Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Storm Raven" data-source="post: 4002530" data-attributes="member: 307">Sure, I can make a fire with two sticks as well. That doesn't mean a match isn't a better tool for the job.The 2e NWP system (and we are talking about the published 2e NWP system here, not a perfect NWP system that we may have wished for, or a house ruled system, or anything else) was an extremely weak and poorly designed system. The NWP slots were too few to make an impact, the individual NWPs were too poorly defined, the rate of skill acquisition was too quick (one NWP took you from &quot;no ability&quot; to &quot;as good as a professional at the job&quot; with one slot), and the system for advancing your NWP provided abilities was horribly weak.I'm going to call it what it was: a hasty, poorly done patch thrown together in the face of developing skill based systems like GURPS, HERO, and even Rolemaster.You mean like all those 2e rogues who spent their NWPs on things like Tumble and Jumping and Blind-Fighting? I'm sorry,but while your argument is interesting, it would be more persuasive if it matched the facts better. The reality is that the NWPs in 2e were just as combat heavy as the skills in 3e, probably more so since you had so many fewer to spend and hence, if you took a combat related NWP it pretty much precluded you from doing much to &quot;flesh out&quot; the noncombat elements of the character.Looking at page 76 of the 2e PHB, it looks like the NWPs essentially amount to a truncated (and more conbat focused) grouping of traits that became skills and feats in 3e. Now, you may have had wonderful players who did nothing but take Brewing, Carpentry, and Pottery with their NWPs, but the 2e rules as written pretty much point towards using NWPs as supplements to your character's combat related abilites as much, if not more than the 3e rules point towards that with skills.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Storm Raven, post: 4002530, member: 307"] Sure, I can make a fire with two sticks as well. That doesn't mean a match isn't a better tool for the job. The 2e NWP system (and we are talking about the published 2e NWP system here, not a perfect NWP system that we may have wished for, or a house ruled system, or anything else) was an extremely weak and poorly designed system. The NWP slots were too few to make an impact, the individual NWPs were too poorly defined, the rate of skill acquisition was too quick (one NWP took you from "no ability" to "as good as a professional at the job" with one slot), and the system for advancing your NWP provided abilities was horribly weak. I'm going to call it what it was: a hasty, poorly done patch thrown together in the face of developing skill based systems like GURPS, HERO, and even Rolemaster. You mean like all those 2e rogues who spent their NWPs on things like Tumble and Jumping and Blind-Fighting? I'm sorry,but while your argument is interesting, it would be more persuasive if it matched the facts better. The reality is that the NWPs in 2e were just as combat heavy as the skills in 3e, probably more so since you had so many fewer to spend and hence, if you took a combat related NWP it pretty much precluded you from doing much to "flesh out" the noncombat elements of the character. Looking at page 76 of the 2e PHB, it looks like the NWPs essentially amount to a truncated (and more conbat focused) grouping of traits that became skills and feats in 3e. Now, you may have had wonderful players who did nothing but take Brewing, Carpentry, and Pottery with their NWPs, but the 2e rules as written pretty much point towards using NWPs as supplements to your character's combat related abilites as much, if not more than the 3e rules point towards that with skills. [/QUOTE]

Verification