Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Psion" data-source="post: 1766777" data-attributes="member: 172">Assertion: Yes, in a setting that does not feature combat prominently, the BAB presumption is a problem.Caveat 1: The above DOES NOT include all SF settings. I thnk I'd be annoyed if I was forced to build a John Crichton (who is a scientist) with a scientist base class that didn't spot him some combat ability. Crichton is quite clearly competant in combat. Similarly, setting like Star Wars are full of characters who are quite clearly competant in combat even if they hold what should be relatively sedentary positions. (I know you all probably try to forget Ep II, but did anyone remember how Amidala pretty much embarrassed young vader in the arena...)Caveat 2: While this is a problem, it's not a requirement. Nothing requires you to use BAB (though I am surprised at how few d20 based systems dare to do away with it where appropraite.)Caveat 3: There are systems that use other techniques, such as PC/NPC dichotomy (Star Wars), or an even crappier BAB advancement track (T20) that do more than a sufficient job at representing relatively unskilled combatants.Overall, the BAB thing bugs me for some applications. But in play, it's not that big a deal. Hardly anything that makes the system overall blow for modern or futuristic endeavors.</blockquote>