Found this over at TPB...http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?731515-PHB-preview-Soldier-background (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?731515-PHB-preview-Soldier-background)....I find it interesting that they seem to be using visuals even for the backgrounds.
Cool preview, nice illustration, ridiculous discussion. lol
It's TBP what do you expect?
Yeah. ;)
Holy fuck there's just no pleasing some people. A pox upon them all.
Way to miss the point by a country mile, Purpleteers.
I have to say, though I'm still a bit skeptical on whether the mechanics do anything better than several other systems I have to hand, I really like the look of 5E and how they're emphasizing character background and personality, more than anything I can think of in the main D&D line since the 2E Complete Handbooks and some promising stuff in the 3.5 Player's Handbook II.
I was wondering if I was the only person who was more interested in reading the words on the page than critiquing the artwork.
Quote from: Bren;770335I was wondering if I was the only person who was more interested in reading the words on the page than critiquing the artwork.
Well to be honest the full write up is already in BASIC so there really isn't anything new beyond the art and layout.
*sigh* Oh, Polaris. You're never not stupid.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;770334I have to say, though I'm still a bit skeptical on whether the mechanics do anything better than several other systems I have to hand, I really like the look of 5E and how they're emphasizing character background and personality, more than anything I can think of in the main D&D line since the 2E Complete Handbooks and some promising stuff in the 3.5 Player's Handbook II.
Well think of it this way. It could have nothing save for whatever you write on the back of your character sheet and the agreement of your referee.
Or you go GURPS and figure out out the exact benefits and complications your character's background has and translate it into a package of adventages, disadvantage, and skills.
You could go Fate and have a less detailed system that still dominates the mechanics.
Or you could do what 5e does and have a little structure, and a handful of benefits and complications.
My opinion if you want to target a really broad audience that 5e approach pretty much hits the sweet spot. There is detail but it obvious how to expand it and how to eliminate it.
Quote from: Marleycat;770337Well to be honest the full write up is already in BASIC so there really isn't anything new beyond the art and layout.
Oh. Guess I'm behind on my reading. :o I like the words though. I think there is something there I can steal.
Quote from: estar;770341My opinion if you want to target a really broad audience that 5e approach pretty much hits the sweet spot. There is detail but it obvious how to expand it and how to eliminate it.
I tend to agree. My concern is twofold:
1. I'm hoping there won't be any traps or breaking points like so much of the community found in 3E;
2.
For me personally, given that I play sporadically and already have numerous variations of D&D in my collection, I'm not 100% convinced that it'll be worth dropping another $100 on the core books. I probably will wind up doing so in the long run, especially if they wind up producing new Ravenloft stuff.
Luckily for you, you can drop $0 on the rules for the basic set (when it's complete), and decide if it's a game you would like to keep playing before dropping a dime.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;770345I probably will wind up doing so in the long run, especially if they wind up producing new Ravenloft stuff.
There is a rumour going around that 5e actually came about because they decided that doing Ravenloft was next to impossible under 4e. If that's true, you have to assume Ravenloft is a decent contender to be coming in the first couple of settings.
Quote from: Bren;770342Oh. Guess I'm behind on my reading. :o I like the words though. I think there is something there I can steal.
Good. Make sure to follow the updates to the PDF they plan to expand it with DMG/MM stuff when the PHB drops next month and probably update it through the end of the year. And it's free.
@Jadrax, I wouldn't be surprised in the least if Ravenloft or Dragonlance isn't on deck fairly quick for a setting book.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;770345I tend to agree. My concern is twofold:
1. I'm hoping there won't be any traps or breaking points like so much of the community found in 3E;
I haven't seen any kewl powerz in the revealed backgrounds. So far they consist of Skill Proficencies, Tool Proficencies, Equipmant, and one or more Feature which appear to all in-game roleplaying benefit as opposed to mechanical benefits.
The question to ask is how badly D&D 5e breaks if a character is proficient in all skills and all items.
That will be the absolute worse the background system could get. Realistically all it does mechanically is add proficiencie.
Quote from: estar;770351I haven't seen any kewl powerz in the revealed backgrounds. So far they consist of Skill Proficencies, Tool Proficencies, Equipmant, and one or more Feature which appear to all in-game roleplaying benefit as opposed to mechanical benefits.
The question to ask is how badly D&D 5e breaks if a character is proficient in all skills and all items.
That will be the absolute worse the background system could get. Realistically all it does mechanically is add proficiencie.
They seem to be very clear as to what they add or do not add and very clear on modification...
QuoteCustomizing a Background
You might want to tweak some of the features of a
background so it better fits your character or the
campaign setting. To customize a background, you
can replace one feature with any other one, choose any
two skills, and choose a total of two tool proficiencies
or languages from the sample backgrounds
You should never see anybody but a bard/rogue have more than 4 skills. It's not like they're so needed like 3e anyway.
Quote from: Marleycat;770352They seem to be very clear as to what they add or do not add and very clear on modification...
And blam, suddenly I have backgrounds for Eberron.
Quote from: Bren;770335I was wondering if I was the only person who was more interested in reading the words on the page than critiquing the artwork.
I critique the artwork because thats my job.
Aside from the face not being quite "Asian" enough and the head possibly a fraction on the small side in scale with the other proportions. Looks ok really.
Quote from: Bren;770335I was wondering if I was the only person who was more interested in reading the words on the page than critiquing the artwork.
I critique the artwork because thats my job.
Aside from the face not being quite "Asian" enough and the head possibly a fraction on the small side in scale with the other proportions - or more aptly, the armour looks oversized on her. Otherwise looks good really.
Quote from: jadrax;770348There is a rumour going around that 5e actually came about because they decided that doing Ravenloft was next to impossible under 4e. If that's true, you have to assume Ravenloft is a decent contender to be coming in the first couple of settings.
Yes, well, I
started that rumor based on a couple things I heard over the past couple of years. :D But the Forbes article from a month or two back did promise new Ravenloft stuff very soon.
Quote from: estar;770351That will be the absolute worse the background system could get. Realistically all it does mechanically is add proficiencie.
I'm sorry, I was unclear; I was referring to the mechanics of the system as a whole, not just the Background section. Backgrounds and Ideals, Traits and Flaws look just fine.
I can see potential for abuse if someone gets the 'bright idea' to start adding save proficiencies to 'special' backgrounds, but that's the kind of thing that you get in any system that isn't rigorously effects-based, and I think WotC is smart enough to avoid it.
Quote from: Sacrosanct;770347Luckily for you, you can drop $0 on the rules for the basic set (when it's complete), and decide if it's a game you would like to keep playing before dropping a dime.
For which I am most grateful. :)
Quote from: Omega;770381I critique the artwork because thats my job.
Aside from the face not being quite "Asian" enough and the head possibly a fraction on the small side in scale with the other proportions - or more aptly, the armour looks oversized on her. Otherwise looks good really.
Something seemed off to me anf thats it. She looks like she looted her armor from a larger person.
Or maybe she ran into a mermaid on a desert isle.
Although for some of us it's going to take more information than Basic to know if we're really going to like the system, but it's at least a ballpark thing.
Quote from: Exploderwizard;770391Something seemed off to me anf thats it. She looks like she looted her armor from a larger person.
Say what you will about anachronism, but Japanese field armor was traditionally oversized.
http://i.imgur.com/TsHlzFo.jpg
At the end of the day, D&D includes everything in the kitchen sink when it comes to real-world influence. Nothing wrong with that.
Yoroi's pretty bulky stuff. It doesn't look unduly so to me. I think people are just used to it fitting closer because of video games and such.
Hermit background preview's up now too, it also has nifty art.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bs2SWr3CcAEn4Gt.jpg:orig)
Women look proportionally different in armor than men. /shrug
Usually when you see them, the only way you can tell the difference is that often they are shorter.
I have to say, I like all of the 5e art I've seen so far. Best art they've had since 2e.
I like that background it would have worked perfectly for Bright Leaf.
Bright Leaf is cool as she is though; but now we have successfully split up the party? Oh noes ... :D
Quote from: dragoner;770414Bright Leaf is cool as she is though; but now we have successfully split up the party? Oh noes ... :D
Bright Feather .:D
We did break rule A though.:)
Quote from: Marleycat;770416Bright Feather .:D
We did break rule A though.:)
The book?
But yeah, now the mongol/goblin/orc horde is going to attack the town. Dang. :(
We'll need Dwarves to escape - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytWz0qVvBZ0
Quote from: Exploderwizard;770391Something seemed off to me anf thats it. She looks like she looted her armor from a larger person.
A "Mulan" sort of approach.
Have to admit, the only thing wrong with the art is the Left Hand of Doom. Other than that, it's good.
Quote from: Warboss Squee;770451Have to admit, the only thing wrong with the art is the Left Hand of Doom. Other than that, it's good.
Noticed that too. Looks allmost unfinished.
While looking at it the proportions are odd in several ways and then is struck me.
What if she is not human? Could be a halfling or dwarf. My vote is halfling.
That adds several twists to the piece all at once.
Quote from: Omega;770461Noticed that too. Looks allmost unfinished.
While looking at it the proportions are odd in several ways and then is struck me.
What if she is not human? Could be a halfling or dwarf. My vote is halfling.
That adds several twists to the piece all at once.
Hm.
If she was I feel like her head would be slightly larger-- assuming the armor is sized for her, anyway. Which I figured it was, because, like I said, yoroi actually do come pretty bulky.
It looks a little bulky but hey, heavy armor! Plus if she's young so what, it's not like no young person ever suited up in their elder's gear to right a wrong, go to war or seek vengeance in fantasy fiction before. It's a staple.
Which is not to say there's anything wrong with critiquing the art. It's ok, but not my favorite 5e piece by a long shot. I dislike the colors more than anything, I think it's the chosen shade of blue that's sticking out.
I didn't care for the dungeonpunk style of 3e, and was pretty divided on most 4e art (although I will cop to a fondness for Wayne Reynolds). I have largely liked 5e's offering so far. And I don't mind character poses, but I like action and adventuring shots where there's a lot of stuff going on in the piece. Needs more of that.
The artwork is weak, uninspired and standard (but 5e isn't alone in that - common issue in fantasy now), but the random charts for roleplaying aspects is a great addition to the game. I'm no fan of 5e, but that is a major positive move - especially for new players or those who haven't thought about PCs as more than builds.
Yeah, the best I can say for the artwork is that it is less putrescent than 3E and 4E. It is fine but safe and out stripped by several recent games — The One Ring, for example. The coolest move would have been for them to jack the art team from Dungeon Crawl Classics, which produced a masterpiece in their core book. But no one with balls that big has worked at WoC in forever.
Good News:
- There is no bad news.
- We got to see some preview art.
- At least WotC isn't rubbing this on anyone's face and trying to shame competitors. Seriously devs of Natural Selection 2. I enjoyed your fully armored women till you started that shit. You lost a customer on that day.
Neutral News:
- Women in full armor? Eh... I been doing that for decades with the vast majority of female npcs. This isn't new and not worth talking about.
Quote from: Snowman0147;770522Good News:
- There is no bad news.
- We got to see some preview art.
- At least WotC isn't rubbing this on anyone's face and trying to shame competitors. Seriously devs of Natural Selection 2. I enjoyed your fully armored women till you started that shit. You lost a customer on that day.
Neutral News:
- Women in full armor? Eh... I been doing that for decades with the vast majority of female npcs. This isn't new and not worth talking about.
It is when it's about the biggest game in the hobby and the only one casual gamers will likely ever play.
Considering many video games do fully armored women as well I would say not really. It won't have a impact. People will play and won't notice it at all. Which is what they should be doing any ways. Women in armor shouldn't draw in attention. It should be treated as a man wearing armor. As in it is normal.