Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 7223576" data-attributes="member: 6795602">5e isn't a purely class based system.  5e is a heavily class based with many aspects that you wouldn't find in purely class based system.  So please don't act like I'm against a heavily class based system because I'm asking that a fairly flexible skill system tacked on to a heavily class based game be made into a more flexible skill system.  You see I'm totally against free form systems that many games and people try to make.  I think they are a waste of time and much better results could be obtained making some cool classes for a class based game.  So the notion that asking for flexibility in skills is someone wanting classes to be gone is ludicrous.  I'm even fine with a game including all in combat and out of combat ability within a class.  It's just that if you do tack on a skill system to a class based game at least make sure it doesn't just offer the illusion of choice and that the skill system actually reasonably allows you the flexibility in character creation that a skill system should be allowing you.  But as has been noted time and time again, my suggestion isn't increasing complexity any more than a stat point buy would and that's still a very common method of producing stats.Well as you can see my plan didn't include changing much except removing the skill point component stats provide and giving you a more free form method to place skill points.  It's not some big sweeping change like you are making it out to be.And yet you are making large sweeping changes that interact with far more rules than my proposed changes do.  Now you have got to figure out expertise, proficiency bonuses to skills, how to factor in some classes higher number of starting skills, how to factor in racial skills...  Those are the reasons I didn't propose a pure skill point system for skills.  Too much is tied to skill proficiency and so you would have a huge cascade of changes in order to implement that idea.I don't see how skills impact class boundaries in 5e at all.  Unless you are claiming it's a design feature to give each class a staple subset of skills only they can typically be the best at and that they accomplished this by tying those kinds of skills to your primary stat.  That's definitely an interesting sentiment.That's exactly the kind of system I dislike.  You see I like classes.  I think they are very useful design vehicles.  I think taking classes away and trying to put everything behind a prerequisite wall doesn't even come class at emulating a class based system.  Even if you give different abilities different costs it still doesn't help.  Basically you end up with a system where a player will always have to choose options that highly synergize with each other or be left behind by his allies that do.  Classes force on you a package of good, bad, ugly and great.  A classless system doesn't really do that.Hurray!! you made something that doesn't resemble D&D and that I dislike...  So why is it that my suggestion doesn't resemble D&D anymore?General design ideas are fine and welcome.  I just can't help but feel like you are arguing that any change no matter how small makes d&d into not d&d.  I think there's a difference in degree.  I don't think my proposed change is a large change.  I'm basically able to replace 1 part of a numerically derived value with a similar value that's derived a bit differently.  Since I am keeping the numbers in the game that the previous value was derived from then I still have those numbers for anything else I need.  Your suggested changes don't keep that simplicity.  Instead you propose changing things in a way that will snowball into many other changes.Are you really arguing that any change no matter how minor causes something to "no longer be D&D"?</blockquote>

Verification