Forgotten Realms themes

[Matt James]

So, the article I created for Forgotten Realms themes is getting a lot of flack for having restrictions in it. My primary goal was to facilitate the setting and not character creation/optimizations. I knew going into it that they likely wouldn't be the most powerful options out there.

What are your thoughts? Should themes always be as open and generic as possible? Does a designer have a need to put restrictions when the setting calls for it? I can see the argument for keeping things wide open. However, as the article was Realms-specific, does it make sense?

[Darth Jerod]

So, the article I created for Forgotten Realms themes is getting a lot of flack for having restrictions in it. My primary goal was to facilitate the setting and not character creation/optimizations. I knew going into it that they likely wouldn't be the most powerful options out there.

What are your thoughts? Should themes always be as open and generic as possible? Does a designer have a need to put restrictions when the setting calls for it? I can see the argument for keeping things wide open. However, as the article was Realms-specific, does it make sense?

It totally makes sense. There are pre-reqs for non-optional things such as racial feats so yeah. I mean this was a theme that had specific story elements to warrant this mechanic.

I will jump on this limb that you trimmed a bit in that thread, I think if the Character Builder allowed to house-rule away that restriction not one of them would have a problem with it.

The argument against house-ruling it because some people play by RAW would also imply that those same groups would follow the story elements and naturally say ooops sorry it says you cant in the fluff so you cant.

But I really think it comes down to the character builder not allowing it so the lazy people* (there is a difference) who do not want to make characters by hand just want to cry and scream about something

*There is Lazy "I have this character builder but I can also make my character by hand, but I wanna make it on the builder oh well I will figure it out." and there is Lazy "I only use Character Builder because... well I am lazy and I am feeling the need to have a bitchfest because that ability is cool and I like to tell people who actually write this stuff that they are making this stuff sub-par"

[Nai_Calus]

I don't have the time or the legible tiny handwriting to actively make characters by hand, and the online CB does not make houseruling easy.

I have a character that actively annoys me with how houseruled he's become whenever we level. It's a mess and I can't properly figure out things in the CB as it is. An item that doesn't exist, a race that doesn't exist, a power that's since been errataed to not have a level and thus be unselectable, +1 bonus/tier to NADs/attacks... Herf.

Thankfully we use Mythweavers because it's a Play-by-post so I just copypasta stuff from the Compendium, but I don't know WTF I'd do with him if I had to do it the long way.

But this has nothing at all to do with the mechanics, and everything to do with the CB. The in-world fluff limitations are fine. The problem lies with the CB not being able to use it. The CB gets used a lot because it's a good way to actually look at all those dozens of scattered options. Unless you can't, which gets irk-y. Needs a way to display illegal elements for all items. Powers, themes, etc.

[gaming tonic]

So, the article I created for Forgotten Realms themes is getting a lot of flack for having restrictions in it.

It is an option and therefore something that people can take or leave. If you say that oxygen is necessary for life somebody will argue the opposite. This is especially true on the internet.
I like having options and the choice on whether or not to use them in my game. As a player if I see an option that the CB doesn't support and I am too lazy to adjust one thing in pencil, then I probably don't want the ability all that much. As far as being the most powerful or not the most powerful option, some of us design our character and not always maximize. I prefer a great trick over a power boost when it comes to options. Thanks for giving us some choices Matt.

[ERJHolton]

Lore is more mutable than mechanics in 4E; the character builder is a facet of the situation, also organised play, and the reduced need to houserule in 4E. Therefore designers probably should give at least some consideration as to how the rules they write might be used outside of the intended context. While lore should inform the writing of rules in a game like 4E, it shouldn't be a straitjacket and definitely shouldn't be an excuse to create options that are deliberately subpar. The game already has enough of those.

I think you came in for additional flak for a perceived hypocrisy between the section on refluffing existing mechanics and introducing mechanics that are inherently problematic for that treatment because they need DM intervention in the form of a houserule, which is not a guaranteed thing. Certainly I wouldn't allow that houserule; I don't want to put up with players hoping for this or that element to be allowed because "it'll go well with their character".

Edit: Just to make it clear, I'm not against restrictions for the sake or lore, but I do think that such restrictions should be avoided if the concept behind the mechanics is somewhat generic. An example is that inflicting radiant vulnerability makes sense to be restricted to followers of sun deities in 4E's context, but "being good on a mount" is a much broader concept.