I was also thinking about, for games where you just have a couple of players and want to give their characters a bit of a Renaissance-man feel, just letting each PC have two backgrounds whole cloth. Like a 3e gestalt class without the headache.

Quote from: Imp;775762I was also thinking about, for games where you just have a couple of players and want to give their characters a bit of a Renaissance-man feel, just letting each PC have two backgrounds whole cloth. Like a 3e gestalt class without the headache.

I don't see were that would hurt anything in a game such as that. So big deal that you get a couple extra languages and maybe an extra way to network.

Quote from: Imp;775762I was also thinking about, for games where you just have a couple of players and want to give their characters a bit of a Renaissance-man feel, just letting each PC have two backgrounds whole cloth. Like a 3e gestalt class without the headache.

I would be tempted to go with two backgrounds in general, now that you put the idea in my head.

A player could double up one if they did not need two for their concept.

Interesting.

I can see it - like Local Hero + Outlander = you're the Local Hero of some other place/a foreign peasant.

One option would be 'combine two backgrounds or add an extra two skills and you are more important in whatever background you chose.'

Another thought occurs to me:

I'd rather certain things that often go into racials, like weapon proficiency, be associated with backgrounds. That might make a good option.

Ooo, here's a thought: split off a little of racial bonuses into a 'racial background.' Humans might have some of that, or might just have double backgrounds, thus reflecting their flexibility.

Quote from: Will;775858Another thought occurs to me:

I'd rather certain things that often go into racials, like weapon proficiency, be associated with backgrounds. That might make a good option.

Ooo, here's a thought: split off a little of racial bonuses into a 'racial background.' Humans might have some of that, or might just have double backgrounds, thus reflecting their flexibility.

It did occur to me to do something similar.... bit more extreme perhaps.

Pull all the racial stat modifiers. Have each race have minimum and maximum values for each stat (if you want to be an Elf you must have 13 dex minimum, if you want to be a hobbit you have a maximum of 14 strength etc etc )
then make all races and all human cultures for your setting (such as Barbarian = Celt for example) into backgrounds.

Everyone gets 2 backgrounds a racial/cultural background and an occupation type background.

You are a Roman Legionaire. Get Roman and Soldier backgrounds. You are a Drow Priestess , get Drow and Acolyte backgrounds, you are a Melnibonian Sorcerer King get the Melniboné and Noble backgrounds etc etc etc.

Quote from: Scott Anderson;775681Barbarian should be a hairdo.  And a mustache.

Kind of like an inverse Brazilian?

Quote from: jibbajibba;775904...you are a Melnibonian Sorcerer King get the Melniboné and Noble backgrounds etc etc etc.

Which part includes Sorcerer? Or should that be three backgrounds?

Quote from: jibbajibba;775904It did occur to me to do something similar.... bit more extreme perhaps.

Pull all the racial stat modifiers. Have each race have minimum and maximum values for each stat (if you want to be an Elf you must have 13 dex minimum, if you want to be a hobbit you have a maximum of 14 strength etc etc )
then make all races and all human cultures for your setting (such as Barbarian = Celt for example) into backgrounds.

Everyone gets 2 backgrounds a racial/cultural background and an occupation type background.

You are a Roman Legionaire. Get Roman and Soldier backgrounds. You are a Drow Priestess , get Drow and Acolyte backgrounds, you are a Melnibonian Sorcerer King get the Melniboné and Noble backgrounds etc etc etc.

That's  workable if you prefer 5e's limited feat slots (I think one of 5e's best decisions was given limited feat slots and making them compete directly with ability improvements).

Quote from: Bren;775929Which part includes Sorcerer? Or should that be three backgrounds?

The Sorcerer would be his class.

Quote from: Marleycat;775937That's  workable if you prefer 5e's limited feat slots (I think one of 5e's best decisions was given limited feat slots and making them compete directly with ability improvements).

Workable cos its workable.
Bugger all to do with feat slots.
You could pull feats entirely and this woudl still work.

Effectively the aim is to reduce the number of mechanical levers but keep the num,ber of options.

So currently you have

Race
Class
Subclass
Background
Feats

This would reduce it to

Class
Background
Feats

(I would keep feats as the single mechanical level but you could pull those as well easily enough.)

So you want to play an Elven Paladin

You take the class Warrior
You take the background Elf
You take the background Holy Order (or whatever)

As you level and they become available you take feats which cover some of those paladin like powers

Now you have to actually role play like a paladin rather than being called a paladin and getting a load of boosts in return for roleplaying the guy you were going to roleplay anyway.  
The feat bits you get are the special powers. The paladiny ones would be available to clerics and a range of other classes as determined by the setting.

Now you have sufficient mechnaical variation but you only have 4 classes and the flexibility of backgrounds to cover for race and subclass and the flexibility of feats to provide mechanical tweaks for those that need them.

Less levers, less abuse, lots of flexibility

It also makes for interesting possible half race options, which I've always felt lacking in 3e.

Okay so I'm getting 5e sort of third hand since I don't want to read it myself yet, let alone play. Soon.

Race, class, background, feat?  Is that how it works?  And ability scores take somewhat of a back seat compared to 3e?

That's not bad.

I also love the hack where races are just a background. That's a good way to unify the rules as well as give Men a boost over Demi-men. It feels like something old-fashioned and strong but still a little weird.

It feels like something Traveller or Petal Throne should have. But sticking it into D makes D better.

Hm. Must think on this. Class, background... Class, background

Feats are actually _optional_.

When you gain an ability score every whatever levels (I forget), you can either choose a bonus to an ability score OR a feat.

Also, backgrounds are pretty low-key:
2 skills, social status/connections that relate, maybe some tools.

Although keep in mind most classes only give proficiency in two skills, so backgrounds essentially are 50% of what your skill selection is likely to be (other than rogues and maybe others).

Ability scores are actually pretty important. Arguably MORE important, because other bonuses aren't as large and don't inflate rapidly like they do in 3e.

Quote from: Will;775970Feats are actually _optional_.

When you gain an ability score every whatever levels (I forget), you can either choose a bonus to an ability score OR a feat.

Also, backgrounds are pretty low-key:
2 skills, social status/connections that relate, maybe some tools.

Although keep in mind most classes only give proficiency in two skills, so backgrounds essentially are 50% of what your skill selection is likely to be (other than rogues and maybe others).

Ability scores are actually pretty important. Arguably MORE important, because other bonuses aren't as large and don't inflate rapidly like they do in 3e.

It's 4/8/12/16/19 for feats unless you're a Fighter. And only Bards get more then 2 skills and expertise like Rogues (those classes are your skill monkeys, specifically Thief's  and Lore Bard subclasses).