Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
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!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
[Ro3 5/15] Traits? lol wut?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tovec" data-source="post: 5916171" data-attributes="member: 95493"><p>Agree with who?</p><p></p><p>Ultimately I never had troubles creating my straightforward (basic) character in 3.5. This have gotten more complicated in PF because of the achetypes but that is a level of complexity I really can just ignore if it doesn't suit me, or adopt if I like it. It isn't like what Ratskinner is suggesting (which I happen to agree with) that there will be 20 options to fill out for a simple and a complex character, just the simple character will have the list already assembled.</p><p></p><p>If anyone wants to know why I dislike this so much, take a look what's happening here: <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/new-horizons-upcoming-edition-d-d/323449-chivalrous-compromise-paladin.html" target="_blank">http://www.enworld.org/forum/new-horizons-upcoming-edition-d-d/323449-chivalrous-compromise-paladin.html</a></p><p>The discussion started with what a paladin could be in 5e and quickly slipped into discussing different backgrounds and themes. I fear that no matter what ALL conversations will have this in 5e. People will come to boards asking for help making a character and people will ask what backgrounds and themes (or from which books) they are allowed to select. It can either be part of the game, which can be cut out, or added to the game to enrich it. Either way people can come up with a system they want. However, one way is more optional.</p><p></p><p>Compare this once again to psionics in 3.5. It was in its own book and had all the mechanics needed to incorporate it into a game. It was beautiful in that way that it was added on, not subtracted, to the base game. If you didn't want the added complication of psionics then you ignored the book. If you DID want them then allow the book and everything is peachy. This is more how I would like to see themes, traits, backgrounds, and to a lesser extent things like alignment and other more classic elements, introduced into 5e. What I am seeing however is that it won't be. It seems to be "pick from these lists" and if you don't like that system then cut it out. That method didn't work for me for 4e's HS/SW mechanics it will likely not work for me in 5e.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tovec, post: 5916171, member: 95493"] Agree with who? Ultimately I never had troubles creating my straightforward (basic) character in 3.5. This have gotten more complicated in PF because of the achetypes but that is a level of complexity I really can just ignore if it doesn't suit me, or adopt if I like it. It isn't like what Ratskinner is suggesting (which I happen to agree with) that there will be 20 options to fill out for a simple and a complex character, just the simple character will have the list already assembled. If anyone wants to know why I dislike this so much, take a look what's happening here: [URL]http://www.enworld.org/forum/new-horizons-upcoming-edition-d-d/323449-chivalrous-compromise-paladin.html[/URL] The discussion started with what a paladin could be in 5e and quickly slipped into discussing different backgrounds and themes. I fear that no matter what ALL conversations will have this in 5e. People will come to boards asking for help making a character and people will ask what backgrounds and themes (or from which books) they are allowed to select. It can either be part of the game, which can be cut out, or added to the game to enrich it. Either way people can come up with a system they want. However, one way is more optional. Compare this once again to psionics in 3.5. It was in its own book and had all the mechanics needed to incorporate it into a game. It was beautiful in that way that it was added on, not subtracted, to the base game. If you didn't want the added complication of psionics then you ignored the book. If you DID want them then allow the book and everything is peachy. This is more how I would like to see themes, traits, backgrounds, and to a lesser extent things like alignment and other more classic elements, introduced into 5e. What I am seeing however is that it won't be. It seems to be "pick from these lists" and if you don't like that system then cut it out. That method didn't work for me for 4e's HS/SW mechanics it will likely not work for me in 5e. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
[Ro3 5/15] Traits? lol wut?
Top