Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Bacon Bits" data-source="post: 9434393" data-attributes="member: 6777737">I remember the discussion or feedback being &quot;more significant backgrounds are fine&quot; or &quot;backgrounds with actual feats are fine.&quot; I don't remember them having ASIs tied to backgrounds at any point in the playtest. (But I admit I don't recall anything after 6.)I just don't understand why they don't just associate ASI with the character class. Like what upsidedown thought process are they going through where they imagine that the most important character choices are made at level 1, and background has a significant effect on your attributes, but your class doesn't do anything at all? Like surely a Fighter or Wizard must have done something to have acquired those proficiencies and abilities. Why would background affect ASIs and not class?Do they think making a Soldier-Wizard have to choose Dex and Con and get stuck with Savage Attacker (I think?) is some deeply interesting choice? Why? The narrative is cool, but the mechanics are entirely awful. People just aren't going to do that because they don't want to be a level 1 Wizard with 15 Int. No, every Wizard is going to take whichever background has Int, and probably whichever background has Int and Con or Dex. The only way that doesn't happen is if War Caster is somehow an origin feat.Like even if it was, &quot;pick one attribute from your Class and one different attribute from your background. One of those attributes gets +2, the other gets +1.&quot;I would rather they eliminate level 1 ASIs entirely than continue to have them tied to species or background. Like if it's &quot;too powerful&quot; to always make the best choice, then isn't it just... allowing several too powerful choices?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Bacon Bits, post: 9434393, member: 6777737"] I remember the discussion or feedback being "more significant backgrounds are fine" or "backgrounds with actual feats are fine." I don't remember them having ASIs tied to backgrounds at any point in the playtest. (But I admit I don't recall anything after 6.) I just don't understand why they don't just associate ASI with the character [B]class[/B]. Like what upsidedown thought process are they going through where they imagine that the most important character choices are made at level 1, and background has a significant effect on your attributes, but your class doesn't do anything at all? Like surely a Fighter or Wizard must have [I]done something [/I]to have acquired those proficiencies and abilities. Why would background affect ASIs and not class? Do they think making a Soldier-Wizard have to choose Dex and Con and get stuck with Savage Attacker (I think?) is some deeply interesting choice? Why? The narrative is cool, but the mechanics are [I]entirely awful[/I]. People just aren't going to do that because they don't want to be a level 1 Wizard with 15 Int. No, every Wizard is going to take whichever background has Int, and probably whichever background has Int and Con or Dex. The only way that doesn't happen is if War Caster is somehow an origin feat. Like even if it was, "pick one attribute from your Class and one different attribute from your background. One of those attributes gets +2, the other gets +1." I would rather they [I]eliminate level 1 ASIs entirely [/I]than continue to have them tied to species or background. Like if it's "too powerful" to always make the best choice, then isn't it just... allowing several too powerful choices? [/QUOTE]

Verification