Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="3catcircus" data-source="post: 1497791" data-attributes="member: 16077">I see what you mean, and I'd have to do the math and expand it along that series of numbers, but it also kinda looks like in addition to shifting the start of the ladder, that the total number of steps of a given number might possible expand - but I'd have to sit down and expand that 0-9 to something like 0-100 or so.Hmm - I really like that modelling of VP/WP per body location.  I also like the 2300AD mechanic, on the face of it - but I don't know how the idea of doing fractional math on the fly would go over with my players - some of them are young enough to not know how to do "old math" and instead think it is ok to "get an answer that makes you feel good about yourself."I'm starting to agree with this - it may work out after all.  The only concern I would have is that given this is a military-intensive game, I would like to see excruciating detail be given to determine whether something should be a feat, a skill-set, or a (prestige) class.For example - it kinda makes sense to make an 11B Infantryman character class.  It even makes sense for an 0300 USMC Rifleman class.  But what about an NEC3353 Submarine Reactor Operator in the navy?  He is really just an Electronics Technician (ET) with a year of extra schooling (I know - I used to be one...)  How would you distinguish him from a Navigation ET?  What about the differences between an FC and an FT, or a GMM and a GMG?  Now - that 11B Infantryman should probably get a class for passing ranger school of Special Forces school.  But he should only get additional skill ranks for passing the Airborne course.  But, then how would you reconcile something like that being given only additional skill ranks if something like Master Fitness Trainer sounds like it could warrant a feat (Athletic)?I just don't know - there is so much detail in terms of MOS's (NEC's in the navy), Additional Skill Identifiers (army), and Secondary Qualification Identifiers (again, army) - what level of granularity do you go to?  What about foreign militaries?Well - what I meant by "worthless" was not so much a given skill, so much as describing a personality trait.  For example - you could have a guy in the infantry continue to take the same career every term - increasing his level, while spending skill points on "Coffee Cup Holding" and "Pencil Whipping" rather than on warrior skills like patrolling, fieldcraft, marksmanship, etc.  In real life - these are the a-hole senior NCOs who gig people on uniform inspections but aren't fit to lead the same soldiers in a battle.  That's why I'm reluctant to use a level system where, if you desired, you could spend all your skill points on cross-class skills.  If you were to use a level-based system, you'd have to restrict the skills list to disallow cross-class skills unless you were spending your (secondary activities analogue) in skill points in a d20 system.</blockquote>

Verification