Talk:Fallen Hero (5e Background)

Feel Free to make any suggestions or drop any constructive criticisms here.

This looks complete to me

Why is there no neutral or anything ideals? Normally you would have 1 for each alignment and one that anyone could take, just asking.--Lord Survival (talk) 08:00, 1 April 2019 (MDT)

Quality Article Nomination
This article is a current quality article nominee as of 09:09, 17 December 2019 (MST). Quality articles exemplify D&D Wiki's very best work, and therefore must meet the quality article criteria. Please discuss the page's merits below.
  • Support. A great choice for players looking for a less law-abiding game. It's a well made choice. --Green Dragon (talk) 09:09, 17 December 2019 (MST)
  • Neutral. The "vanilla" progression of a PC is from a humble origin to a famous hero. This background wants to bypass that and make the PC already a famous hero, and doesn't do the actual job of a background which is to say what the PC was before they were an adventurer. In my opinion this background also makes your PC look like a tiresome edgelord. Marasmusine (talk) 08:44, 15 March 2020 (MDT)
  • Oppose. I agree with Maras' point about the skipping past the hero phase. It doesn't exactly sound 5e-esque in that regard to me, more like 4e maybe, since that edition specifies PCs as heroes more overtly. This is also rather edgy, especially with the Dark Gift alternative. I could see this definitely as a good background for some specific game settings, but as a general background for more generic settings, I don't think it would mesh very well.--Yanied (talk) 10:22, 5 October 2020 (MDT)
gollark: Okay, sure, you can ignore that for Go itself, if we had Go-with-an-alternate-compiler-but-identical-language-bits it would be irrelevant.
gollark: I can't easily come up with a *ton* of examples of this, but stuff like generics being special-cased in for three types (because guess what, you *do* actually need them), certain basic operations returning either one or two values depending on how you interact with them, quirks of nil/closed channel operations, the standard library secretly having a `recover` mechanism and using it like exceptions a bit, multiple return values which are not first-class at all and which are used as a horrible, horrible way to do error handling, and all of go assembly, are just inconsistent and odd.
gollark: And inconsistent.
gollark: But... Google is hiring some of the smartest programmers around, can they *not* make a language which is not this, well, stupid? Dumbed-down?
gollark: It has some very nice things for the cloud-thing/CLI tool/server usecase; the runtime is pretty good and for all garbage collection's flaws manual memory management is annoying, and the standard library is pretty extensive.
This article is issued from Dandwiki. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.