Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="JohnSnow" data-source="post: 2899671" data-attributes="member: 32164">Okay, first off, I'll confess that I think Iron Heroes is closest to the &quot;right way&quot; to handle d20 classes. In IH, classes represent fighting style - because it's the one thing that doesn't &quot;track&quot; or &quot;balance&quot; well in a classless system. Basically, every character gets their own style so that nobody's treading on the other guy's &quot;fun.&quot;That said, if you insist on modelling the combat ability as skill, you have to model ALL abilities through a combination of skills and feats. d20 Modern sorta halfway does this and then introduces a bastardization of feats called &quot;talents&quot; which are basically feats that are class-specific. Basically, I guess I'm saying if you want to make combat skill-based (as well as feat-based), then spellcasting should also be skill-based.The only way I can think of to properly balance the system is to introduce Feat Mastery (a la Iron Heroes) and then let each character choose which categories of feats they want to master. Give them enough skill points that they can buy their combat, noncombat, and spellcasting skills. EVERY character now gets the same number of skill points. Fighter-types devote them primarily to combat with some noncombat capability. Spellcasters primarily to spellcasting (with some combat and noncombat abilities). And your rogue types would be primarily noncombatant skills, with some combat.Balancing it so that the players could all have a chance to have fun in most games would be a nightmare. West End Games Star Wars RPG and TSR's Top Secret S.I. both worked like this, as did, IIRC, Alternity.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="JohnSnow, post: 2899671, member: 32164"] Okay, first off, I'll confess that I think [i]Iron Heroes[/i] is closest to the "right way" to handle d20 classes. In IH, classes represent fighting style - because it's the one thing that doesn't "track" or "balance" well in a classless system. Basically, every character gets their own style so that nobody's treading on the other guy's "fun." That said, if you insist on modelling the combat ability as skill, you have to model ALL abilities through a combination of skills and feats. [i]d20 Modern[/i] sorta halfway does this and then introduces a bastardization of feats called "talents" which are basically feats that are class-specific. Basically, I guess I'm saying if you want to make combat skill-based (as well as feat-based), then spellcasting should also be skill-based. The only way I can think of to properly balance the system is to introduce Feat Mastery (a la [i]Iron Heroes[/i]) and then let each character choose which categories of feats they want to master. Give them enough skill points that they can buy their combat, noncombat, and spellcasting skills. EVERY character now gets the same number of skill points. Fighter-types devote them primarily to combat with some noncombat capability. Spellcasters primarily to spellcasting (with some combat and noncombat abilities). And your rogue types would be primarily noncombatant skills, with some combat. Balancing it so that the players could all have a chance to have fun in most games would be a nightmare. West End Games [i]Star Wars RPG[/i] and TSR's [i]Top Secret S.I.[/i] both worked like this, as did, IIRC, [i]Alternity[/i]. [/QUOTE]

Verification