Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Vigilance" data-source="post: 3724962" data-attributes="member: 4275">I don't I'm saying &quot;you should definitely require feats for armor&quot; there. I'm mostly just saying that if you're going to change something: A) you should have a reason and B) you should realize that just changing one thing can make other things go wonky and C) expect wearing heavier armor to be something everyone does. Also, d20 Modern and True 20 were different games, last I checked.Spending 2 feats in a game where your character gets 23 (True 20) *IS* less onerous to me than spending 3 feats in a game where your character might get 12 (d20 Modern). But in that thread, I was talking about True 20. In this case, I had already gotten rid of: weapon proficiency feats (folded into the firearms skill and the weapons skill) and Vehicle Operation feats (folded into the Vehicles skill). In that environment, requiring a feat for armor doesn't make sense to me. It doesn't fit. It feels like the type of feat I've done away with and tied to skill elsewhere. In such a case, I felt like I had three basic choices: leave it a feat, find a skill to tie it to or create a new skill just for armor. Since I'm re-examining everything, I also just decided to ask myself if there needed to be any mechanical expenditure (eg spending character resources like skills or feats) for armor AT ALL. I'm still undecided too. Though I'm against a feat. I might tie it to the Athletics skill, through a perk. I know, I haven't talked about perks much yet. Perks are something you gain from Occupations in 2.0 that modify how your existing skills work.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Vigilance, post: 3724962, member: 4275"] I don't I'm saying "you should definitely require feats for armor" there. I'm mostly just saying that if you're going to change something: A) you should have a reason and B) you should realize that just changing one thing can make other things go wonky and C) expect wearing heavier armor to be something everyone does. Also, d20 Modern and True 20 were different games, last I checked. Spending 2 feats in a game where your character gets 23 (True 20) *IS* less onerous to me than spending 3 feats in a game where your character might get 12 (d20 Modern). But in that thread, I was talking about True 20. In this case, I had already gotten rid of: weapon proficiency feats (folded into the firearms skill and the weapons skill) and Vehicle Operation feats (folded into the Vehicles skill). In that environment, requiring a feat for armor doesn't make sense to me. It doesn't fit. It feels like the type of feat I've done away with and tied to skill elsewhere. In such a case, I felt like I had three basic choices: leave it a feat, find a skill to tie it to or create a new skill just for armor. Since I'm re-examining everything, I also just decided to ask myself if there needed to be any mechanical expenditure (eg spending character resources like skills or feats) for armor AT ALL. I'm still undecided too. Though I'm against a feat. I might tie it to the Athletics skill, through a perk. I know, I haven't talked about perks much yet. Perks are something you gain from Occupations in 2.0 that modify how your existing skills work. [/QUOTE]

Verification