O.L.D. Careers ("Traditions")

[Morrus]

But what if you want to play a normal soldier, who isn't specifically an archer or a knight? It seems like there's something missing.

That's what the "I expect others will be added as and when" part of my post means.

It's a starter set for playtesters. It's not supposed to cover every butcher, baker, and candlestick maker... at least not yet.

 

[MarkB]

I'm not fond "Wizard's Apprentice" as a name. It does the job, but it's a bit Disney.

"Student of Magic", perhaps? Or is that a little too Harry Potter?

 

[Morrus]

Here's a pair of (first draft; will likely change) military traditions as examples.

 

[Morrus]

And one of those starter traditions.

 

[Derren]

I don't really like progression Watchman->Musketeer.

First, Musketeer is quite specific, no matter if you take the "Hollywood" or the historical musketeer and also I do not really see what those two traditions have in common and why you should progress that way.
I also think that Inquisitor is a bit too specific, requiring a certain church structure and also the progression of sailors becoming pirates as it automatically forces them into a criminal/lawless role.

And the Squire V ability sounds a tad bit strong and too absolute.

 

[Morrus]

and also the progression of sailors becoming pirates as it automatically forces them into a criminal/lawless role.

They aren't progressions - they're just pre-requisites. All it means is that in order to be a pirate you must have a bit of sailing in your background. A sailor doesn't progress to a pirate.

I also think that Inquisitor is a bit too specific, requiring a certain church structure

That's actually a War of the Burning Sky Inquisitor, not a real world historical inquisitor. They're kinda anti-magic clerics.

 

[Derren]

They aren't progressions - they're just pre-requisites. All it means is that in order to be a pirate you must have a bit of sailing in your background. A sailor doesn't progress to a pirate.

That makes more sense. Still even with that I don't feel like Watchman->Musketeer fits.

 

[Morrus]

That makes more sense. Still even with that I don't feel like Watchman->Musketeer fits.

It's pre-reqs are actually Watchman or Man-at-arms (a new one I added earlier). Basically a military tradition of some kind, even if only a brief dip. They're the swashbuckling kind of Musketeers.

 

[Derren]

It's pre-reqs are actually Watchman or Man-at-arms (a new one I added earlier). Basically a military tradition of some kind, even if only a brief dip. They're the swashbuckling kind of Musketeers.

Do muskets even exist in the setting? If not then fencer or simply swashbuckler might fit better than musketeer. And even if you have muskets, the name can still be misleading when someone expects that they are modeled after historical musketeers.

Another thing, the Orphan starter looks out of place. All other starters describe a profession (slave is a bit generic at that though). Orphan on the other hand is a background and in no way tells you what the character actually does.

 

[Morrus]

Do muskets even exist in the setting? If not then fencer or simply swashbuckler might fit better than musketeer.

It's not a setting, but yes, muskets exist in the rules. It would be a pretty dire musketeer if muskets weren't possible.

Another thing, the Orphan starter looks out of place. All other starters describe a profession (slave is a bit generic at that though). Orphan on the other hand is a background and in no way tells you what the character actually does.

Well, it's description does (I've actually renamed it Urchin). It's a mix between a background and a career system.

You probably need to see it in context. I'll try to share some more info next week. Bit focused on the N.E.W. playtest reports this week.