Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Razz" data-source="post: 3598302" data-attributes="member: 3014">I don't like that at all. The class system is fine the way it is. You have to keep the class system because it provides balance.A fighter that has the diplomatic skills of a courtier and can disarm traps? It's not really a fighter anymore. It's something else. That something else is where multiclassing comes into play.Also, it'd be really hard to playtest things without the standard Warrior, Rogue, Priest/Healer, Wizard types staying within their roles. If every class can do what every other class does without any sort of penalty, what's the point of anything then really?At least it's balanced with the way it is now. If you're a Fighter and want to dabble in social skills, take a level of Aristocrat or Rogue or two. In effect, you're giving up some abilities of a Fighter in order to gain the abilities of that. Sounds reasonable, streamlined and balanced to me.What you suggest is just making things complicated and less streamlined.As for that whole talent tree thing, etc. I don't understand how that system is streamlined and better? Trees tend to, well, get bigger. And branch all over the place...and create tangles of vines and weeds and interconnect with other trees...rather complex. And things will get ridiculous when stuff begins to say,&quot;To qualify for this you'll need access to these skills taken from this talent tree up to this point in the tree, and then branch off from this other talent tree to qualify for this ability in order to finally qualify for the ability to actually take in order to qualify for---&quot;. No...feats, throw some points into your skills, and alternate class features are wayyyy more simpler and streamlined. You need feat A, B, C, Str 13, BAB +4, done.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Razz, post: 3598302, member: 3014"] I don't like that at all. The class system is fine the way it is. You have to keep the class system because it provides balance. A fighter that has the diplomatic skills of a courtier and can disarm traps? It's not really a fighter anymore. It's something else. That something else is where multiclassing comes into play. Also, it'd be really hard to playtest things without the standard Warrior, Rogue, Priest/Healer, Wizard types staying within their roles. If every class can do what every other class does without any sort of penalty, what's the point of anything then really? At least it's balanced with the way it is now. If you're a Fighter and want to dabble in social skills, take a level of Aristocrat or Rogue or two. In effect, you're giving up some abilities of a Fighter in order to gain the abilities of that. Sounds reasonable, streamlined and balanced to me. What you suggest is just making things complicated and less streamlined. As for that whole talent tree thing, etc. I don't understand how that system is streamlined and better? Trees tend to, well, get bigger. And branch all over the place...and create tangles of vines and weeds and interconnect with other trees...rather complex. And things will get ridiculous when stuff begins to say,"To qualify for this you'll need access to these skills taken from this talent tree up to this point in the tree, and then branch off from this other talent tree to qualify for this ability in order to finally qualify for the ability to actually take in order to qualify for---". No...feats, throw some points into your skills, and alternate class features are wayyyy more simpler and streamlined. You need feat A, B, C, Str 13, BAB +4, done. [/QUOTE]

Verification