Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Psion" data-source="post: 60779" data-attributes="member: 172">Re: ::sigh::N.B.: It's not. So please do not go the arrogant but all-too-typical route of assuming that if I don't like classless systems I obviously have no exposure to the world.That said, there are actually rather few truly classless systems. A great many (including 3e) occupy a middle ground in which there is some structure and some freeform choice.For any genre, nothing is wrong with archetypes if they are done flexibly enough.More accurate? Maybe... but I have conferenced on the creation of many games and very few games, even skill based, concern themselves with modelling learning as it happens in the real world. Most use a simplified experience model and often grant points for role-play or other actions that fit no definition of the word accurate.But that's okay, because few games pretend to be perfectly accurate training models or that such is a desirable characteristic.I disagree. It fit traveller great. I assert it can fit most genres great, if you pick the right classes and allow the right latitude.Utter bogus.I used to be in the navy. Now I am engineer. Two different career paths with two different sets of core competancies. But at least each individual "class" I have has an attendant skill set. Were I a skills-based character, odds are I would have a min/maxed and logically inconsistent "goody bag" of skills that some player making me thinks is necessary for my survival in stressful situations. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />And how would this be that much different than the umpteen dozen new skills and advantage in GURPS, for example? They are just new takes on player capabilities.But unlike some skill-based system, D&D's classes and feats force you to put them in context.</blockquote>

Verification