Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="payn" data-source="post: 9742632" data-attributes="member: 90374">Well, id have defense just baked into character, firstly. You have some proficiency like defense that just gets better (slightly keeping BA intact). Then, some classes will get armor prof, in light, medium, and/or heavy armor. Casters would get access to magic to help their defense. Its the very notion of playing against type I want to excise from the game. There is no &quot;type&quot; any longer in terms of SAD design. You can make many &quot;types&quot; of every class with a MAD set up. Also, &quot;you can do it but your character will suck&quot; is not consolation prize; its bollocks. I dont even know what that means? I can only assume certain classes all have the same strengths and weaknesses? so if you are fighting a fighter you do X, and if you are fighting a caster you do Y. I understand thats a traditional paradigm but its not a tradition I care to keep up with.&nbsp; I dont really understand how your proposed system is less complicated? The system for 5E couldn't be simpler. The main difference is its a roll high instead of roll low between them as far as I can tell. I think backgrounds naturally lead to &quot;life skills&quot; and there is a lot of design space for this kind of thing left on the 5E bone.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="payn, post: 9742632, member: 90374"] Well, id have defense just baked into character, firstly. You have some proficiency like defense that just gets better (slightly keeping BA intact). Then, some classes will get armor prof, in light, medium, and/or heavy armor. Casters would get access to magic to help their defense. Its the very notion of playing against type I want to excise from the game. There is no "type" any longer in terms of SAD design. You can make many "types" of every class with a MAD set up. Also, "you can do it but your character will suck" is not consolation prize; its bollocks. I dont even know what that means? I can only assume certain classes all have the same strengths and weaknesses? so if you are fighting a fighter you do X, and if you are fighting a caster you do Y. I understand thats a traditional paradigm but its not a tradition I care to keep up with. I dont really understand how your proposed system is less complicated? The system for 5E couldn't be simpler. The main difference is its a roll high instead of roll low between them as far as I can tell. I think backgrounds naturally lead to "life skills" and there is a lot of design space for this kind of thing left on the 5E bone. [/QUOTE]

Verification