Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5986471" data-attributes="member: 54877">This is the kind of thing that I can see working better as a guide than a restriction, though I'd do it by some kind of keyword instead of class. Class is too brittle as new classes get added to the game, and somewhat misleading for classes the more they are drifted. (A stereotypical fighter might be a good fit for some abilities that aren't all that hot for a lightly armored, swashbuckling style fighter.)&nbsp;Strangely enough, that might be a good use of roles, though you would need more of them than 4E used, but few enough and fixed to cover all the bases. The 4E monster roles with a few tweaks would probably be a good start. Then you can do things like this:&nbsp;Power AttackBrute+, Artillery-, Lurker-(feat text)&nbsp;That says if you've read the &quot;brute&quot; role and are pursuing it, then this is a good feat for you. Likewise, if you are pursuing the artillery or lurker roles, then it's a bad choice for you. Any role not listed is neutral--it's not your best option, but you could make it work for soldier, skirmisher, etc.&nbsp;Even if you are ignoring the advice of the role guidelines, that still tells you a little about the nature of the feat, and would help with a database app if you want to filter to things that are more likely to interest you. If you decide to build a sneaky guy that hits hard, you know that some lurker things will work but some brute things will help too, for your atypical character. &nbsp;You'd probably need about twice as many roles as the 4E monsters have, as there would be some other distinctions that might matter for certain feats, though perhaps keywords like arcane, divine, etc. will cover those well enough.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 5986471, member: 54877"] This is the kind of thing that I can see working better as a guide than a restriction, though I'd do it by some kind of keyword instead of class. Class is too brittle as new classes get added to the game, and somewhat misleading for classes the more they are drifted. (A stereotypical fighter might be a good fit for some abilities that aren't all that hot for a lightly armored, swashbuckling style fighter.) Strangely enough, that might be a good use of roles, though you would need more of them than 4E used, but few enough and fixed to cover all the bases. The 4E monster roles with a few tweaks would probably be a good start. Then you can do things like this: Power Attack Brute+, Artillery-, Lurker- (feat text) That says if you've read the "brute" role and are pursuing it, then this is a good feat for you. Likewise, if you are pursuing the artillery or lurker roles, then it's a bad choice for you. Any role not listed is neutral--it's not your best option, but you could make it work for soldier, skirmisher, etc. Even if you are ignoring the advice of the role guidelines, that still tells you a little about the nature of the feat, and would help with a database app if you want to filter to things that are more likely to interest you. If you decide to build a sneaky guy that hits hard, you know that some lurker things will work but some brute things will help too, for your atypical character. You'd probably need about twice as many roles as the 4E monsters have, as there would be some other distinctions that might matter for certain feats, though perhaps keywords like arcane, divine, etc. will cover those well enough. [/QUOTE]

Verification