Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5862450" data-attributes="member: 54877">Well, mechanically they could always treat roles as more explicit and separate, instead of less so and embedded. Make &quot;role&quot; an actual mechanical widget, just like race, class, feats, etc. Then simply include option in that list that amount to, &quot;no thanks, I'll make my own&quot;. For whatever feats, powers, spells, etc. that exists outside of that framework, but should be informed by it, use keywords.&nbsp;Another nice thing about this is that you can have roles that not everyone will enjoy, perhaps some that don't even overlap well. I don't care for games where one guy can be the &quot;face guy&quot;. Others don't like &quot;defenders&quot;. Someone else will want a guy with no particularly great combat abiltiies whatsoever:<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Defender - marking ability, pick from a handful of relevant consequences, pick options with &quot;defender&quot; keyword to strengthen the role.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Face Guy - some kind of reroll ability on social skills, pick from a handful of ways to mitigate failures on social rolls, pick options with &quot;face&quot; keyword to strength the role.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Adventurer - some kind of bonus feat ability or &quot;generic&quot; option that works ok no matter what your focus (not unlike what &quot;humans&quot; often get for racial abilities), pick from a handful of similar ways to mitigate failure or get bonus action point or something similar, pick any options that strike your fancy.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">And so forth.</li>
</ul>Note that nothing says that you must &quot;strengthen&quot; your chosen role, either, with those feats, powers, etc. picks. Those are just there to tell you how to go about it if you want to. Of course, an individual table might decide that you must--if you sign up to play a &quot;leader&quot; then you have to bring N abilities to the table. Everyone can draw the line where they want.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 5862450, member: 54877"] Well, mechanically they could always treat roles as more explicit and separate, instead of less so and embedded. Make "role" an actual mechanical widget, just like race, class, feats, etc. Then simply include option in that list that amount to, "no thanks, I'll make my own". For whatever feats, powers, spells, etc. that exists outside of that framework, but should be informed by it, use keywords. Another nice thing about this is that you can have roles that not everyone will enjoy, perhaps some that don't even overlap well. I don't care for games where one guy can be the "face guy". Others don't like "defenders". Someone else will want a guy with no particularly great combat abiltiies whatsoever: [LIST] [*]Defender - marking ability, pick from a handful of relevant consequences, pick options with "defender" keyword to strengthen the role. [*]Face Guy - some kind of reroll ability on social skills, pick from a handful of ways to mitigate failures on social rolls, pick options with "face" keyword to strength the role. [*]Adventurer - some kind of bonus feat ability or "generic" option that works ok no matter what your focus (not unlike what "humans" often get for racial abilities), pick from a handful of similar ways to mitigate failure or get bonus action point or something similar, pick any options that strike your fancy. [*]And so forth. [/LIST]Note that nothing says that you must "strengthen" your chosen role, either, with those feats, powers, etc. picks. Those are just there to tell you how to go about it if you want to. Of course, an individual table might decide that you must--if you sign up to play a "leader" then you have to bring N abilities to the table. Everyone can draw the line where they want. [/QUOTE]

Verification