Someone took the effort to list out the differences in the starter set fighter as opposed to the final playtest version.  Interesting.

Mike Mearls has posted on twitter the full character sheet of one of the Starter Set fighters.

So, what has changed from the playtest? Here’s a list…

Proficiency Bonus: In the playtest it went from +1 to +6. In the full game, it starts at +2 (and presumably goes to +6). The change to +3 happens at level 5. (Previously levels 1-2 were +1, levels 3-6 were +2, and levels 7-10 were +3).

Personality Traits, Ideals, Bonds and Flaws: These additional pieces give you guides to role-play your character.

Second Wind: A first-level fighter now regains 1d10+level hit points rather than gaining 1d6+level temporary hit points.

Position of Privilege: The noble trait now allows you to secure an audience with a local noble rather than three followers.

Skills: Investigation replaces Search.

Passive Perception: Once again, Passive Perception is back (10 + Perception skill), replacing the need to make certain rolls.

XP changes: Level gains now occur at 300, 900, 2700 and 6500 XP rather than 250, 950, 2250 and 4750 XP

Tools: Playing cards are a tool, as opposed to “gaming set”.

Proficiencies: The Noble had History, Insight and Persuasion. Insight seems to have dropped off the list, as has Mounts (land) for the Fighter.

Land Speed and Chainmail: Although the Fighter is wearing chain mail, his speed is still 30 feet. It would have been 25 feet in the playtest. (The disadvantage with Stealth checks remains). --Note:  this is because based on the screen shot of the equipment earlier, high STR negates speed penalty for armor

Hmm, Position of Privilege used to be a mechanic that gave you followers, now let's you get an audience with a noble.  I don't like the precedent of the "powers for Roleplaying".  Too much game system fingers on the setting.  

This is exactly the kind of thing WotC always does.  They don't even realize that including this as a power on a base character, what they are saying is the implied assumption of the game is a high medieval nobility with Mallory like courtesy.  It sets the tone and now puts the GM on the defensive because he has to explain the reality of his setting, and he's still going to look like a dick.  I was hoping I could away with not doing a total explode and rebuild on the starter set.  Starting to think I was wrong.

Eh, if your world doesn't have nobles of that style, ban that background from your game. It's no different than banning clerics in a game world with no gods.

That seems to be an overreaction. They seem to be going for the obvious to you and myself but not so when I actually started gaming seriously. I for one bitched on and on for these kind of roleplay aids until 2006 with MtAw. I flat out don't have your years and years of experience yet I'm no newbie.

Fuck your strawmanning bullshit. If you don't like it ban the background or change it back already.

OTOH I don't like the change to Second Wind. Damn backdoor 4e stuff AGAIN!

Quote from: Emperor Norton;759987Eh, if your world doesn't have nobles of that style, ban that background from your game. It's no different than banning clerics in a game world with no gods.

Sigh, Rule Zero.  I realize I can do whatever I wish, but telling a GM "this player gets an audience with any local noble" is not setting the best example for a GM  for a Starter Set, don't you think?  Honestly?

Quote from: Marleycat;759988Fuck your strawmanning bullshit. If you don't like it ban the background or change it back already.

Words have definitions, it helps to know them before use.

Quote from: Marleycat;759988OTOH I don't like the change to Second Wind. Damn backdoor 4e stuff AGAIN!

That's an overreaction, just change it if you don't like it.

See what a completely useless argument that is?

A background by definition is gonna tie into the campaign setting, so... yeah, I think you'd have to adjust them as needed. *shrug*

Having an allowed and banned list of backgrounds for a campaign setting isn't rule 0.

Its not rule 0 when Dark Sun say there are no Clerics. There are just no Clerics. Its a function of the Campaign setting.

Just like I don't expect every race to be in every campaign, I don't expect every background to be in every campaign. It has to fit the roleplaying premise of the campaign world.

Quote from: CRKrueger;759991Words have definitions, it helps to know them before use.

That's an overreaction, just change it if you don't like it.

See what a completely useless argument that is?

No. Given one is background and the other is a RULE (which like said background is easily altered) and in the case of long/short rests the developers already said there is no fixed time. It's up to individual games. As for healing? Seriously? You know that can be altered even without the DMG. And backgrounds are optional and easily changed. Or just not appropriate to the setting you're running.

Quote from: Emperor Norton;759996Having an allowed and banned list of backgrounds for a campaign setting isn't rule 0.

Its not rule 0 when Dark Sun say there are no Clerics. There are just no Clerics. Its a function of the Campaign setting.

Just like I don't expect every race to be in every campaign, I don't expect every background to be in every campaign. It has to fit the roleplaying premise of the campaign world.

Yeah, but this isn't Dark Sun, Planescape or Spelljammer, this is the Starter Set, where we tell Mr. Newbie GM "Any noble in your game must give this character an audience."  Seriously?  We're doing the genre metagame thing right out of the gate? Was that really necessary?

Was "This character is nobility.  NPCs will treat him with the level of respect their culture gives those of noble blood." so fucking hard?

Quote from: Marleycat;759998No. Given one is background and the other is a RULE (which like said background is easily altered) and in the case of long/short rests the developers already said there is no fixed time. It's up to individual games. As for healing? Seriously? You know that can be altered even without the DMG. And backgrounds are optional and easily changed. Or just not appropriate to the setting you're running.

Umm, are you aware you just invalidated your argument?

Quote from: CRKrueger;760000Yeah, but this isn't Dark Sun, Planescape or Spelljammer, this is the Starter Set, where we tell Mr. Newbie GM "Any noble in your game must give this character an audience."  Seriously?  We're doing the genre metagame thing right out of the gate? Was that really necessary?

Was "This character is nobility.  NPCs will treat him with the level of respect their culture gives those of noble blood." so fucking hard?

No but that isn't the point.

Quote from: Marleycat;760005No but that isn't the point.

The point is what, making a criticism you don't agree with is verboten?  That's the point of all these threads, isn't it.

Quote from: CRKrueger;760004Umm, are you aware you just invalidated your argument?

No. Because you're literally complaining about an option. The starter set is including some options (backgrounds, traits, flaws, bonds...) on purpose as handholds for beginners. They flat out said as much already. I don't agree with it but I understand the why of it.

Quote from: Marleycat;760008No. Because you're literally complaining about an option. The starter set is including some options (backgrounds, traits, flaws, bonds...) on purpose as handholds for beginners. They flat out said as much already.

And you're different of course because you're complaining about a rule?  Funny, when I complained about a rule, At-will cantrips, you said the same exact thing, what a surprise.

Your opinion or one you agree with is the only one with any validity ever, got it.  

Can you just sig when you're in the mood to post with your brain turned off, kind of getting sick of wasting my time.