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="Primitive Screwhead" data-source="post: 6437646" data-attributes="member: 20805">Popping in!    Disclaimer, I handed the new character generation rules to my group and expected to hear back from them regarding changes/issues/etc.. so I had not really looked into it as I was working spell paths and monsters.   Now having received feedback from them and looking at the set-up, here are some thoughts: Format:  I like the flow-chart layout and think its useful, allowing players to visually see where the best path is to get to an advanced tradition.  I don't like how the tradition list is laid out. I would prefer to see a tree-style layout based on pre-requisite. Something like:AGI +3 - Burglar - Duelist - SharpshooterLog 3 - Mage  {states Log 4 in the released chapter}Skills: - Any Perform - - Minstrel - Heraldry - - KnightSecrets:- Blood- - necromancer- Good- - Paladinetc..Content:  Maybe this is a play-style difference. My preference is a system that has prefered advancement pathways, where the optimal choices are things like Apprentice -> Mage - > Fire Mage... but the optimal route should be a choice. As the rules stand, if you want to start play as a Fire Mage you have to be either Grand Elf or human, take Apprentice - > Mage II - > Fire Mage. This is caused by the pre-requisites and race attribute boosts. Similarly, if you want to play a Herbologist that discovers adventuring you have to be an Orc -> [page/slave/acolyte] -> Herbalist I -> other classI would prefer lower prereqs {attribute +3} for the base traditions so that you can have non-standard origin stories. This would mean that humans could start with any origin and with any base tradition, while other races would have 'preferred' base traditions, while still being able to break the mold if desired.I also do not like the 'you cannot return to a tradition' rule as it seems out of synch with the fall from grace scenarios and other character concepts. I would prefer that be replaced with a 'you cannot return to a tradition that you left for a specialization/advancement of that tradition'. So going to Pirate means you cannot return to being a Sailor. But you could go off and learn to be a Mage and then go back to your pirating ways {or advance to Corsair}Paladin tradition: Neat! Except: Rank IV. No, no, never, no-way. Part of the Paladin schtick is to fight Evil {with a Big 'E'}, most often represented by undead and/or devil/demon. The Rank IV power says 'nope', you can pretty much ignore an entire swath on non-outsider Evil {Big 'E'} threats so playing a Paladin means your GM has to introduce Demons and Devils. Perhaps something a bit less absolute, like:       Undead, demons, and devils within 30' of you grant advantage to you and your allies {+1d6 to hit} and you and your allies strike with the power of Good {+1d6 Good damage to all attacks}</blockquote>

Verification