Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Psion" data-source="post: 287891" data-attributes="member: 172">Everything doesn't. As I already mentioned, there are already items within the system that use straight-up XP. But the rub is this: the system more strongly relies on class and level as the fulcrum of balance than XP. You start adding too many abilities in terms of XP, level starts to lose its effectiveness as a gauge of character power.Further, it's more than just a matter of whether you can do it this way. I think it is a matter of whether you should. I think fighting styles can be well represented by prestige classes and feat chains. Take AEG's Swashbuckling Adventures as an example. Further, I think the things associated with a class -- like skills and save bonuses -- would be logical outgrowths of one's specialized martial training.So I'll grant you that is sounds as if PotS is more balanced than the fighting styles in TQF (jury is still out... book due in Wednesday.) But even if it is, the fundamental question is: is there a good reason that I should NOT use the existing tools to create fighting styles? Is there any advantage that outweights the disadvantages that come with skirting around the system provided and supported methods?DM judgement rendered irrelevant? Heh. First off, I might point out that the judgement of some GMs is not all that good. Second, in a way I think packaging your ideas in an unfamiliar format makes it more difficult to use their judgement than if it were a PrC or feat chain, because they will not be familiar with the pitfalls of using your fighting styles as compared to evaluating classes and feats, which they may already have some familiarity with. They may be capable of such a judgement call, but you may be burdening them with some analysis.Expecting some competance of a GM is probably fair. But expecting all GMs to spot trouble spots on sight without burdening them with analysis might be too much to ask, especially considering GMs typically have enough tasks to worry about.Not that I am railing. I'm just saying there are other factors to consider.</blockquote>

Verification