|
I would have no problem with providing the 36 backgrounds as examples of how to build appropriate ones. My problem is with them being a finite list of choices.
But that question of mine has been quoted twice without the context. Here that is:
Some of the restrictions on retraining make little sense from a character's point of view. But they are consistent with the non-chronological take on Multiclass for example. In PF2 you are building a character you play, so basically a statblock. You are not creating a story.
I very much think that the Pathfinder Design Team would say that the character creation process in PF2E is about more than just creating a statblock, and I don't think they would have spent time writing the text of the backgrounds that they included if they didn't feel like the character's story was important.
I think that the thought behind including more story/backstory building into the character creation process was a good one. I just really, really wish that they had done so in a way that didn't limit things so much.
It certainly made sense to those who created these characters.
And now I am wondering about a CG Oracle of Battle who would worship Gorum. Because they would both worship Gorum AND get power from him.
But CG Cleric of Gorum is forbidden now.
But that is it, it doesn't make sense to his edicts, what he stands for and requires from his devotees.
A CG cleric of Gorum, battle cleric or not is not LG if they uphold the values of Gorum.
Keeping in mind that alignment has nothing to do with what the character thinks of themselves, but rather what they do.
A good character, chaotic or not will not actively get in the way of diplomatic talks or start conflict because they believe conflict is the primary goal.
They would worship another god or just be a martial who worships that god but doesn't gain power from Gorum.
Anyway, I will stop talking about that here as this is a backgrounds discussion and deities are a tangent I shouldn't have continued down.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I quite like the 2e backgrounds system as well, it's fun and flavorful.
I think that the thought behind including more story/backstory building into the character creation process was a good one. I just really, really wish that they had done so in a way that didn't limit things so much.
Interestingly, everytime you or others pine for a freeform background system, I keep having the reaction of "Why have backgrounds at all then?" Just roll the whole thing into the Class stage of character creation, skipping the lore skill, but allowing all 1st level characters to have an additional skill feat, skill rank, and a total of three boosts (one of which must be to your primary stat).
THis isn't really a criticism of your points, or an attempt to refute them. I just thought it was interesting I had the same reaction as you, in almost the same wording in fact, but from a completely different context.
|
|
I think that the thought behind including more story/backstory building into the character creation process was a good one. I just really, really wish that they had done so in a way that didn't limit things so much.Interestingly, everytime you or others pine for a freeform background system, I keep having the reaction of "Why have backgrounds at all then?" Just roll the whole thing into the Class stage of character creation, skipping the lore skill, but allowing all 1st level characters to have an additional skill feat, skill rank, and a total of three boosts (one of which must be to your primary stat).
THis isn't really a criticism of your points, or an attempt to refute them. I just thought it was interesting I had the same reaction as you, in almost the same wording in fact, but from a completely different context.
For (most of) the reasons that Michael laid out in his post upthread. So that the developers can create backgrounds to swap in for that set of items and use a simpler term to say replace your Background with whatever. And because people should at least be encouraged to come up with a backstory for their characters, whether they choose to or not. Just because I think that most of the Backgrounds in the core rulebook are wasted space, it doesn't mean I believe that backstory should be ignored. I'm upset because backstory is being limited.
Anyone who is going to ignore story and only focus on mechanics is going to do so whether the options fall under Background or they are only part of the character. It's really frustrating to have story options limited as a way to combat power gaming.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think Ferious needs to be a little more open-minded about their backgrounds. Guard is perfect for a szcarni heavy. Nothing says that what you were guarding was legitimate goods.
|
Likewise, the Criminal background covers such an incredibly wide range of backstories that you can fit into the keyword, from a burglar, through gentleman con-person, through document forger, smuggler, casino cheater, thief-acrobat, mastermind, pimp, highway robber, noble brigand, seriously, calling it out as "limiting" while sitting at a PFS table where everybody is Reactionary with Rich Parents sounds rather silly.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
...calling it out as "limiting" while sitting at a PFS table where everybody is Reactionary with Rich Parents sounds rather silly.
Of course it's limiting! Anything that doesn't allow me to wreck the campaign for a few levels with my two CR 5 war-trained pet tigers (starting at 1st-level) before retraining my Additional Traits feat out when Rich Parents is spent, is VERY limiting!
|
|
You served in the guard, out of either patriotism or the need for coin. Either way, you know how to get a difficult suspect to talk. However you left the guard, you might think of adventuring as a way to use your skills on a wider stage.
Not you guarded goods. You were part of some formal guard organization. It’s fine if we can reskin that to be served as a sczarni guard. It’s not fine if there’s an in game reaction because you used to be part of the city guard. Since PFS generally doesn’t allow reskinning, you’re stuck with what the background says. There is no homebrewing it.
Either the flavor text in the backgrounds is so minor it can be ignored, in which case why do we have it? Or it’s a new way to define your character through the character building process, in which case we’re limited to the things the backgrounds actually say.
The Sczarni example is just one of an infinite number. There will always be more possible backgrounds than Paizo can ever publish. Even within “Guard” there are many, many concepts that wouldn’t involve intimidation at all. But you can’t choose any of those. Why, for example, can’t a Guard who patrolled a city get the lore skill for the city they were a guard in? To do that, you have to have been a Street Urchin and have Thievery trained and Pickpocket for your feat.
Prisoner and Criminal are examples of where the backgrounds are taking up extra space. The mechanics of each are identical except for the stats you can choose. If the stats don’t matter due to the free boost, and the story side of it can just be reskinned, then why do we need two backgrounds providing the same skill, lore skill, and feat? Because the story part of it is supposed to matter. So if you want Expert Smuggler, but need to be able to choose Strength and Charisma, you have to have been a Prisoner, because a Criminal can’t get that combination. And we have to have two backgrounds that are almost identical taking up space in the book. That problem will only be compounded going forward.
I don’t begrudge anyone having fun reading through backgrounds and coming up with a character. But you can have that without it affecting the mechanics of the game or necessitating that future space be taken up in books to cover small differences between two backgrounds.
|
|
Likewise, the Criminal background covers such an incredibly wide range of backstories that you can fit into the keyword, from a burglar, through gentleman con-person, through document forger, smuggler, casino cheater, thief-acrobat, mastermind, pimp, highway robber, noble brigand, seriously, calling it out as "limiting" while sitting at a PFS table where everybody is Reactionary with Rich Parents sounds rather silly.
I pointed out the problem with traits. People took the same ones over and over because they were the ones that were desirable mechanically. Backgrounds have made that problem worse by tying more of the mechanics to the limited story.
Also Rich Parents isn’t PFS legal.
Edit: And for many of the concepts you listed, being trained in stealth and smuggling makes little sense.
|
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
OK, how about some actual real-life example on my side, then?
Back in PF1 I've told people that if they will produce a short (1pg max) backstory for their characters, they can come up with two traits based on that background and if I'm fine with them, they'll keep them for the game. It sounds like a sensible idea, right?
I'm running for ca. 20 people on a regular and semi-regular basis.
How many did brave the list of over 1200 traits to do that?
One person. A powergamer playing a Diviner Wizard and of course he went for Reactionary and some other trait that enhanced his spellcasting.
Now we're in PF2 era and everybody does backgrounds, meaning that every PC has some element of its backstory fleshed out right off the get-go. From the perspective of enhancing our storytelling and building the narrative, it's an improvement. Of course, the powergamer still goes for the background that fits his caster shtick the best, but I'm not stopping him.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm in total agreement with Gorbacz that the new Background system is a big improvement over previous systems.
|
|
I’ve been pointing out sources of Experienced Smuggler in part because they look like they will become the Reactionary of PFS2. Why? Because:
Experienced Smuggler skill feat – Allows you to always Earn Income with the Underworld Lore with tasks of your level -1 (instead of the normal level -2).
Because of the rule around Experienced Smuggler and Earned Income in PFS, Criminal and Prisoner grant something mechanically that other backgrounds don’t. Criminal has already started to become a better choice than other backgrounds based purely on the mechanics. A Rogue can take it and get the skill feat, the extra earned income benefit, then take any other skill that they want, because they get to replace Stealth from their class. And they can choose Dex and whatever else they want for their boost.
A strength based rogue can take Prisoner and do the same things, but select Strength and another stat.
Gorbacz and Ravingdork - Thank you for helping me make my point.
All the other backgrounds let you replace your skill if there's overlap. All the other backgrounds grant skill feats that offer unique benefits too.
What exactly is it that makes Criminal and Prisoner different?
Experienced Smuggler skill feat – Allows you to always Earn Income with the Underworld Lore with tasks of your level -1 (instead of the normal level -2).
Also, I'm not seeing this anywhere in the rules. Experienced Smuggler does say "Due to your smuggling skill, you’re more likely to find more lucrative smuggling jobs when using Underworld Lore to Earn Income." However, how that works is completely undefined and thus up to the GM.
|
|
The added unique benefit that isn’t possible to get anywhere else in the game and affects wealth. Sure, you can just take Experienced Smuggler with one of you skill feats. But why do that when you could take anything else with those and you can just get it out of the way by taking the same background on every rogue?
The complaint for PF1 is that everyone chose the same traits, because they were mechanically superior. Everyone was reactionary, fate’s favored, whatever.
Criminal and Prisoner are mechanically superior. So everyone will take them. Other backgrounds will be published that are mechanically superior, and those will become ubiquitous the same way the traits did.
Edit: The quoted text is from the PFS guide. It applies there, not in the general game. But in the general game, you can just reskin the backgrounds anyway.
|
|
Again, it’s coming back to one of two arguments. Either there’s so much flexibility in the system that you can get any combination you want anyway, so the background you choose doesn’t matter and the story included with it doesn’t matter.
Or the story included with it is supposed to be important, and backgrounds provide unique combinations that you can’t get otherwise.
In the first situation, why do we need to take up space in books if none of it matters anyway?
In the second, we end up compounding the issue that was the main problem with traits.
|
|
Was Reactionary OP? That’s not the point. The point is that with a limited number of backgrounds to choose from, and one or two backgrounds being superior to others for certain classes, you end up with a lack of variety in the builds. In a system that is promoting how flexible it is and how much variety there is. By restricting things to 36 backgrounds, and then having a couple of those backgrounds be better for each class, you end up with the same situation you had with traits. Everyone selecting the same options for the same types of characters. Every Rogue is a Criminal or Prisoner. Every healer was a Field Medic. Etc.
The background system is not encouraging variety of characters. It’s discouraging it. It’s useful for players who don’t like to spend time constructing their backstories. It’s a hinderance for those of us who do.
Edit: Why wouldn’t a Rogue level Underworld Lore past trained? It seems like an extremely useful skill to have in PFS, and Rogues get plenty of skill increases. I think that many rogues will level Underworld Lore past Trained, in part because they get it from their background and they get the bonus on earned income. Which, again, pushes things toward a particular build.
You do realize they’re going to keep putting out more and more Backgrounds, right?
There are currently over 120 backgrounds. It looks as though more will be included with every single stand alone module, adventure path, and with many other books. It won't be long before we have thousands to work with.
I think the fact that you already have several near-identical backgrounds with only themes to differentiate them is a great indicator that the developers intended the non-game-mechanic descriptions to matter.
I also believe that changing said background "flavor" to better suit your character concept in your home games is totally and completely acceptable.
|
|
Rysky - Yes. See my complaint that space in future books will have to be taken up publishing backgrounds that are just different combinations of existing skills/feats/stats. And, as more are published, there will be more backgrounds that stand out as strictly better than others. Both of those things are part of the problem.
Malk_Content - Because by granting stealth, it means they can take any other skill they want instead of stealth. Because underworld lore is something they probably want anyway. And because they have plenty of skill feats to take something else with. There’s little mechanical reason for a strength or dex rogue to take anything else. A charisma rogue is probably going charlatan. Detective is a decent option. As is street urchin. But mechanically you gain more from Criminal or Prisoner.
The only way all of that isn’t true is if you believe that it ultimately doesn’t matter, because they could just take the skills or feat with their regular class choices. In which case, see my response to Rysky. Why spend page count on it?
|
|
You do realize they’re going to keep putting out more and more Backgrounds, right?There are currently over 120 backgrounds. It looks as though more will be included with every single stand alone module, adventure path, and with many other books. It won't be long before we have thousands to work with.
I think the fact that you already have several near-identical backgrounds with only themes to differentiate them is a great indicator that the developers intended the non-game-mechanic descriptions to matter.
I also believe that changing said background "flavor" to better suit your character concept in your home games is totally and completely acceptable.
Where are the other 84? I count 35 in core and one from an AP. But then I only own the core book.
How many of those 120 grant something other than a combination of two stat boosts, one trained skill, one lore skill, and one first level skill feat? Assuming they’re in one of the recent books, what did we give up in terms of content to get those extra 84 backgrounds that aren’t giving us anything we couldn’t have already done by combining existing elements on our own?
|
|
Rysky - Yes. See my complaint that space in future books will have to be taken up publishing backgrounds that are just different combinations of existing skills/feats/stats. And, as more are published, there will be more backgrounds that stand out as strictly better than others. Both of those things are part of the problem.
1) that applies to every option published that has mechanics attached.
2) We WANT more. Taking away options and customizations isn’t fun, like your pick two stats and a feat solution, no flavor or interest.
3) that’s only an issue if they publish OP Backgrounds. So far your benchmark for OP is the one that might let a PC get some extra pocket change, so I think we’re doing okay so far.
|
|
All of those option can go against it too you know? What other skill were you going to take because Stealth was pre chosen? Well you can take a background that gives you that skill and voila you've freed up a skill choice that can be put into, you guessed it Stealth!
Malk_Content - Because by granting stealth, it means they can take any other skill they want instead of stealth. Because underworld lore is something they probably want anyway. And because they have plenty of skill feats to take something else with. There’s little mechanical reason for a strength or dex rogue to take anything else. A charisma rogue is probably going charlatan. Detective is a decent option. As is street urchin. But mechanically you gain more from Criminal or Prisoner.
You would have taken Stealth, because Rogues are trained in Stealth by default? Getting Stealth from a background frees up the class skill so that you can take anything else, without having to worry about finding a background that grants it.
Lore skills are pretty minor and I'm not sure Underworld is more valuable than any others. Its also a Lore several backgrounds give.
I don't see how "they have loads of skill feats anyway" as an argument that suddenly makes an okayish skill feat super valuable.
And as for the stats? So long as you want either of the stats that any background gives at a 12 then it doesn't matter! You can always pick up your core stat with your alternate freebie.
You haven't presented a single solid reason that makes Criminal even particularly desirable.
I mean lets say I go Martial Disciple. I end up with exactly the same stats, exactly the same non-lore skills. I get a maybe less good lore skill in Warfare and a way better Feat in either Cat Fall or Quick Jump.
Then enjoy? You could have also just taken Acrobatics in place of Stealth, since Stealth would be freed up, and Cat Fall with your level 1 skill feat. Which, incidentally, is exactly what I did on my rogue.
So, then, are you saying that backgrounds don’t really matter? Then why are we spending page count on them? I’d rather have an actual new option or more background on the setting than a background that only exists to create a new combination of things that already existed.
|
|
2) We WANT more. Taking away options and customizations isn’t fun, like your pick two stats and a feat solution, no flavor or interest.
The published backgrounds in the core rulebook aren’t very interesting, either. Do we really need several lines of text to tell us our character could have been a criminal? Or a detective? Or field medic? Those are generic, uninteresting backgrounds. They offer little benefit above a customizable system. But because they are what we got, we will get more uninteresting backgrounds just because they are necessary in order to combine the elements we already have.
I would much rather have seen those as examples of how to use the customizable system, then spend future publishing energy and space on creating Golarion specific backgrounds that give us actual new information and options.
I’d rather have an actual new option or more background on the setting than a background that only exists to create a new combination of things that already existed.
I mean, that's great and all but not liking content isn't really a compelling reason to not publish it. It just means the thing being printed isn't targeted at you, which is fine.
I'd be more likely to play a cleric if deities were done in the same way you want backgrounds to be done, but that's not the content Paizo wants to create and that's fine, it's just not aimed at what I'm looking for.
|
|
I’d rather have an actual new option or more background on the setting than a background that only exists to create a new combination of things that already existed.I mean, that's great and all but not liking content isn't really a compelling reason to not publish it. It just means the thing being printed isn't targeted at you, which is fine.
I'd be more likely to play a cleric if deities were done in the same way you want backgrounds to be done, but that's not the content Paizo wants to create and that's fine, it's just not aimed at what I'm looking for.
When content doesn’t add anything useful, that is definitely a reason not to publish it. The usefulness of backgrounds is manufactured. They are useful, because options are limited. Options are limited, because backgrounds exist.
They are targeted at me, because I have to choose between them. Because they limit the options.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Where are the other 84? I count 35 in core and one from an AP. But then I only own the core book.How many of those 120 grant something other than a combination of two stat boosts, one trained skill, one lore skill, and one first level skill feat? Assuming they’re in one of the recent books, what did we give up in terms of content to get those extra 84 backgrounds that aren’t giving us anything we couldn’t have already done by combining existing elements on our own?
Do you know about the official rules resource, the Archives of Nethys?
General Backgrounds - These are the ones in the Core Rulebook.
Regional Backgrounds - Found in the Lost Omens World Guide.
Campaign Backgrounds - Age of Ashes so far, with more surely to come.
Adventure Backgrounds - Fall of Plaguestone, with new ones with every adventure.
Hope that helps. :)
Backgrounds are an important tool that even if you or I could do with out and make up our own, serve as a fantastic jumping off point for new players and a easy to cope with customization mechanic. That those with understanding of the ABC flexibility can work around it to the point of it being almost purely theme doesn't mean it lacks a purpose for other players.
I agree. I know plenty of people who never would have picked up the game in the first place if they were told they needed to familiarize themselves with ALL the feats and skills, then tailor pick them to make up their background. Having the book basically say "Want to be a criminal? Use this!" is a heck of a lot less daunting to new players, and is generally easier even for veteran players as well.
Many of the characters in my Emporium simply wouldn't exist without that jumping off point to inspire me first. Having the rules instead say "pick two ability scores, a skill, and skill feat of your choice" would save a lot of space, but I have little doubt it would have been slowed the game's popularity growth and sales.
And guess what? We have so many backgrounds, and will have many more by the end, that there is absolutely nothing stopping you from changing the name/descriptions of existing backgrounds to better fit your concept.
Also, I love that the first wave of backgrounds were pretty general, conceptually. It allows us to cover all the basics while still allowing for more specific and interesting backgrounds like Menagerie Dung Sweeper.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Instead, we’re limited to what is available.
Only if you're playing in Society (which helps keep everyone on the same page), or have an especially orthodox/strict GM (which is a GM issue, not a rules presentation issue).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When content doesn’t add anything useful, that is definitely a reason not to publish it.
Other people have clearly commented to the contrary in this very thread though. Again, just because something doesn't suit your needs doesn't mean it's not worth publishing.
I get that it can be frustrating when a developer spends time and energy publishing things you don't like instead of more things you do, but games need to be tailored to an audience, not just a person.
Which I am playing in society. Which is where the rules apply. Which is why backgrounds should have been more flexible. It’s the one place they can’t be ignored.Instead, we’re limited to what is available.Only if you're playing in Society, or have an especially orthodox/strict GM.
As Ravingdork said (which you left out of your quote), PFS being restrictive is a good thing. When you're potentially with a different GM and group of players every week, you need some way to keep things in line so everyone has the same expectations for what will be in the game.
|
|
As Ravingdork said (which you left out of your quote), PFS being restrictive is a good thing. When you're potentially with a different GM and group of players every week, you need some way to keep things in line so everyone has the same expectations for what will be in the game.Which I am playing in society. Which is where the rules apply. Which is why backgrounds should have been more flexible. It’s the one place they can’t be ignored.Instead, we’re limited to what is available.Only if you're playing in Society, or have an especially orthodox/strict GM.
Ravingdork edited his post without marking it as such. I did not intentionally leave anything out.
Responding to the edit. We’ve had people arguing that no background is overpowered, so none will become the go to background. We’ve had people argue that you can get any combination you want anyway. And then we have people arguing that if it’s a customizable system, power gamers will power game and create overpowered combinations. Which the edit seems to be a part of.
If none of the backgrounds are overpowered, and you can get any combination of the skills/feats anyway, then how is any combination that a customizable system allows going to be overpowered? You can’t invent new rules (edit: meaning someone using the customizable system can’t invent new rules, not accusing anyone in this thread). Only the developers can do that (as was done with Experienced Smuggler). There’s no need to “keep everyone on the same page,” because they already have access to all of the options that would be available.
Keep in mind that with society, you also have to own every book that you use an option from. So say my Sczarni Enforcer background gets published somewhere. It’s the only option I want to use from that book (this happened often in PFS1). I have to buy that book just to be able to combine things that appear in the core rulebook.
Ravingdork edited his post without marking it as such. I did not intentionally leave anything out.As Ravingdork said (which you left out of your quote), PFS being restrictive is a good thing. When you're potentially with a different GM and group of players every week, you need some way to keep things in line so everyone has the same expectations for what will be in the game.Which I am playing in society. Which is where the rules apply. Which is why backgrounds should have been more flexible. It’s the one place they can’t be ignored.Instead, we’re limited to what is available.Only if you're playing in Society, or have an especially orthodox/strict GM.
Yeah, sorry about that.
The fact that opinions are all over the place on the matter kind of indicates (to me at least) that things are in a pretty well balanced spot at the moment.
|
|
Ravingdork edited his post without marking it as such. I did not intentionally leave anything out.As Ravingdork said (which you left out of your quote), PFS being restrictive is a good thing. When you're potentially with a different GM and group of players every week, you need some way to keep things in line so everyone has the same expectations for what will be in the game.Which I am playing in society. Which is where the rules apply. Which is why backgrounds should have been more flexible. It’s the one place they can’t be ignored.Instead, we’re limited to what is available.Only if you're playing in Society, or have an especially orthodox/strict GM.Yeah, sorry about that.
The fact that opinions are all over the place on the matter kind of indicates (to me at least) that things are in a pretty well balanced spot at the moment.
Or that none of it matters and it’s wasted space and an unnecessary restriction that doesn’t help the game.
As an optional system, it’s fine. As helpful guidelines, it’s fine. As you are limited to these options until we publish more, even though it’s clear how to construct them on your own, it’s incredibly annoying.
And I did say earlier in the thread that this is an annoyance and an inconvenience. It’s not something that’s going to keep me from playing PFS2E. It’s just sad to see a new system make a mistake. I don’t want to see that compounded. It would be great if Michael dropped in to say they’ll open them up in PFS, but I think that’s unlikely to happen. Paizo needs to sell books, and this system gives them easy to generate content to fill space in books.
Furious, do you think backgrounds are the only way to get skill feats?
|
|
Furious, do you think backgrounds are the only way to get skill feats?
*sigh* I understand how the system works. There are multiple issues with backgrounds. The more people point out that you can get all of the same options elsewhere, the more I question why, then, we need mechanical options tied to backgrounds at all. Why spend so much current and future development time on something that isn’t adding anything new.
One of the things I’d like to see avoided is further tying mechanics to backgrounds. It is very easy to imagine a scenario calling for a different response from an NPC if one of the PCs has Criminal as their background (the example I gave earlier was a penalty to diplomacize a Hellknight). So the Rogue who took Criminal gets the penalty, but the Rogue who took Charlatan doesn’t, even though their actual backstories might be pretty similar.
To my knowledge, that kind of thing hasn’t happened yet. But there are posters in this thread indicating they plan to use it that way in their home games (by saying things like at least their players have some backstory now that they can use).
What could be useful, though, is if you have a background as being a member of the Sczarni, so members of the Sczarni react differently to you. But Criminal doesn’t cover that.
With the way the background system is set up, it encourages future books to include more generic backgrounds and fewer golarion specific backgrounds. Because you need those additional generic backgrounds in order to combine existing core rulebook skill/feat options in your background.
I agree with Ferious that the backgrounds in the CRB are super-boring and I would never take them.
However, the Golarion- and adventure-specific backgrounds in the AP and module are fantastic.
I think this is a problem for PFS but not for people running Age of Ashes or Fall of Plaguestone or a homebrew campaign where the GM is making appropriate backgrounds.
Perhaps PFS should introduce some faction-specific backgrounds just for Organized Play?