"Themes"

[Cerebral Paladin]

I think one useful way to think about themes is in terms of literary (etc.) works with a bunch of characters who would have the same class, but who feel different anyway. So, if you think about The Three Musketeers, all four of the Musketeers would be fighters. But Aramis has either some sort of religious theme or a Don Juan theme, Athos would be either a noble theme or an "old grump" theme, D'Artagnan would have some sort of young gallant theme, and so forth. They're all fighters, but a different mix of additional details. Or Morrus's example of different pirate themed characters. In terms of the samurai example, that actually makes perfect sense to me: you can have the samurai fighter (the iconic "samurai"), you can have a samurai priest (samurai social class and background but became a priest), you can have the samurai rogue (the sort of political samurai who wants to manipulate his enemies and stab them in the back rather than honorably facing them in battle), and so forth. Sure, some combos will be oxymoronic, but those offer interesting quirkiness--a scholar fighter? That sorta defines an unusual character right there. And since you're choosing them, if you don't want to play a scholar fighter or a knight wizard, you don't have to.

 

[Erik le Rouge]

A theme is a flavor. Its mainly for background purposes or style. You can have 1 theme either for your race or your class. As an example your elf might be a ranger who comes from a royal family (noble theme).

It is basically background fluff with a skill or two and a language.

 

[Morrus]

So how would that work mechanically? Take a racial template, a class template, a theme template, with all the attendant feats, skills, etc., mix them all together and that's your character? Would there still be room for individual choice, or would we be back in 4e-land?

I'll tell you as soon as WotC tells me!

 

[bert1000]

It is a bit muddled, because class is muddled.

I think it works best when Themes represent an affiliation to an in-game group or 'profession', often an affiliation that is class independent (although doesn't always have to be). Class then represents an archetype but has no in-game affiliation. No one identifies themselves as a "Fighter" in game, there are no "Fighter Guilds" etc. Class names are meant to represent very wide concepts represented by their particular mechanics. (note that this description isn't always true in D&D but I am trying to illustrate how it makes the most sense to have class and theme together)

Themes in 4e provide small mechanical thematic benefits and sometimes the opportunity to swap out your class abilities for further theme abilities if you really want to emphasize that aspect of your character (but class still dominates). I liked the 4E Dark Sun implementation of themes because you could chose to emphasis more of your theme and to have it matter up to high levels if you wanted to (or not).

So some examples --

Noble. Should there be a separate noble class or should you have Fighters, Mages, etc. that are also nobles? Unless you are playing in some kind of system (Game of Thrones) where Noble should have some district and defining abilities, then probably this shouldn't be a class in itself. So, you either just have it be roleplaying background or you could have a Noble Theme that gives you background fluff but also some mechanical benefits to any class that takes it.

Bountyhunter. This is a profession that could have meaning within the game world. Are bounty hunters so distinct they need their own class mechanics? Why wouldn't some fighters, mages, thiefs, etc. be bounty hunters? Better to make it a theme.

Veiled Alliance member (Dark Sun). This is an organization in Dark Sun that storywise mentions having members of all classes. If you want some mechanics behind it, themes work well.

I think themes are a nice way to tie characters to the campaign world and give some mechanical differentiation to go along with the flavor. If you don't want that mechanical differentiation then yes, you can just note "noble" on your character sheet and go with it.

Note: Themes in 4E were also available from level 1 which further differentiates them from prestige classes/paragon paths, which take some of the same role as themes but usually require higher levels to enter.

 

[jsaving]

I'd actually describe themes as a halfway-house of sorts between 2e's kits and 3e's regional feats. Most themes give you a bit of flavor, a few minor mechanical benefits, and a couple of optional powers that you can take in lieu of class powers as you level. For example, a Red Wizard theme might give you modest necromancy bonuses and add chill/ghoul touch to your "class power list" while stipulating that you'll be treated as a Red Wizard (for good or ill) as you make your way through your campaign. They don't generally swap out class features for something else, as a kit would do, but they're definitely more expansive than a regional feat would be.

As an optional add-on that provides some richness and depth without (at least in theory) being overpowered, one can see why the general notion of themes might be attractive to the 5e team. But we really don't have any idea at this point of what themes will look like in 5e, or how mechanically important they might turn out to be.

 

[Klaus]

Depends on the theme. I agree with you that some make poor matches. Others work though - a pirate crew comprising fantasy classes (the Druid controls the wind, the wizard blasts ships with fireballs, the rogue climbs the rigging, etc).

You just described "Pirates of Dark Water"

Back to the OP:

In 2e, you had the Peasant Hero kit in several splatbooks, so you could have a Peasant Fighter, Peasant Thief, Peasant Wizard, etc. Themes are like this, they tell of your background and life story beyond the elements of class.

Take the Gladiator theme from Dark Sun. Any class can end up in the arenas of Athas, from fighters to warlords or psions. Instead of making a single "Gladiator" class, which would make all gladiators the same, the theme allows a variety to the characters while still giving them an added layer of shared experiences and capabilities.

 

[IanB]

My hope is that with themes integrated from the beginning, the features you get from them won't displace class features. I like the idea of 4e themes, but having to take powers in place of class powers always made them feel like they were diluting the character's identity rather than sharpening it.

 

[tecnowraith]

It has been that themes are as followed:

• Themes cover potion-makers and blacksmiths. Like kits from 2E. You can i
• mprove in that theme with feats etc. Or you can use skills and feats to customize your own theme.
• Themes such as commoner, noble, knight, apprentice. Also planetouched, deva, avenger. There is one called "pub crawler". So you can have an avenger themed paladin.
• Themes tie into open-ended skill system - skills for specific themes.

Skills & Ability Scores: EN World: Your Daily RPG Magazine: Your Daily RPG Magazine

Also if my memory is correct, Themes will be an addition to classes like adding 1 or 3 things that will make your you character unique.

 

[howandwhy99]

Maybe it's an addition to the character creation game as mechanical incentives to create a background. I think they are basically pre-designed backgrounds one could pick rather than create.

Depending upon how Races are defined, these could be mechanically indistinguishable.

 

[Henry]

The thing I liked about 4e themes is that th
ey gave you a number of special abilities that were appropriate for your level to swap out with your normal abilities, to give your Pc a slightly different feel from any other character of your same class - if you ever played pathfinder it's like archetypes but without having to switch the whole suite. It was different from multiclassing a la 3e style in that the abilities are level-appropriate, and don't dilute your character's power too much in exchange for versatility. 4e multiclassing worked similarly, and I tend to like it better than the way 3.x handles multiclassing. To me, in 3e, being a partial spellcaster was much worse that being a partial melee multiclass, and its a bug that should be addressed in a way that still allows you to explore a character concept without being penalized compared to someone else doing the same thing.