Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 4232821" data-attributes="member: 710">I am really not sure yet. I like what I see with 4E, but I still sometimes wonder if there shouldn't be _some_ kind of rule for purely background aspects.But if there are such rules, I feel they should never ever force me to decide between a pure &quot;fluff&quot; ability (Basketweaving) and an important ability (Perception). And it just doesn't require the attention to detail of conflict-solving skills. No need to have to shuffle skill points and stuff like that.So, &quot;less is more&quot;, I agree with that. &quot;Nothing is best&quot; might not be true. I find it okay if there was something like a &quot;background keyword&quot; mechanic in 4E. Just describe your background with a few keywords, strung together in a narrative.&quot;I used to work as Blacksmith at my home town. When the war against the Goblins started, I conscripted in the army and became a soldier.&quot;=&gt; Bob McStabby, Fighter 1; [Background: Blacksmith, Soldier]I don't know what Soldier &quot;does&quot; (what's a &quot;soldier&quot; skill that an adventurer or fighter doesn't have?), but if Bob ever gets to talk with Dwarf, he knows a topic they can discuss, and if he ever is forced to repair someone elses armor, he's your go-to-guy. If it really requires further rules, say: +2 to social checks if the skill would help you relate to a guy, and +5 if you need to make a check related to the &quot;job&quot; (that is not covered by another skill).But already thinking about the problems of background jobs and adventuring skills colliding seems a little too much work...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mustrum_Ridcully, post: 4232821, member: 710"] I am really not sure yet. I like what I see with 4E, but I still sometimes wonder if there shouldn't be _some_ kind of rule for purely background aspects. But if there are such rules, I feel they should never ever force me to decide between a pure "fluff" ability (Basketweaving) and an important ability (Perception). And it just doesn't require the attention to detail of conflict-solving skills. No need to have to shuffle skill points and stuff like that. So, "less is more", I agree with that. "Nothing is best" might not be true. I find it okay if there was something like a "background keyword" mechanic in 4E. Just describe your background with a few keywords, strung together in a narrative. "I used to work as [i]Blacksmith[/i] at my home town. When the war against the Goblins started, I conscripted in the army and became a [i]soldier[/i]." => Bob McStabby, Fighter 1; [Background: Blacksmith, Soldier] I don't know what Soldier "does" (what's a "soldier" skill that an adventurer or fighter doesn't have?), but if Bob ever gets to talk with Dwarf, he knows a topic they can discuss, and if he ever is forced to repair someone elses armor, he's your go-to-guy. If it really requires further rules, say: +2 to social checks if the skill would help you relate to a guy, and +5 if you need to make a check related to the "job" (that is not covered by another skill). But already thinking about the problems of background jobs and adventuring skills colliding seems a little too much work... [/QUOTE]

Verification