I agree that some things are subjective, but this one isn't.
- If lets say if people choose to take a background (instead of put one together), then its better if the backgrounds are before classes.
- If you rather put together a background then it might not be better to place it before classes. But at that point it doesn't matte where it is in the book, since its all up to the player.
No, that's still subjective.
Classes give you a choice from a limited pool. Backgrounds give you free choice with suggestions. If you picked background first, you might find the skill choices overlap badly, and end up backtracking to backgrounds to pick something else.
Does that make this layout better? Well, it's arguable. You can tell, because there's an argument about it ;-)
Lol, optional. I think just about everyone will take one feat atleast. Even then since its a character option, it should be much closer to classes and races, instead of after equipment (i find this to be objective).
In your game, perhaps.
There have been several people on these forums who have said they wouldn't use feats, and there will be a lot of people who play only the Basic Rules, then pick up the PHB later. They might not go for feats immediately or at all.
The thing is, in both of the points above I can see your point - I'm just arguing that it's all subjective and there are valid reasons for the way things have been laid out, even if you (or perhaps we) don't agree with them.
So basically I am being pedantic.
Sorry about that.
Yea, I know. I don't like it tho.
Aye. I guess I don't really care about settings, since I don't use any of the published ones. Well, except for Planescape, and that's just in the background of a load of campaigns that take place on the Prime Material, in case I need to know what sort of strange stuff is out there.
I just thought about it it, and...why can't we customize how our character looks? ... I mean duh....
Well, we can. Although I'd love to have a decent copy of the old 2e stuff. If you just change the appearance of the Tiefling, it really looks like it'll work well.
Oh yea, its there... my bad. But then there is no point in having it in the class table.
I think when multi-classing, proficiency bonus continues to rise, "proficiency bonus is based on character level". (I might be wrong).
Thus I think it should just be written in one table.
Because for most people (who don't multiclass), having everything in one table is easier and freindlier. And for those who do multiclass, they know they're taking a more complex option and are referred to the character-level table. But really, since everyone has the same proficiency progression and everyone has the same spell slot progression, they can actually use
any class for their proficiency (they just look at total character level) and any full caster class for their spell slots (they just look at their actual spellcaster class level). Which makes finding the information a bit easier, once you're used to it.
But mostly, I think, so that the default situation - single classing - has everything they need for their class in one table.