Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Texicles" data-source="post: 5944502" data-attributes="member: 6694608">Thanks for that. I hadn't seen that particular blurb. I'm by no means a neo-luddite, but I have +10 resist to social networking. I'm certainly not expecting ALL themes to be limited, but I feel like, in order to strike a balance between mundane and broken, some themes are just going to need some kind of restrictions.Being early playtest, we're VERY much in the dark about character creation and progression. I'm not vehemently opposed to a Fighter getting a couple of spells, but my concerns are in later progression of the theme/background (beyond even familiars), what happens? I guess Li Shenron's post gives me my answer.I guess that, when DMing, I can always place limits on things if I feel they're game-breaking, which has been a long-time tradition that I don't suspect will be dead come 5e. Ultimately, if WotC takes the full on, laissez faire approach and keeps all themes/backgrounds open to everyone, I'm not going to be all foot-stompy about it or take my dice and go home, much like I feel about any other feature I may not be in love with. I like themes and backgrounds, and I hope that they are all interesting enough to be worth taking, but none so powerful that they create balance issues.As a player, of course I'll try to squeeze every ounce of over-powered I can out of my characters, and as a DM, I'll try to mitigate my players' attempts to do the same, and life will go on, regardless of the name on the books.I'm certainly enjoying the discussion though. Everyone has brought compelling points to the table, and I'm not completely sold on the opposing view, but my stance is softening.</blockquote>

Verification