Just to get out of the line item thing I'll address the more important parts straight through. I know and have met hundreds of gamers at conventions and in my gaming life. I have never met a person who wanted or could handle that many feats. Heck, most people i know who play the game tend to forget their earlier feats once they hit level 10. I do thikn the C&C idea is good for what you're looking for. I like the system, it reminds me of the first diceless campaign i played a decade ago. If you wanted more meat you could do the same thing with Iron Heroes and its stunts and challenges. But this style is not popular and not the traditional way of dungeons and dragons. Even with C&C there's a bit of copycatting that goes on in gaming sessions that makes characters less special.
You could be right. I don't know.
I know almost nothing about C&C, far less than I know about Pathfinder, except C&C supposedly is similar to D&D 1E.
As a professional RPG reviewer, i get to read and review dozens of products a month, so i have been exposed to hundreds of feats in my life. and to be honest, to many of them simply repeat what others do with more (or less) interesting flavor text. When I say, that you will be able to do everything, I mean that in the sense that with 45 feats, you could do anything you wanted to do or the character to be by at least 4th level especially with your skill thing.
You are a professional reviewer? Cheers.
I agree about feats ... some are really interesting, and some quite boring. And many are duplicates (on the Crystalkeep list, there were a number of outright duplicates.)
I *honestly, really, do not* wish a 4th level character to be able to *do everything.* Trust me, I don't want that!
Resource management has always been apart of the game, it adds to the fantasy realism of the game. I don't know of a piece of fiction where a hero can do everything. This would be a pretty boring book to read. You as a DM would have to fiat just to make it challenging.
That was extremely well put!
I'm not sure if you're familiar with it, but the game of 3.5 seems to break at level 20 or so, and what you're suggesting is to start the game off at this level... broken. Again, this is a pretty uniformed thought in the gaming world.
(sighs) I don't know what to say. The Human Equation factors in heavily here. DMs do have limits. Players want specific things. And so on.
I honestly do believe in my system, or I would not advocate it (although I must concede that too many skill points create too much uniformity amongst characters, ala my post above.)
I hardly believe my proposals will be adopted! Not at all. I just wanted them to be seen, is all. Food for thought. A discussion. Shop talk. And some really great posts from a lot of people (like yourself) about the subject, to read.
Your opinions seem to ...
I agree, that with too much complexity, it is counterproductive. I am - honestly - not trying to make it too complicated. More interesting, fascinating, exciting, fun ... yes. Cumbersome, awkward, mind-numbing, impossible to play with any speed? No.
As a DM your job is to facilitate a game, sure their your friends, but no rule book says that the job of a dm is to be best buds with your player. If you have a problem saying no, you're going to be a pretty crappy DM, because you'll ignore the boundaries of the game.
Well put, and it is a serious problem, sometimes an insurmountable problem, dealing with this facet of the Human Equation.
I have no good answer, just one of 'doing my best.' Unfortunately, that's not been good enough, in a number of cases. (sighs)
There are many who still play 1e or 1e type games, and the lack of structure bolds well wit some groups. C&C is fun, for a certain group. But the point of RPGs is that you play a character who grows throughout the adventure. There's no growth with your system.
Again, this is not my intention. Really not my intention, here!! I *WANT* characters to *GROW*. It is extremely important that they grow. You are *absolutely* right that they should grow! (my opinion.)
I wanted to increase the feats and skills so characters had *more* potential to grow, not *less.* That would be the opposite of the desired effect!
Again, once you hit 4th level, you can do everything a 20th level character could do. In my last campaign, exodus, i gave players a feat just every level, and I had a player "break" the campaign with the perfect combo at level 12 (we're talking 12 feats). This is what happened, he'd sit back and attack an army by himself on his initiative, and then the others had nothing to do on their initiative.
Your point is well made. Min/maxing can produce devastating results.
With a mere *two* feats, a wizard of 7th level can become almost invincible. She merely need take Irresistible Spell and Material Sacrifice (from Crystalkeep), and keep a lot of large, expensive gems on her, and she can now cast all her spells at their base level, and those spells allow NO saving throw.
2 feats, and I have an Autokill Wizard, a complete game-wrecker.
Yet ... I could dump 24 feats into the 3.5 Spell Focus (all 8 schools), 3.5 Greater Spell Focus (8 schools), and 3.5 Arcane Defense (8 schools), and have a wizard who had ... +2 to her spell DCs, and +2 to save against all spells.
LOL. Now, that's a difference in feat approach, if ever there was one.
Not all feats are created equal!
You touch on where these powers come from, and looking at a typical adventure it usually lasts 6 to 12 months in game time. It already yis a stretch to believe that complex magics and maneuvers can be balanced in this time, Now you're talking about multiplying that by 3x. From a role playing point of view your system breaks the believablity barrier too much. From a gamist point of view you've created a game far too easy to challenge any player without yourself fiating things.
Again, well put. I'm in agreement with most everything you're saying, actually.
I just thought the increased choice would help. You believe it would hurt. I don't know what to say. I refuse to say you're wrong, but I still really think my approach could work.
It seems you are tryng to boost the power level of D&D, which does not work.
Only slightly.
The primary boost I was looking at was in flexibility.
You mention that a professional violnist has 18 ranks, meaning now that all of your working NPCs who are good at anything are at least 18th level in pathfinder (15th in 3.5). So everyone in your world is super good at alot of things with heroes being the superheroes of the supers?
I would give a truly professional violinist 20 ranks in Profession, Musician, Violinist.
There aren't many of these people running around. Only a handful, in the whole world (unless there is a special magical or supernatural nation that emphasizes music as the epitome of it's civilization, in which case there might be a few more.)
You have a good chance, though, of finding an NPC with 10 skill ranks in the skill you're looking for, if you look in major towns and cities for a while, and it's a fairly common skill you're seeking out.
A PC could obtain 10 professional skill ranks by spending 10 to 20 points in Profession, but he'd have to be 7th level to do it, and he probably will have other priorities. (That is, in 3rd Edition, where other skills beckon.)
A PC that wants to be a true professional in any profession, is going to have to obtain 20 ranks in that profession, meaning he is going to have to be 17th level or higher. Stat bonuses are irrelevant here; a +20 doesn't make a true professional, 20 skill *ranks* makes for a true professional.
Again, if this works for you more power to it, I just wanted to explain why a professional gaming company would never take Dungeons and Dragons in your direction. YOu seem strong in thinking that this could work, and by all means if your friends are happy then do whatever you wish.
I'm not trying to tell them they should adopt my ideas. Or request they adopt my ideas. Or plead for my ideas. Or anything of the sort.
I merely throw out my ideas for discussion, and hope for feedback. I've gotten a lot of feedback, and appreciate it.
