of potential. That much is certain. That said, I'm still waiting until I can see the exact mechanical implementation and the available Theme choices before I really get excited. To be honest, Class is the one thing that has been handled well so far in D&D. Even Race, with its long history, still exists in a troubled niche where it should be important and interesting, but ultimately it is not terribly interesting and is only important in ways that it shouldn't be. If Theme turns out to be as bad as Race has been in the last few editions, then I'm not exactly going to be thrilled.

Of course, if 5E managed to both improve Race to the point where it would be meaningful and fun (according to my standards), and Theme is equally interesting, then I will be very happy to praise it. I love the idea of "Knight" being something you can add on to any class. I'm curious if they can come up with mechanics to make that kind of theme work well, and other Themes that can match that quality. If they do, then it will add a lot of good stuff to character creation.

 

[KidSnide]

I think this idea is totally awesome.

-KS

 

[Jack7]

I don't know enough about the concept to offer an informed opinion. Can you or someone else who knows some of the details explain how you think the concept will work exactly?

 

[Ahnehnois]

From some of the seminars, it sounds like theme is being elevated in importance, to a point where it could define a character almost as much as class or race. So instead of having a Dwarf Fighter, you'll have a Dwarf Fighter Pubcrawler. Or a Dwarf Fighter Warlord. Perhaps an Elf Wizard Warlord instead? The theme, as many have written, gives a cue as to how the class meshes with the world, which is a very cool notion.

The potential to vary the class experience so wildly makes me pretty excited. How about you?

Warlord the class? Bad idea. Warlord the theme? Good idea.

They haven't said much, but in basic principle the concept of themes sounds like a good one.

 

[Knightfall]

I don't know enough about the concept to offer an informed opinion. Can you or someone else who knows some of the details explain how you think the concept will work exactly?

4E Themes work a lot like 2E kits; however, instead of adding abilities on top of the character, a 4e theme replaces core powers with theme-based powers.

That's a very simple explanation. There is a bit more to the process, if I remember correctly. Hmm, where's my Dark Sun hardcover?

Now, since 5e isn't likely to be power-based (yay!), themes will have to be reworked for the new iteration. Ability scores seem to be the driving design focus for 5e; thus, I have a feeling that themes will interact not only with the features of the basic classes but also with ability score rolls regarding skill checks and perhaps even with feat selection.

I really see them as being a combination of 2e kits with 3e/4e templates but with notable improvements. Imagine if kits had been better integrated into the design of 2e. Themes will not be something tacked on at a later date, the design of themes will be built into the core rules right from the start.

And, it appears the designers are building them to be optional. A theme won't be required for your character if you'd prefer to play just the basic class. And having a theme won't make you more powerful than a character without a theme.

 

[Knightfall]

Warlord the class? Bad idea. Warlord the theme? Good idea.

They haven't said much, but in basic principle the concept of themes sounds like a good one.

We don't know if some of the PHB 1's classes will be actual classes or if some will be turned into themes. I could live with warlord as a theme, but 4e players might not like the class being regulated to theme status.

I think the idea has a lot of merit. What if I want to be a paladin with the inspiring presence of a warlord?

The next question is what else can be reworked into a theme? Can bard be a theme? Or is it too iconic as a class. What about illusionist?

We already know the designers are considering turning other classes that weren't in the PHB 1's into themes. They mentioned it for avenger.

 

[Nivenus]

I'll have to see the idea in action myself to be sure, but at the moment I'll admit that the idea of theme has a third axis of character progression has a lot of appeal to me.

 

[mach1.9pants]

The DnDNext guys have been reading Fantasy Craft and taking some good ideas, I am very happy with this aspect.

Human Thief Fighter? yes please

 

[Knightfall]

Here's an interesting idea.

Perhaps their could be three levels for themes.

Heroic themes that modify your character at lower levels. Paragon Path-style themes that modify your character at midpoint levels. And Epic Destiny-style themes that modify your character at the highest levels.

They wouldn't overlap each other and they would replace basic class features with theme-specific features.

And you could say that basic themes are common, paragon themes are uncommon, and epic themes are rare. That way the DM can say "we're only using the common themes."

Just some thoughts...