Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="keterys" data-source="post: 5040828" data-attributes="member: 43019">That said, I would recommend broader silos than adding one for _every_ single little subsystem people want to add, but eh, whatever floats folks' boats. If, for example, you say that it takes a feat to get a domain, and that domain on average gives you X bonuses in other scenes that is par for value for any other feat... then poof, whatever happens in that domain silo who cares about the rest. If you want everyone to have a domain, then you add the silo to everybody. And not using it is your choice. And possibly an impediment to your party.Don't get caught up on the side ideas of item crafting, or domains, or chocobo hatching and look at the base things that will actually come up in a game.Basically, the most simple thing is to look at just Combat and Social silos for a moment and go 'Okay, is there any reason someone should be able to sacrifice everything from one to be better at the other?' 'Should anyone be forced to sit out either?' 'How much of a game should a subset (such as one) player be able to dominate an encounter?' 'Does it matter whether that encounter is combat, physical, social, or investigative?' 'If 4/5 of the people at the table need to mostly sit out a particular type of encounter, will that likely mean that we'll do _much less_ of those encounters?'Cause I'm pretty sure ending up in a situation where a large percentage of the party is twiddling their thumbs is bad, no matter what the situation is - hence the decking, rigging, astral examples. It's okay for someone to be _better_ at some of those, but everyone should get to participate and have an ability to contribute. Even if the barbarian is better at taverns than masquerade balls <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=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification